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 Peter had freely chosen not to deny Jesus, then Jesus would never have prophesied that Peter would deny him.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Prophetic utterances are performative speech acts that partly constitute the future rather than merely describe an independently fixed reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If prophecy is constitutive rather than merely descriptive, then the counterfactual 'Peter would not deny' cannot coherently subtract the prophecy while preserving Peter's free choice as the sole variable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument illicitly assumes a one-way dependence from choice to prophecy, ignoring the possibility that divine speech and human action are mutually conditioning within a single providential structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On Ockhamist accounts, God's past-tensed belief that Peter will deny is a 'soft fact' about the past, whose obtaining is itself counterfactually dependent on Peter's future free act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God's prophetic declaration is likewise a soft fact, then the conditional 'if Peter had freely denied, God would have prophesied' is equally valid as its converse, rendering the original claim's directionality arbitrary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Asymmetric counterfactual dependence from choice to prophecy requires a principled account of temporal grounding that neither the claim nor its supporting arguments supply.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If a person were about to freely choose to do something, then God would have known about it from eternity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God acts in accordance with God's eternal foreknowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Peter's denial was a contingent future event dependent on Peter's free choice.
      ?

      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.