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 God alone is able to move the creaturely will as agent without violence (i.e., consistently with its voluntary nature).

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A cause that determines the outcome of a free choice with infallible efficacy renders that choice unfree, regardless of whether it operates 'from within'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between internal and external causation does not preserve voluntariness if the agent could not have chosen otherwise given the divine motion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Leibniz and libertarian incompatibilists hold that genuine freedom requires the ability to do otherwise, which omnipotent internal determination forecloses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Molina argued that God's knowledge of free acts depends on counterfactuals of creaturely freedom, implying the will has a sovereignty over its acts that precedes divine motion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If creaturely will possesses an irreducible self-determining power (as Scotus's formal distinction and Molina's middle knowledge suggest), then no external agent—even God operating internally—can be the sufficient moving cause of its free acts without usurping that sovereignty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If the will were moved by an external principle as agent, the movement would be violent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God alone is the cause and sustainer of the will's being, and thus is able to move it from within rather than as an external principle.
      ?

      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.