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 If God infallibly knows at T1 that agent A will do X at T2, then it is necessary that A does X at T2.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Infallible knowledge of a contingent fact does not entail the fact is necessary; God could infallibly know contingent truths without determining them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The argument conflates epistemic necessity (what is knowable) with metaphysical necessity (what must be true), committing a modal scope fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If God exists outside time, God's knowledge at T1 describes what A freely does at T2 without causally determining it, preserving agent freedom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Infallible knowledge means the known proposition cannot be false without the knower being fallible, making the proposition necessarily true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God's knowledge at T1 is about a genuine fact, that fact must obtain; otherwise God wouldn't know it but would merely guess correctly.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Logical consistency requires that if P is known to be true, then P cannot simultaneously be false or avoidable without contradiction.
      ?

      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.