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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The objects described in [v] do not exist necessarily

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Finite modes follow necessarily from God's nature via infinite intermediate modes, preserving modal transfer through mediate causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Spinoza's Ethics 1p28 establishes that finite modes are causally necessitated through the infinite chain of finite causes grounded in God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A necessitation that is mediate rather than immediate still counts as deriving necessity from God's nature under the modal transfer principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason entails that any contingent object requires an external sufficient reason, collapsing into necessity given an omniscient God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God's intellect comprehends all possible objects described in [v], their existence is determined by God's will, making them necessary relative to divine decrees.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The objects described in [v] do not follow from God's nature
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The modal transfer principle requires necessity to derive from God's nature
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The only available source for the necessity of finite modes is God's nature
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42