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 person in a later life and the person in an earlier life do not strictly exist as ultimate entities.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Strict identity (Leibniz's Law) applies to abstract objects and logical constants, but persons may be vague objects that admit of borderline cases without thereby being non-existent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Derek Parfit's reductionism holds that persons exist as real but non-fundamental entities constituted by physical and mental events, making the dichotomy between 'strict existence' and 'non-existence' a false one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A continuant can be a genuine constituent of reality under a sortal concept without satisfying the classical criteria for being an ultimate, simple, or substance-like entity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The argument assumes the Law of the Excluded Middle applies to personal identity claims, but intuitionist and paraconsistent logics deny this assumption for vague or process-based domains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Vasubandhu's Abhidharma tradition, a Buddhist competitor to the Madhyamaka reading, holds that dharmas—the momentary constituents of persons—do strictly exist as ultimate entities, grounding conventional truths about persons in real causal streams.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the causal-continuity relation between earlier and later person-stages is itself an ultimate fact, then persons exist at least derivatively as real patterns, contra the claim that they fail to exist at all as ultimate entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any two existing things must be either identical or distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Buddha asserts the earlier and later person are neither the same nor different.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If two persons are neither identical nor distinct, they cannot both strictly exist.
      ?

      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.