Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Not even an omnipotent being can causally determine a genuinely free choice.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Aquinas and Molina argue God's knowledge via middle knowledge or primary causation moves the will from within, making God the source of the very act of willing itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If God moves the will as its interior final cause rather than an external constraint, the incompatibility between omnipotent causation and free choice is not self-evident.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The libertarian premise that causal determination entails unfreedom assumes external determination, which classical theists explicitly deny in accounts of divine concurrence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Classical compatibilists (Hume, Frankfurt) hold that freedom requires acting from one's own desires without external compulsion, not absence of causal determination.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If compatibilism is coherent, an omnipotent being could causally determine the conditions from which a genuinely free choice flows without violating freedom.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
Freedom and determinism are incompatible (the libertarian understanding of free will).
?
How convincing is this?
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.