William Hasker argues that if God's middle knowledge is logically prior to creation, the counterfactuals constraining agents are not grounded in those agents' own future free choices but in brute, agent-independent modalfacts.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
Facts about what is possible, necessary, or could have been different—basically, facts about how things could be other than they actually are.
William Hasker(as the originator of the 'no-freeze' objection)
A contemporary American philosopher who specializes in philosophy of religion and metaphysics, known for developing arguments about how God can know future events without controlling them.
brute facts(Used to describe the epistemic status of revealed religious information)
Facts accepted without further explanation or justification, not derivable from prior causes or scientific reasoning
counterfactuals(as used in logic and philosophy of free will (related to 'subjunctives of freedom'))
Statements about what *would* happen in situations that aren't actually happening—'if I had studied harder, I would have passed the test' is a counterfactual about a situation that didn't occur.
knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.