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
    The argument against backward causation must rely on dete... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Free Will & Foreknowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The argument against backward causation based on free will must differ from the argument against traditional fatalism

    The argument against backward causation must rely on determinateness rather than determinism

    CausationFree Will & Foreknowledge
    ?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.

    Topics

    Free Will & ForeknowledgeCausation

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Free Will & Foreknowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Determinateness and determinism are distinct considerations in the free will deb...The argument against backward causation based on free will must differ from the ...The argument against traditional fatalism relies on determinism

    Similar

    If the assumption does not hold for backward causation, Mellor's argum...87%The notion of backward causation is incoherent86%The bilking argument does not successfully demonstrate that backward c...83%The force of the bilking argument against backward causation can be we...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: causation-backwards
    View source passageHide passage
    As we can see, the above argument of consequence combines determinateness of the past and determinism of laws. Whatever the compatibilist would object in order to reject the argument of consequence, the argument cannot be used mutatis mutandis to argue against eternalism or the block universe, because in contrast to the discussion of free will and the past that focuses on determinism, the discussion of free will and the future focuses on determinateness. For even if indeterminism is true, i.e. i

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective