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
    If traditional defenders invoked absolute explanation, gi... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Traditional defenders of the cosmological argument cannot invoke the requirement of an absolute explanation.

    If traditional defenders invoked absolute explanation, given their metaphysic of actualist realism, they would face the impossibility of libertarian free will, of indeterministic quantum effects, of modal imagination about lawless worlds where things pop into existence, and the collapse of modal distinctions.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Key Terms

    absolute explanation(as used in metaphysics)
    A complete reason or cause for why something exists or is the way it is, with no gaps or unanswered questions left over.
    actualist realism(as used in metaphysics)
    The philosophical view that only things that actually exist are real, as opposed to possible things that could exist but don't.
    indeterministic quantum effects(as used in philosophy of science)
    Events in quantum physics (the science of tiny particles) that don't have a single predetermined outcome but happen randomly.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    lawless worlds(as used in metaphysics)
    Imaginary scenarios in philosophy where the normal rules of nature don't apply and things could behave in any way whatsoever.
    libertarian free will(Used to frame the tension between divine freedom and divine moral goodness.)
    An account of free will according to which being free with respect to an action requires the possibility of acting otherwise.
    metaphysic/metaphysics(as used in philosophy broadly)
    The branch of philosophy that asks what kinds of things exist and what reality is fundamentally made of.
    modal(in logic and metaphysics)
    Dealing with possibility and necessity—questions about what could be true, what must be true, and what's merely contingent (could go either way).
    modal distinctions(as used in metaphysics)
    The philosophical differences between what is necessarily true (must be true), what is possibly true (could be true), and what is actually true.

    Related

    Since all is determined on an absolute explanation, these problems arise from th...Traditional defenders of the cosmological argument cannot invoke the requirement...

    Similar

    Traditional defenders of the cosmological argument cannot invoke the r...75%Since all is determined on an absolute explanation, these problems ari...73%Natural law arguments cannot be disentangled from a highly speculative...71%Therefore, facts about real possibilities and real impossibilities can...70%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: cosmological-argument
    View source passageHide passage
    Michael Almeida (2018) builds on the critical arguments of van Inwagen and others regarding the PSR. He contends that the version of the PSR used by defenders of the cosmological argument is inadequate because it fails to provide the best explanation for the universe. The best explanation, and hence the one required of a sound cosmological argument, is an absolute explanation, where everything is explained completely. There are no brute or contingent facts. He notes that in constructing their respective cosmological arguments, Pruss and Swinburne reject absolute explanation for complete explan...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective