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 Incompatibilists deny either infallible foreknowledge or free will in the sense targeted by the argument.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Middle knowledge (Molinism) allows God to foreknow free choices via counterfactuals of creaturely freedom without causally determining them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Molinist foreknowledge is coherent, incompatibilists cannot simply deny foreknowledge—they must first refute a sophisticated compatibilist alternative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Plantinga and Flint have defended middle knowledge as internally consistent, shifting the burden of proof back to incompatibilists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Open theists like William Hasker deny infallible foreknowledge of free acts, but this constitutes a revision of classical theism, not a refutation of the dilemma's logical structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Denying foreknowledge resolves the epistemic conflict only by relocating the problem to divine omniscience, leaving the incompatibilist thesis itself unargued against.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • Incompatibilists accept the incompatibility of infallible foreknowledge and human free will.
      ?

      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.