Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The first mover must be a mind. — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→An infinite will must be the first mover.

    The first mover must be a mind.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There are only two kinds of substances: bodies and minds (Cordemoy's third axiom).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The first mover is not a body.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore only a mind remains as a candidate for the first mover.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The exhaustive dualism of bodies and minds is not a necessary truth but a contingent metaphysical assumption requiring independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Spinoza's substance monism and Leibniz's monadology demonstrate historically viable alternatives that admit neither Cartesian body nor Cartesian mind as ultimate categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the dichotomy of bodies and minds is not exhaustive, the elimination of body as first mover does not entail mind is the only remaining candidate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Causation may be a structural or dispositional feature of reality rather than an act requiring a mental agent, as argued in Aristotelian immanent teleology and neo-Aristotelian powers ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If causal power can be grounded in non-mental natures or forms, the inference from 'not a body' to 'must be a mind' commits a false dilemma by presupposing mentality is necessary for agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Divine AttributesNatural Theology

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consciousness & Mind1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    An infinite will must be the first mover.Causation may be a structural or dispositional feature of reality rather than an...Finite minds are not the source of motion in bodies.If causal power can be grounded in non-mental natures or forms, the inference fr...
    +7 moreShow less
    If the dichotomy of bodies and minds is not exhaustive, the elimination of body ...Spinoza's substance monism and Leibniz's monadology demonstrate historically via...The exhaustive dualism of bodies and minds is not a necessary truth but a contin...

    Similar

    Therefore only a mind remains as a candidate for the first mover.90%The first mover is not a body.86%If the first mover were a body, it would have to have motion of itself...84%Therefore the first mover must be an infinite mind, i.e., an infinite ...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: cordemoy
    View source passageHide passage
    As for the first mover, it could not itself be a body, since if it were, it would have to have motion of itself (for as first mover, where else would it get it?), and this has been shown to be impossible for bodies. Thus we may also conclude that the first mover is not a body. But there being only two kinds of substances (Cordemoy’s third axiom), bodies and minds, only a mind remains as a candidate for the first mover. Further, it is clear that our (finite) minds are not the source of motion in

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    The first mover is not a body.
    There are only two kinds of substances: bodies and minds (Cordemoy's third axiom...
    Therefore only a mind remains as a candidate for the first mover.
    Therefore the first mover must be an infinite mind, i.e., an infinite will.