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 Garrett DeWeese and William Lane Craig's debate on 'timeless-then-temporal' God shows that the transition point itself must be located either in time or outside it, and neither option is coherent.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The dilemma assumes transitions require the same ontological framework as their relata. A timeless state could relate to temporal states without itself being temporal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The incoherence claim conflates logical contradiction with epistemic difficulty. We lack concepts for timeless-temporal relations, but absence of explanation ≠ incoherence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Creation accounts (e.g., God's timeless decree causing temporal effects) offer coherent models where causation doesn't require temporal sequence for both cause and effect.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any transition requires temporal sequence: before-during-after. A timeless state cannot precede a temporal one without occupying a prior moment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the transition point exists in time, it's part of the temporal sequence, leaving timelessness unexplained. If outside time, causation becomes unintelligible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The concept of 'becoming temporal' implies change, which presupposes time. This makes timelessness-to-temporality logically contradictory.
      ?

      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.