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 future is a potential infinite, not an actual infinite. — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The future is a potential infinite, not an actual infinite.

    Natural Theology
    ?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.Future events have not yet happened.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Only determinate, already-realized events can be collected into a totality constituting an actual infinite.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On block universe (B-theory) eternalism, all future events exist as fully determinate temporal parts of a four-dimensional manifold.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If future events are ontologically real constituents of spacetime, they form an actual infinite collection regardless of epistemic accessibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Craig's argument against actual infinites in the future therefore presupposes the truth of A-theory, making the Kalām cosmological argument question-begging against eternalists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Cantorian set theory treats infinite sets as completed totalities defined by membership conditions, not by whether members have been 'realized' sequentially.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The set of all future events can be defined by a well-formed membership condition (e.g., events occurring after t₀), satisfying Cantor's criterion for an actual infinite.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Craig's conflation of ontological realization with mathematical completeness illegitimately imports a temporal criterion into a mathematical distinction that does not require it.
      ?

      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

    Natural Theology

    Related

    Cantorian set theory treats infinite sets as completed totalities defined by mem...Craig's argument against actual infinites in the future therefore presupposes th...Craig's conflation of ontological realization with mathematical completeness ill...Future events have not yet happened.
    +4 moreShow less
    If future events are ontologically real constituents of spacetime, they form an ...On block universe (B-theory) eternalism, all future events exist as fully determ...Only determinate, already-realized events can be collected into a totality const...The set of all future events can be defined by a well-formed membership conditio...

    Similar

    A beginningless series of past events is an actual infinite, not a pot...86%For Aristotle, the temporal series of events, formed by successively a...85%There can be no such thing as an actual infinite.83%Craig's usage of 'actual infinite' and 'potential infinite' differs fr...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: cosmological-argument
    Craig's position as described in the passage
    View source passageHide passage
    Craig is well aware of the fact that he is using actual and potential infinite in a way that differs from the traditional usage in Aristotle and Aquinas [Craig and Sinclair 2009: 115. For Aristotle, all the elements in an actual infinite exist simultaneously, whereas a potential infinite is realized over time by addition or division. Hence, the temporal series of events, as formed by successively adding new events, was a potential, not an actual, infinite (Aristotle, Physics, III, 6)]. For Craig, however, an actual infinite is a timeless totality that cannot be added to or reduced. “Since past...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: If only determinate, already-realized events can constitute an actual infinite (premise 2), and future events have not yet happened and thus are not yet realized (premise 1), it logically follows that the future cannot be an actual infinite and is therefore a potential infinite.

    Confidence: High confidence — directly stated.

    Details

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