Compatibilists like Alvin Plantinga and William Hasker have argued the fatalist argument commits a modalfallacy by conflating necessity of the consequence with necessity of the consequent.
?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.
fatalism(Presented as a consequence allegedly entailed by backward causation.)
The view that all events are fixed in advance and inevitable, such that agents cannot do otherwise than they do.
modal(in logic and metaphysics)
Dealing with possibility and necessity—questions about what could be true, what must be true, and what's merely contingent (could go either way).
modal fallacy(Epistemology and modal logic)
An invalid inference resulting from illicit substitution of a non-rigid designator into a modal context, producing a false conclusion from true premises
necessity of the consequence(modal logic, distinguished from 'necessity of the consequent')
The entire conditional (p→q) falling under the scope of the necessity operator, expressed as □(p→q)