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 relevant interlocutors for the argument for theological fatalism are those who endorse a libertarian conception of free will.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Some compatibilists, notably Frankfurt, deny that 'able to do otherwise' is necessary for moral responsibility at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If compatibilists reject the 'could have done otherwise' requirement entirely, they have positive reasons to engage theological fatalism, not merely ignore it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An argument that eliminates 'could have done otherwise' threatens Frankfurt-style compatibilism's own positive account of free action, making compatibilists genuine interlocutors.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Classical theists like Aquinas and Molina were compatibilists about providence yet devoted sustained argument to reconciling foreknowledge with contingent human action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The historical record shows that compatibilist thinkers treated theological fatalism as a serious problem requiring resolution, not as an argument that left them untroubled.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If canonical compatibilist theologians found the argument compelling enough to refute at length, the claim that compatibilists are simply 'untroubled' misrepresents the dialectical history.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Compatibilists hold that it is possible for an agent to do otherwise, in the sense required for free will, even if her action is causally determined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Compatibilists will probably be untroubled by an argument purporting to show that no one can do otherwise given divine foreknowledge.
      ?

      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.