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
    William Hasker's 'no-freeze' objection establishes that f... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→God can achieve infallible knowledge of future contingents through a 'bootstrapping' process.

    William Hasker's 'no-freeze' objection establishes that for knowledge of free future actions, the knowing relation must be grounded in the action itself, not in any prior epistemic state of the knower.

    ?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.

    Key Terms

    Free future actions(as the subject of knowledge that creates philosophical problems)
    Things you will choose to do later that are genuinely up to you—not determined in advance or controlled by outside forces.
    Knowing relation(as what philosophers debate about how knowledge actually happens)
    The connection between a knower (like God or a person) and what they know; it's the 'link' that makes knowledge actually work.
    No-freeze objection(as a challenge to traditional views of divine knowledge and human freedom)
    An argument that says if God knows what you'll freely do in the future, that knowledge can't force or 'freeze' your future action into being predetermined—your action itself has to be the basis of God's knowledge, not the other way around.
    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.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    epistemic state(used interchangeably with 'cognitive state' in the passage)
    A cognitive state; the way things are represented or appear from the standpoint of a knowing subject
    grounded in(whether distinctness or identity is explained by intrinsic features)
    To be explained by or to have its reason or basis in something else—like how a tree being wet is grounded in (explained by) recent rain.
    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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Free Will & Foreknowledge1 linked

    Related

    God can achieve infallible knowledge of future contingents through a 'bootstrapp...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective