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
    The compatibility of divine foreknowledge and human freed... — Carmelics
    Home/Free Will & Foreknowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The compatibility of divine foreknowledge and human freedom can be defended.

    Free Will & Foreknowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.God's foreknowledge of future contingents depends on the foreknown events themselves, including future exercises of human free will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Human actions are independent of God's foreknowledge of them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If God infallibly knows at T1 that agent A will do X at T2, then it is necessary that A does X at T2.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An action that is necessary cannot be otherwise, and an action that cannot be otherwise is not free in any meaningful libertarian sense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, infallible foreknowledge is logically incompatible with the libertarian freedom required for genuine moral responsibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The claim that God's foreknowledge 'depends on' future free acts inverts the classical divine aseity doctrine, which holds God's knowledge is not causally derived from creation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A God whose knowledge is dependent on contingent human acts is not the metaphysically independent, eternally self-sufficient being of classical theism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Free Will & Foreknowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Related

    A God whose knowledge is dependent on contingent human acts is not the metaphysi...An action that is necessary cannot be otherwise, and an action that cannot be ot...God's foreknowledge of future contingents depends on the foreknown events themse...Human actions are independent of God's foreknowledge of them.
    +3 moreShow less
    If God infallibly knows at T1 that agent A will do X at T2, then it is necessary...The claim that God's foreknowledge 'depends on' future free acts inverts the cla...Therefore, infallible foreknowledge is logically incompatible with the libertari...

    Similar

    Other compatibilist solutions aim only at showing that infallible fore...83%Incompatibilists accept the incompatibility of infallible foreknowledg...82%Augustine's rejection of human freedom was motivated by considerations...81%Molinism is distinct from other compatibilist solutions regarding fore...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: free-will-foreknowledge
    View source passageHide passage
    If God’s timeless knowledge doesn’t threaten free will, there’s still the question whether it can be confined to the timeless realm; if not, it might still cause trouble for free will. Van Inwagen (2008) argues against the Boethian solution on the grounds that a timeless deity could still bring about the existence in time of a “Freedom-denying Prophetic Object,” for example, a stone slab on which are inscribed the words, “Peter van Inwagen will answer the phone at 9:00 am on May 27, 2034.” An interesting puzzle for Christian defenders of the Boethian solution is the problem of whether the know...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit