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 A freely chosen eternal destiny apart from God is metaphysically impossible.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A choice can be both fully informed and freely irrational, as Aristotle's account of akrasia demonstrates: agents knowingly choose against their recognized good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If full information guaranteed rational choice toward the good, moral freedom would collapse into a form of Socratic intellectualism that most libertarian free will theorists explicitly reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore P2 conflates epistemic sufficiency with motivational sufficiency, illicitly ruling out the possibility of a fully informed yet perverse will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On C.S. Lewis's own logic in 'The Great Divorce,' the self can progressively contract through habituated choices until it becomes constitutively incapable of desiring union with God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If character formation through repeated free choices can produce a self whose deepest identity is oriented away from God, then that final orientation is itself a free achievement, not a mere misjudgment correctable by further information.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.P3 and P4 therefore beg the question by treating every rejection of God as an epistemic failure rather than a possible culmination of a freely shaped volitional identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Either a person S is fully informed about who God is and what both union with and separation from the divine nature entail, or S is not so informed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If S is fully informed and chooses a life apart from God, then S's choice would be utterly irrational and would fall below the threshold required for moral freedom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If S is not fully informed, then God can continue to work with S—subjecting S to new experiences, shattering S's illusions, and correcting S's misjudgments—without interfering with S's freedom.
      ?

      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.