Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The necessity of the past may simply be the principle that past events are outside the class of causable events.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Retrocausation thought experiments (e.g., tachyons, closed causal loops) suggest causability is not strictly forward-directed in time.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If physical possibility grounds the necessity of the past, contingent physical laws cannot underwrite the modal force needed for theological fatalism arguments.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Ockham's distinction between hard and soft facts about the past shows that some past truths—like God's past beliefs—remain modally open relative to future actions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If soft past facts are causable via the future free acts they are about, then past events cannot be uniformly excluded from the class of causable events.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
There is a temporal asymmetry in causability because everything causable is in the future.
?
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.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42