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 One cannot have parts — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Nothing positive can be predicated of the One

    The One cannot have parts

    Divine Attributes
    ?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.If the One is, it must be without parts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the One had parts, it would be many
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The One cannot be many
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The One can possess internal structural relations (like self-identity) without thereby becoming numerically plural.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Plotinus's One generates multiplicity through emanation while remaining undivided, showing unity and internal differentiation are compatible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Denying all internal structure to the One renders it indistinguishable from sheer non-being, as Hegel argued against Parmenidean abstraction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A whole can be ontologically prior to its parts without those parts threatening the whole's fundamental unity, as Aristotle argues in Metaphysics Z.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the One organizes or grounds its parts, those parts are dependent aspects of the One rather than independent constituents that fragment it.
      ?

      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 AttributesAgainst an aspect of God

    Connections

    1 linked claim · 1 topic

    Modality & Possibility4 linked
    Nothing positive can be predicated of the One

    Related

    A whole can be ontologically prior to its parts without those parts threatening ...Any positive predicate applied to the One would pluralize the OneDenying all internal structure to the One renders it indistinguishable from shee...If the One had parts, it would be many
    +7 moreShow less
    If the One is, it must be without partsIf the One organizes or grounds its parts, those parts are dependent aspects of ...Nothing positive can be predicated of the OnePlotinus's One generates multiplicity through emanation while remaining undivide...Pluralizing the One would make the One consist of partsThe One can possess internal structural relations (like self-identity) without t...The One cannot be many

    Similar

    If the One is, it must be without parts84%A simple being cannot have parts, including material or temporal parts...81%What is many or has parts cannot be the simple One79%Pluralizing the One would make the One consist of parts75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: speusippus
    View source passageHide passage
    The first is an argument from the assumed simplicity of the One. This corresponds to things we can find in Plato. In what is frequently referred to as the ‘first hypothesis’ of Plato’s Parmenides (137c-142a), Parmenides begins (137c) by laying it down that the One cannot be many; he then argues, first (137cd), that if the One is, it must be without parts, since otherwise it would be many. Subsequent argumentation makes this a proscription against all attempts to predicate anything positive of th

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit