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 two forms of fatalism (theological and logical) are equivalent.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Logical fatalism derives necessity from the timeless truth of propositions, not from any agent's knowledge or existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Theological fatalism requires an essentially omniscient being whose foreknowledge causally or constitutively fixes future events.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.These distinct grounds of necessity generate non-equivalent modal structures: one concerns propositional logic, the other divine ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Boethius and Aquinas held that divine eternity places God outside time, making 'foreknowledge' a category error inapplicable to logical fatalism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical fatalism operates solely on the principle of bivalence and applies universally regardless of any being's existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If God's atemporal knowledge dissolves the 'fore' in foreknowledge, the theological and logical arguments cannot share equivalent logical form.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.God is necessarily existent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God is essentially omniscient.
      ?

      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.