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 can believe the same propositions we do without getting first-person belief about someone else, and whether he gets present-time belief depends on whether he believes in time or out of time.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Haecceities of times are only epistemically accessible to a subject located at that time, not merely believing a proposition containing them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A being outside time cannot satisfy the indexical acquaintance condition required to tokenize 'now', rendering present-time belief structurally unavailable to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, divine atemporality does not merely affect *when* God believes but eliminates the cognitive relation necessary for genuinely present-tense belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Castañeda's work on quasi-indicators shows that first-person and present-time beliefs are irreducibly perspectival and cannot be fully captured by any third-personal propositional content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If no propositional haecceity-content can exhaustively represent the de se and de nunc content of indexical belief, then God's believing those propositions leaves the essential perspectival residue ungrasped.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An omniscient being who fails to grasp any cognitively accessible content thereby falls short of omniscience, regardless of whether that content is labeled 'propositional'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Present-time and first-person beliefs involve propositions that include haecceities (individual essences) of persons and times.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.One gets a first-person belief by believing a proposition including one's own haecceity, and a present-time belief by believing a proposition involving the haecceity of a moment of time at the time in question.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The relevant propositions do not include God's own haecceity, so he does not get a first-person belief about someone else.
      ?

      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.