Plantinga's free will defense therefore presupposes libertarianism without arguing for it, making the impossibility claimconditional on a contested metaphysical assumption, not a necessary truth.
?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.
Presupposes(as describing what Plantinga's argument takes for granted)
Assumes something to be true without proving it—like how an argument might presuppose that logic works, without first arguing that logic is valid.
metaphysical assumption(metaphysics (the study of what exists))
A belief about what fundamentally exists or what reality is really made of that you're taking for granted without proving it.
necessary truth(Mill's empiricist reinterpretation of modal concepts)
A proposition whose denial seems inconceivable, explained by Mill not as a metaphysical fact but as a result of psychological association making the proposition deeply ingrained.