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 Retroactive causation by the agent's future choice cannot dissolve the logical fixity of a truth already possessed by a past proposition.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
If past and future are equally real (eternalism), temporal direction is conventional; retroactive influence is logically coherent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Truth-values may not inhere in propositions independent of complete spacetime context; a full description includes future boundary conditions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The claim confuses logical necessity with temporal causation. Future choices might determine which past proposition was the true one.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Past propositions possess truth-values independent of future events; changing the future cannot retroactively alter what was true.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Logical fixity means a true proposition cannot become false. Future choices cannot unmake past truths without violating non-contradiction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Agency requires choosing among genuinely open alternatives, but retroactive causation would make past facts depend on future decisions.
?
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.