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 Compatibilist freedom, defended by Leibniz and Edwards, holds that acts caused by God-ordained natures can still be genuinely free.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If God ordained your nature completely, you could not have done otherwise—the core condition compatibilists struggle to satisfy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Identifying freedom with 'acting from your desires' begs the question when those desires themselves were divinely determined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Compatibilism redefines 'freedom' to match determinism rather than preserving the intuitive concept requiring genuine alternatives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Freedom requires only absence of external coercion, not absence of causal determination by one's own nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An act flowing from one's genuine desires, character, and reasoning is free even if those traits were divinely ordained.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Incompatibilism's requirement that free acts be uncaused leads to randomness, which undermines rather than secures 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.