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
    It is hard to maintain that God's belief that T is infall... — Carmelics
    Home/Free Will & Foreknowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    It is hard to maintain that God's belief that T is infallible (as claimed in premise (1)).

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Infallibility, properly understood, concerns the modal status of the belief-forming process, not the modal status of the proposition believed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A belief is infallible if no possible world contains that belief being held and being false simultaneously, which is compatible with the proposition itself being contingent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.God's omniscience entails that in every world where God believes T, T is true—this counterfactual reliability is precisely what infallibility requires, per Alvin Plantinga's proper function epistemology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The objection conflates de dicto and de re possibility: it is possible that T is false, but it is not possible that God believes T and T is false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.William Alston's account of epistemic justification distinguishes between a proposition's contingency and the reliability of a belief-forming mechanism tracking that proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Divine beliefs formed through timeless eternal cognition, as Boethius and Aquinas argue, track contingent truths with necessity because eternity encompasses all temporal possibilities simultaneously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.T concerns the contingent future: it is still possible for you to refrain from answering the phone at 9 tomorrow morning, even though (by supposition) you will answer it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Because T is contingent, it is still possible for T to turn out false (though it won't), and still possible for the belief that T to be incorrect (though it isn't).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If T could turn out false and the belief that T could be incorrect, then the belief is not infallible.
      ?

      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

    Related

    A belief is infallible if no possible world contains that belief being held and ...Because T is contingent, it is still possible for T to turn out false (though it...Divine beliefs formed through timeless eternal cognition, as Boethius and Aquina...God's omniscience entails that in every world where God believes T, T is true—th...
    +5 moreShow less
    If T could turn out false and the belief that T could be incorrect, then the bel...Infallibility, properly understood, concerns the modal status of the belief-form...T concerns the contingent future: it is still possible for you to refrain from a...The objection conflates de dicto and de re possibility: it is possible that T is...William Alston's account of epistemic justification distinguishes between a prop...

    Similar

    If T could turn out false and the belief that T could be incorrect, th...87%You cannot make him mistaken in his belief, given that he is infallibl...83%If God is infallible in all his beliefs, then it is not possible that ...82%Because T is contingent, it is still possible for T to turn out false ...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: free-will-foreknowledge
    View source passageHide passage
    This theological fatalist argument creates a dilemma for anyone who thinks it important to maintain both (1) there is a deity who infallibly knows the entire future, and (2) human beings have free will in the strong sense usually called libertarian. But it has also fascinated many who have not shared either of these commitments, because taking the argument’s full measure requires rethinking some of the most fundamental questions in philosophy, especially ones concerning time, truth, and modality. Those philosophers who think there is a way to consistently maintain both (1) and (2) are called c...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit