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 Molinism is distinct from other compatibilist solutions regarding foreknowledge and freedom.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Middle knowledge depends on the truth of counterfactuals of creaturely freedom, but such counterfactuals have no ground if libertarian freedom obtains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without grounded CCFs, Molinism cannot coherently claim to explain HOW God knows the contingent future, collapsing its alleged distinction from mere compatibility arguments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This 'grounding objection,' advanced by Robert Adams and William Hasker, shows Molinism's explanatory ambition is illusory, not genuinely distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Open theists like William Hasker argue that classical compatibilist solutions and Molinism alike presuppose a static, block-universe model of time incompatible with genuine libertarian freedom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If both Molinism and standard compatibilism share this problematic presupposition, the purported distinctness is a difference in degree of theological elaboration, not kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Other compatibilist solutions aim only at showing that infallible foreknowledge and human freedom are compatible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Molinism provides an account of how God knows the contingent future, along with a strong doctrine of divine providence.
      ?

      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.