We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded by your direct support for ReKnew and our vision. Please consider supporting this project.
The Hexagon of Opposition
Throughout the western philosophical and theological tradition, scholars have assumed that the future can be adequately described in terms of what will and will not happen. In this essay I, Alan Rhoda and Tom Belt argue that this assumption is mistaken, for the logical contradictory of will is not will not but might not. Conversely, the logical contradictory of will not is not will, but might. We suggest that the traditional assumption that the future is exhaustively describable in terms of what will and will not occur is influenced by an inadequacy in Aristotle’s famous “Square of Opposition.” We correct this deficiency and demonstrate that an adequate logical model of the future must incorporate might and might not, producing a “Hexagon of Opposition” rather than a “Square of Opposition.”
Click here to download this essay:
The Hexagon of Opposition: Thinking Outside the Aristotelian Box
Category: Essays
Tags: Essay, Open Theism
Topics: Defending the Open View
Related Reading
Podcast: Is God Capable of Total Control?
Greg talks the consequences of creating autonomous persons. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0355.mp3
Greg on the Open View: Video One
By popular demand, we’re sharing the first of Greg’s video presentations on the Open View of the future. If you enjoy it, you can find the rest of the series entitled A Flexible Sovereignty: A Biblical Understanding of Providence and the Nature of the Future by clicking here. This video was recorded in 2008 at Azuza…
What is the significance of Judges 10:13–16?
The Israelites cry out to God because of their oppression from foreign rulers. The Lord refuses to deliver them because they have abandoned him (vs. 13–14). The Israelites repented, put away their foreign gods and worshipped the Lord. The Lord “also could no longer bear to see Israel suffer” (vs. 16). Hence the Lord changed…
The Future is Not Like the Past For God (or Us)
Image by seier+seier via Flickr Everyone agrees that we are not free to change the past. No sane person would claim, for example, that I can now make any free choices about whether John F. Kennedy will be assassinated or not on November 22, 1963. This deed, like all past deeds, has already been accomplished. Now consider,…
If God anticipates each possibility perfectly, how does he differ from the “frozen God” of classical theism?
Question: If God anticipates each and every possibility as if each were only possibility, how does God ever experience novelty and adventure? It seems that a God who perfectly anticipated (from all eternity) every single possibility as if it were the only possibility would not differ from the timeless “frozen God” of classical theism Answer:…
What If Open Theism is Not True? What Would Be the Practical Implications?
In this episode Greg talks about what the practical implication would be if Open Theism is not true. Our favorite quote from this episode: “There is no way to live as if we are predestined.” http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0010.mp3