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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The ontological complexity of concrete states of affairs does not comport well with divine simplicity.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On a trope-theoretic ontology, a state of affairs like God's wisdom is a simple, non-repeatable particular, not a subject-property complex.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If divine attributes are identified with distinct tropes that are themselves identical with God's being, no genuine compositional plurality arises.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Trope theory thus dissolves the subject-property complexity that threatens divine simplicity without abandoning concrete ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas held that God does not instantiate properties but rather is identical with his own esse, making the subject-property analysis inapplicable to God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God is not a concrete particular that falls under universals but is subsistent being itself, states-of-affairs ontology presupposes a categorial framework that simply does not apply to the divine nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A concrete state of affairs such as Socrates' being pale is a complex both the subject and the property constituent of which are necessary for its identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Divine simplicity requires that God not be composed of distinct constituents.
      ?

      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.