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 It is not that God would ever stop someone from acting rationally

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.God would stop someone from acting rationally if they attempted suicide in Hell
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the above is true, then God would stop someone from acting rationally if they attempted suicide
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • If the above is true, God might stop someone form acting rationally
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.God's nature as perfectly rational entails that divine action is always oriented toward preserving and perfecting rational agency, never suppressing it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Preventing suicide in Hell constitutes preserving rational agency across time, not overriding it, since annihilation forecloses all future rational acts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aquinas's doctrine of divine providence holds that God directs rational creatures toward their proper ends, which requires sustaining rather than eliminating their rational capacity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On Kant's account, rational autonomy is inviolable such that any being perfectly aligned with rational law would act only to sustain conditions for rational agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Intervention that prevents the permanent destruction of a rational agent is categorically distinct from coercion, since coercion redirects rational will while annihilation eliminates it entirely.
      ?

      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.