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
    Linda Zagzebski's dilemma for middle knowledge shows that... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Fischer's bootstrapping account of divine foreknowledge fails.

    Linda Zagzebski's dilemma for middle knowledge shows that grounding foreknowledge in God's cognitive situation requires either libertarian-incompatible determination or vicious epistemic regress.

    ?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.

    Key Terms

    Cognitive situation(explaining why we confuse two things—it's because of how our thinking works, not reality)
    The specific way our minds are set up or the context in which we're thinking about and understanding something.
    Epistemic
    "Epistemic" relates to knowledge—how we know things, what counts as knowledge, and whether we can trust what we believe to be true. It comes from the Greek word for knowledge and is used to describe questions about the reliability and validity of our beliefs and understanding. For example, "epistemic humility" means acknowledging the limits of what you can actually know for certain.
    Foreknowledge(Boethius's distinction between knowing and foreknowing)
    Knowledge of future events prior to their occurrence, distinguished from mere knowledge in that it implies temporal priority and thus raises the question of whether the future is already fixed
    Libertarian (in philosophy)(in metaphysics and free will debates)
    Not about politics—this refers to philosophers who believe humans have free will that is NOT determined by prior causes, and that this free will is genuinely real.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Linda Zagzebski(named as the originator of the distinction being discussed)
    A contemporary American philosopher who specializes in epistemology (the study of knowledge) and philosophy of religion, known for her work on virtue epistemology and divine foreknowledge.
    Middle knowledge(Core component of Molinism, as described in Marsh's reply to Maitzen)
    God's knowledge of what free creatures would freely do in counterfactual situations
    Vicious epistemic regress(as a type of logical problem that undermines an explanation)
    A circular chain of reasoning about knowledge where you need to know something to justify knowing something else, forever—a logical dead-end.
    determination(Used to explain supervenience-like dependency between entities or properties)
    A relation in which the requirements associated with one thing include the requirements associated with another
    dilemma(Used in classical rhetoric and logic; discussed by Valla in the context of the Protagoras–Euathlus lawsuit.)
    An argument structured so that two mutually exhaustive alternatives each independently entail the same conclusion, leaving the opponent no escape.
    grounding(Drawn from contemporary metaphysics; proposed as potentially applicable to understanding the foundations of legality.)
    A metaphysical relation in which some entities or facts are more foundational than others, providing a hierarchical structure of the world.
    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Free Will & Foreknowledge1 linked

    Related

    Fischer's bootstrapping account of divine foreknowledge fails.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    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