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 Principle of Sufficient Reason governs the domain of contingent truths

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Spinoza's monist necessitarianism holds that all truths, including apparently contingent ones, follow necessarily from God/Nature's essence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If all truths are ultimately necessary, the PSR cannot be domain-restricted to contingency without collapsing the contingent/necessary distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Leibniz's own modal bifurcation presupposes a robust contingency that Spinozistic rationalism systematically undermines from within the rationalist tradition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Schopenhauer argues in 'On the Fourfold Root' that sufficient reason governs necessary structural relations (e.g., mathematical and logical), not merely contingent ones.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If PSR applies to necessary truths via the principle of knowing (principium rationis cognoscendi), then restricting PSR to contingency misrepresents its actual scope.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz associates each of his two fundamental principles with distinct modal domains
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The domain of contingent truths is characterized modally as the domain where the Principle of Sufficient Reason is the governing principle
      ?

      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.