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
    This revision is equivalent to (D1). — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    This revision is equivalent to (D1).

    Divine Attributes
    ?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.For every false proposition there is a true one to the effect that the first one is false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.(D1) already requires an omniscient being to know the latter proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Knowing that P is false is not equivalent to knowing the negation of P if propositional attitudes are hyperintensional.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A being could know 'not-P' without representing the distinct proposition 'P is false' under that description.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.D1 and its revision thus differ in cognitive grain, making equivalence fail for minds sensitive to representational differences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The revision smuggles in a disquotational assumption that every false proposition has a well-formed true negation expressible in the same language.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Priest and others in the dialetheist tradition argue some true contradictions resist clean negation into a distinct true proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If any proposition is both true and false, the symmetry between D1 and its revision collapses, blocking the equivalence claim.
      ?

      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

    Divine Attributes

    Related

    (D1) already requires an omniscient being to know the latter proposition.A being could know 'not-P' without representing the distinct proposition 'P is f...D1 and its revision thus differ in cognitive grain, making equivalence fail for ...For every false proposition there is a true one to the effect that the first one...
    +4 moreShow less
    If any proposition is both true and false, the symmetry between D1 and its revis...Knowing that P is false is not equivalent to knowing the negation of P if propos...Priest and others in the dialetheist tradition argue some true contradictions re...The revision smuggles in a disquotational assumption that every false propositio...

    Similar

    Definition (D3) is equivalent to definition (D1).80%Perfect knowledge is identical to God.73%Therefore, Damian has to maintain that God can undo what has been done71%Ideas are really identical with the Divine Nature.71%

    Source

    AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid
    SEP: omniscience
    View source passageHide passage
    This revision is equivalent to (D1), however, given that for every false proposition there is a true one to the effect that the first one is false. (D1) already requires an omniscient being to know the latter proposition.
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The passage explicitly states the conclusion ("This revision is equivalent to (D1)") and provides the two premises as the justification, connected by "given that," making this a faithfully extracted supportive argument.

    Confidence: Clear argument with explicit premises leading to the stated equivalence conclusion.

    Details

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