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 Present truths about future events are made true by future decisions, not the reverse.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Truth is atemporal: propositions do not acquire truth values over time but are timelessly true or false (Frege, Russell).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'she will visit' is timelessly true, no future decision can 'make' it true—it already has its truth value independently of any cause.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A future decision cannot be the truthmaker of a proposition whose truth value is fixed prior to that decision's occurrence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's sea-battle argument (De Interpretatione 9) establishes that bivalence for future contingents entails fatalism, not agent-grounded truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the agent's decision genuinely determines present truth, then prior to the decision the proposition has no determinate truth value, violating classical bivalence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Accepting that future decisions ground present truths commits one either to fatalism or to a non-classical logic of future contingents, neither of which supports libertarian free will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If the agent decides tomorrow to visit her parents, it is true today that she will visit them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the agent decides tomorrow not to visit her parents, it is true today that she will not visit them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Whatever the agent chooses, it is her decision that makes the present truth value determinate.
      ?

      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.