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
    God's foreknowledge is compatible with libertarian freedom. — Carmelics
    Home/Free Will & Foreknowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    God's foreknowledge is compatible with libertarian freedom.

    Free Will & Foreknowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.God is not bound in time but knows the future from an eternal viewpoint.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The unique vantage point of an omniscient God prevents any impingement on freedom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.God can know the future without this knowledge being grounded on an established, determinate future.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If God infallibly knows at T1 that agent A will do X at T2, then it is necessary that A does X at T2.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An agent lacks libertarian freedom regarding an action if it is necessary that the agent performs it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Boethian eternal simultaneity does not dissolve the transfer of necessity from divine knowledge to human action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Middle knowledge, as Molina proposed, requires that counterfactuals of creaturely freedom have determinate truth values prior to God's creative decree.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the truth of such counterfactuals is grounded in nothing within the agent's undetermined will, they violate the grounding objection advanced by Robert Adams and William Hasker.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a coherent grounding for true counterfactuals of freedom, foreknowledge of libertarian free acts lacks a stable epistemic foundation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Free Will & Foreknowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Divine Attributes3 linked

    Related

    An agent lacks libertarian freedom regarding an action if it is necessary that t...Boethian eternal simultaneity does not dissolve the transfer of necessity from d...God can know the future without this knowledge being grounded on an established,...God is not bound in time but knows the future from an eternal viewpoint.
    +5 moreShow less
    If God infallibly knows at T1 that agent A will do X at T2, then it is necessary...If the truth of such counterfactuals is grounded in nothing within the agent's u...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: philosophy-religion
    View source passageHide passage
    Various replies to the freedom-foreknowledge debate have been given. Some adopt compatibilism, affirming the compatibility of free will and determinism, and conclude that foreknowledge is no more threatening to freedom than determinism. While some prominent philosophical theists in the past have taken this route (most dramatically Jonathan Edwards (1703–1758)), this seems to be the minority position in philosophy of religion today (exceptions include Paul Helm, John Fischer, and Lynne Baker). A
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Middle knowledge, as Molina proposed, requires that counterfactuals of creaturel...
    The unique vantage point of an omniscient God prevents any impingement on freedo...
    Without a coherent grounding for true counterfactuals of freedom, foreknowledge ...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit