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 one thing to will that truths be necessary. — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→God willing that certain truths be necessary does not mean God was necessitated to will those truths.

    It is one thing to will that truths be necessary.

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility
    ?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

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility

    Related

    God willing that certain truths be necessary does not mean God was necessitated ...It is a different thing to will those truths necessarily, or to be necessitated ...These two senses of necessity are logically distinct.

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Divine Attributes
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Axioms are necessary truths90%God willing that certain truths be necessary does not mean God was nec...88%It is a different thing to will those truths necessarily, or to be nec...87%Necessary truths are necessary in every possible world87%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: legrand
    View source passageHide passage
    Whereas the creation of true and immutable natures was the work of God’s freewill (not dictated according to his Wisdom, as Malebranche and other critics held), once created, they were necessary. In order to tie this necessity to the immutability of God’s will without limiting God in any way, Le Grand drew on a Scholastic distinction between antecedent and consequent necessity. He argued that true and immutable natures, such as mathematical truths, only possessed a consequent necessity. God did

    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