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
    Van Inwagen's theory has not demonstrated the consistency... — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Van Inwagen's theory has not demonstrated the consistency of trinitarianism.

    Trinity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Van Inwagen's theory remains neutral on the issue of identity, which allows that the three Persons are absolutely non-identical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the three Persons are absolutely non-identical, it is hard to see what it could mean to say they are the same being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any things which are non-identical are not the same being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Topics

    Trinity

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Any things which are non-identical are not the same being.If the three Persons are absolutely non-identical, it is hard to see what it cou...Therefore, van Inwagen must assume there is absolute identity and deny that this...Van Inwagen's theory remains neutral on the issue of identity, which allows that...

    Similar

    Popular Latin trinitarianism is incoherent85%Van Inwagen's impure relative identity trinitarianism is inadequate.82%Popular Latin trinitarianism holds claims 1–3 about numerical identity...80%Van Inwagen's theory remains neutral on the issue of identity, which a...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid
    SEP: trinity
    Michael Rea (2003)
    View source passageHide passage
    Michael Rea (2003) objects that by remaining neutral on the issue of identity, van Inwagen’s theory allows that the three Persons are (absolutely) non-identical, in which case “it is hard to see what it could possibly mean to say that they are the same being” (Rea 2003, 441). It seems that any things which are non-identical are not the same being. Thus, van Inwagen must assume that there is absolute identity, and deny that this relation holds between the Persons. Thus, van Inwagen has not demonstrated the consistency of (this version of) trinitarianism. Further, the theory doesn’t rule out pol...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises faithfully reconstruct Rea's argument as presented in the passage, forming a rational attack on van Inwagen's claim to have demonstrated the consistency of trinitarianism by showing that his neutrality on identity forces an assumption that undermines his project.

    Confidence: Clear argumentative structure explicitly laid out in the text.

    Details

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