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 Transcendentals like 'being', 'one', and 'good' function as the most universal predicates, applicable across all categories without restriction.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Mathematical objects and abstract propositions do not possess 'being' in the same sense as physical substances, undermining universality.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
'Good' is fundamentally evaluative and context-dependent; its application requires external standards, unlike genuine category-neutral predicates.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
These terms function as obscuring metaphors rather than substantive predicates; they explain nothing by applying to everything equally.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Every entity, regardless of category, must possess being; non-being cannot be predicated of anything that exists or can be discussed.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Substances, accidents, and abstract objects all exhibit degrees of unity and composition, making 'one' a genuinely universal measure.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
All beings exhibit some form of perfection or desirability relative to their nature, grounding 'good' as a transcendental predicate.
?
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.