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 Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP) at most ... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP) at most sets forth a necessary condition of acting freely in the libertarian sense, not a sufficient one.

    Afterlife & DeathEternal Conscious Torment
    ?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.PAP claims that in order to act freely one must be able to do otherwise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.PAP includes no requirement that a free choice be even minimally rational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frankfurt's own cases, the primary challenge to PAP, target the ability-to-do-otherwise condition directly, not PAP's alleged silence on rationality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If PAP survives Frankfurt cases via the flicker-of-freedom response (Fischer, Nozick), then the rationality gap identified in P2 is a feature of the counterexample strategy, not PAP itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating PAP's incompleteness with PAP's inadequacy commits a category error: necessary conditions are not expected to specify sufficient ones.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.PAP's defenders, including van Inwagen, explicitly situate it within broader compatibilist and libertarian frameworks that already presuppose rationality conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A necessary condition embedded in a rich theoretical framework inherits the sufficiency constraints of that framework, making the insufficiency objection merely terminological.
      ?

      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

    Afterlife & DeathEternal Conscious Torment

    Related

    A necessary condition embedded in a rich theoretical framework inherits the suff...Conflating PAP's incompleteness with PAP's inadequacy commits a category error: ...Frankfurt's own cases, the primary challenge to PAP, target the ability-to-do-ot...If PAP survives Frankfurt cases via the flicker-of-freedom response (Fischer, No...
    +3 moreShow less
    PAP claims that in order to act freely one must be able to do otherwise.PAP includes no requirement that a free choice be even minimally rational.PAP's defenders, including van Inwagen, explicitly situate it within broader com...

    Similar

    PAP claims that in order to act freely one must be able to do otherwis...80%If a person freely acts wrongly in a given set of circumstances, it wa...77%Given VanArragon's understanding of libertarian freedom, continuing to...77%Doing the right thing for the right reasons freely does not require an...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: heaven-hell
    View source passageHide passage
    Now, as already indicated, those who embrace a free-will theodicy of hell typically appeal, in the words of Jonathan Kvanvig, to “a libertarian account of human freedom in order to provide a complete response to” the problem of hell (Kvanvig 2011, 54). But of course such a “complete response” would also require a relatively complete account of libertarian freedom. According to Kvanvig, “some formulation of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP) correctly describes this notion of [libertarian] freedom”; and, as he also points out, this “principle claims that in order to act freely one...

    Details

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