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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Eternal truths are necessary

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.God's omnipotence entails that God could have willed otherwise even regarding eternal truths, as Descartes himself affirms in letters to Mersenne (1630).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God could have willed eternal truths to be otherwise, then eternal truths are contingent on God's will, not necessary in themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the very theological grounding meant to secure necessity instead undermines it, collapsing into a divine voluntarism incompatible with genuine necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Necessity, properly construed (as in Leibniz's critique of Descartes), requires truth in all possible worlds including those where God wills differently.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If eternal truths depend on divine fiat, they are necessary only relative to God's actual will, not absolutely—making them what Leibniz calls merely 'moral' necessities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Relative or conditional necessity is categorically distinct from the absolute necessity the claim asserts, exposing an equivocation in the original argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.God willed eternal truths to be necessary
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God willed a truth to be necessary, then it is false that it could have been otherwise
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42