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 practical intellect and the will are not separate powers, but one power with two separate acts

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas distinguishes intellect and will as really distinct faculties because their formal objects differ: truth (verum) versus good (bonum) as such.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The intensional/extensional convergence of transcendentals does not collapse the real distinction between faculties ordered to them, since acts differ in kind by their formal ratios.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Philip's own Chancellor-era Summa de bono presupposes distinct operative powers to explain why error in judgment does not entail defect in willing, requiring separate causal seats.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Scotus argues that the will's self-motion (as an active power originating its own act) is irreducible to any intellectual operation, establishing an asymmetry of causal kind, not merely act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If practical intellect and will were one power with two acts, akrasia would be inexplicable, since knowing the right act and failing to will it would require no transition between distinct powers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The intellect and the will have different ends: the intellect aims at truth, the will aims at the good
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.According to the doctrine of the transcendentals, the true and the good differ only intensionally, not extensionally
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the ends of two powers do not differ extensionally, then the powers themselves do not differ extensionally
      ?

      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.