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
    To conceptualize a simple God, we must assign him to some... — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→It may not be possible to conceptualize a simple God by assigning him to a familiar category.

    To conceptualize a simple God, we must assign him to some familiar category.

    Divine Attributes
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Divine Attributes

    Related

    It is unclear how assigning God to a familiar category is possible if God is utt...It may not be possible to conceptualize a simple God by assigning him to a famil...The doctrine of divine simplicity (DDS) implies that God is utterly sui generis ...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Divine Attributes
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    It may not be possible to conceptualize a simple God by assigning him ...93%It is unclear how assigning God to a familiar category is possible if ...78%If picking out a single individual were sufficient to disqualify a rep...71%'Model' is more specific than 'idea' in the Cartesian sense, since a m...70%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: divine-simplicity
    View source passageHide passage
    To conceptualize a simple God it seems we must assign him to some familiar category or other. But how is this possible if, as DDS implies, God is utterly sui generis and unique in his very mode of uniqueness? It might not be possible at all, in which case silence might be the most appropriate response. But let’s not give up just yet. Vallicella (1992) suggests that God is assimilable to a self-exemplifying property, a Platonic Form. Hughes goes nominalist with his idea that God is something like a singleton set. Mann assimilates God to a property instance or trope. Hugh McCann, rejecting Mann’...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective