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
    There must be something whose necessity is uncaused. — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    There must be something whose necessity is uncaused.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Necessary beings exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a necessary being has its existence from another necessary being, then we have an unsatisfactory infinite regress of explanations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A necessary being must have its existence either from itself or from another.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.An infinite series of contingent beings, each explained by a prior contingent being, constitutes a complete explanatory chain without remainder.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hume's Enquiry demonstrates that explaining each member of a series individually dissolves any demand for a further explanation of the series as a whole.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aquinas illicitly treats the collection of contingent beings as itself a further entity requiring explanation beyond its explained members.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Bertrand Russell's position holds that the universe's existence may be a brute fact, and demanding a sufficient reason for all facts generates an explanatory regress that necessity cannot terminate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The concept of a being that exists necessarily is incoherent if necessity is solely a property of propositions or logical relations, not of concrete existents, as Kant argues in the Critique of Pure Reason.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Related

    A necessary being must have its existence either from itself or from another.An infinite series of contingent beings, each explained by a prior contingent be...Aquinas illicitly treats the collection of contingent beings as itself a further...Bertrand Russell's position holds that the universe's existence may be a brute f...
    +4 moreShow less
    Hume's Enquiry demonstrates that explaining each member of a series individually...If a necessary being has its existence from another necessary being, then we hav...Necessary beings exist.The concept of a being that exists necessarily is incoherent if necessity is sol...

    Similar

    God's necessity is not logical necessity.82%Therefore, it is necessary that God exists.75%An uncaused Necessary Being exists whose essence suffices for its exis...75%There exists a being that is necessary in itself75%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: cosmological-argument
    Aquinas, Summa Theologica I, q.2, a.3 (Third Way)
    View source passageHide passage
    Interestingly enough, this approach was anticipated by Aquinas in his third way in his Summa Theologica (I,q.2,a.3). Once Aquinas concludes that necessary beings exist, he then goes on to ask whether these beings have their existence from themselves or from another. If from another, then we have an unsatisfactory infinite regress of explanations. Hence, there must be something whose necessity is uncaused. As Kenny points out, Aquinas understands this necessity in terms of being unable to cease to exist (Kenny 1969: 48). Although Aquinas understands the uncaused necessary being to be God, Rundl...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: From premise 3, a necessary being's existence comes from itself or another; from premise 2, if from another, an infinite regress results (which is unsatisfactory and thus rejected); therefore, by disjunctive syllogism, there must be a necessary being whose existence comes from itself—i.e., whose necessity is uncaused.

    Confidence: Clearly reconstructed from the text's summary of Aquinas's Third Way argument.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit