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 necessary ex suppositione (conditionally necessary), though not absolutely necessary

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.William of Ockham's distinction between composite and divided sense shows that 'it is possible that P not occur' and 'given foreknowledge, P will occur' operate at different modal levels.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Gregory's ex suppositione framework smuggles in temporal indexing that presupposes a fixed timeline, begging the question against open future theorists like Peter Auriol who denied determinate truth-values for future contingents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If future contingents lack determinate truth-values prior to occurrence, God's immutable knowledge cannot have a fixed object, undermining the suppositio that generates the conditional necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If God's knowledge is truly immutable, then the proposition 'God could have known otherwise' entails a change in the divine nature, which is impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A necessity that cannot be otherwise in any coherent sense of divine immutability collapses into absolute necessity, not merely conditional necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.God has immutable knowledge of the future
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Whatever God knows cannot fail to occur, given that knowledge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.It remains logically possible for an immutable God to have known otherwise (absolute necessity does not follow)
      ?

      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.