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 future is a potential infinite, not an actual infinite.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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