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 The absolute sense of omnipotence (having the power to bring about any state of affairs whatsoever, including necessary and impossible ones) is incoherent.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The modal framework presupposed by P2 is itself contingent on human logical systems, not a constraint on divine power.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Descartes argued in letters to Mersenne that God's omnipotence precedes and grounds necessary truths, meaning God could have made contradictions true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If God creates the laws of logic, the impossibility invoked in P2 cannot serve as an external limit on divine omnipotence without begging the question.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.P3 misconstrues the relevant counterfactual by assuming necessary truths are metaphysically independent of divine will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If divine voluntarism is true, necessary states of affairs hold only because God continuously sustains them, making divine agency causally relevant to their obtaining.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An omnipotent God who actively upholds necessary truths thereby 'brings them about' in a sense that P3's counterfactual analysis fails to capture.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If an agent has the power to bring about a state of affairs, then it is possible that the agent brings about that state of affairs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is not possible for an agent to bring about an impossible state of affairs, since if it were, it would be possible for an impossible state of affairs to obtain, which is a contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.It is not possible for an agent to bring about a necessary state of affairs, because a necessary state of affairs obtains whether or not anyone acts, so the counterfactual condition (that the state of affairs would have failed to obtain had the agent not acted) is false.
      ?

      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.