Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The modal framework presupposed by P2 is itself contingent on human logical systems, not a constraint on divine power.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
If modal claims about God's power are merely human constructs, we cannot meaningfully assert what God can or cannot do at all.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Logical contradiction (like squared circles) appears to be a feature of reality itself, not dependent on human invention or frameworks.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Denying that logic constrains divine power makes theological claims about God vacuous and indistinguishable from incoherence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Human logical systems evolved to solve practical problems, not to describe metaphysical reality or divine nature.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If God transcends creation, divine power likely transcends the logical frameworks creatures developed within that creation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Modal logic (possibility/necessity) is a human conceptual tool; treating it as metaphysically binding assumes human cognition mirrors reality.
?
How convincing is this?
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.