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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The principle of the fixity of the past should be replaced with the principle of the fixity of the independent.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The asymmetry between past and future is grounded in causal directionality, not dependence relations, making 'fixity of the independent' explanatorily derivative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.David Lewis's analysis of counterfactual dependence already accounts for backtracking cases without abandoning the primacy of temporal asymmetry in fixing modal facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Replacing temporal fixity with independence-fixity smuggles in a controversial metaphysics of causation that the original incompatibilist argument need not presuppose.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hasker and Zagzebski argue that if past divine beliefs depend on future free acts, God's beliefs become modally fragile in ways that undermine robust divine omniscience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A God whose past beliefs are 'unfixed' because dependent on future contingents cannot serve as the epistemic anchor that theological fatalism requires, dissolving rather than solving the foreknowledge problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.What's fixed isn't the past in toto, but so much of the past as isn't dependent on the future.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The fixity of the past, insofar as the past is fixed, is derivative from the fixity of the independent.
      ?

      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