Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The Stoics identified matter as one of two co-eternal principles, with pneuma (rational breath) permeating and structuring it from within.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Positing two co-eternal principles violates parsimony; a single substance theory explains Stoic observations equally well.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The claim that pneuma 'structures' matter is obscure—it lacks mechanism for how an immaterial principle physically acts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Stoic materialism about pneuma itself undermines the conceptual distinction between pneuma and matter being explanatory.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Stoic physics requires an active principle to explain order and causation, which inert matter alone cannot provide.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Pneuma as immanent rationality elegantly accounts for both universal lawfulness and the apparent design in nature.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Co-eternal principles avoid creation ex nihilo problems that plague monotheistic theology and infinite regress.
?
How convincing is this?
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.