John Martin Fischer has shown that intuitions about paradigm soft facts systematically diverge among competent philosophers, meaning no case is sufficiently uncontroversial to bear the dialectical weight Ockhamism requires.

?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.

Dialectical weight(what the statement claims is lacking in this philosophical dispute): The power of an example to convince people in a philosophical debate—basically, how much force it carries in arguments for or against a position.
John Martin Fischer(the statement references his work on a specific philosophical problem): A contemporary American philosopher who specializes in debates about free will, responsibility, and whether humans have genuine control over their actions.
Ockhamism(the theory being discussed in this debate about past facts and free will): A philosophical position (named after medieval philosopher William of Ockham) that argues God's knowledge of the future doesn't force future events to happen—you can still have free will even if God already knows what you'll do.
Soft facts(metaphysics and philosophy of time): In philosophy of time, facts about the past that somehow depend on or are flexible about future events, rather than being completely fixed and determined.

Based on where you are in your exploration