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 Omniscience of future events requires that God's knowledge updates or is indexed to temporal positions, implying genuinely sequential cognitive states.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
God's knowledge could be a single, timeless act of intellection grasping all events in one eternal cognitive state.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Indexing to temporal positions presupposes God exists in time; a timeless being needs no sequential cognitive updates.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Future events' truth-values may be determinate from the eternal perspective without requiring knowledge to 'update'.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Knowledge of X at time T1 differs from knowledge of X at time T2 if X's truth-value changes between T1 and T2.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Future events have not yet occurred, so their truth-value is not yet determinate without temporal indexing.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Any mind knowing future contingents must track which facts are true at which temporal positions to avoid contradiction.
?
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.