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 trinitarian argument is invalid (having true premises but a false conclusion).

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Relative identity requires that 'same F' relations be transitive within a sortal kind, so 'same being' must be transitive across all three Persons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the Father, Son, and Spirit are each the same being as God, then by transitivity they are the same being as each other, collapsing into Sabellianism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The relative identity solution thus either preserves validity and generates heresy, or blocks transitivity and abandons standard identity logic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Peter Geach's relative identity framework, the source of this trinitarian strategy, still requires that no two distinct things bear the same-F relation under a single sortal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'Person' is a genuine sortal, then 'same Person' must obey Leibniz's Law within that sortal, making the Father and Son discernible as Persons but not as beings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This sortal asymmetry entails that the Trinity contains numerically distinct substances sharing a nature, which is indistinguishable from the tritheism orthodoxy rejects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The 'is' in premises 1 and 2 should be read as 'is the same being as'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The 'is' in premise 3 should be read as 'is the same divine Person as'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Under this reading, the relation in the premises differs from the relation in the conclusion.
      ?

      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.