Skip to main content
Log in

Divine determinism, human freedom, and the consequence argument

  • Article
  • Published:
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper I consider the view, held by some Thomistic thinkers, that divine determinism is compatible with human freedom, even though natural determinism is not. After examining the purported differences between divine and natural determinism, I discuss the Consequence Argument, which has been put forward to establish the incompatibility of natural determinism and human freedom. The Consequence Argument, I note, hinges on the premise that an action ultimately determined by factors outside of the actor’s control is not free. Since, I argue, divine determinism also entails that human actions are ultimately determined by factors outside of the actors’ control, I suggest that a parallel argument to the Consequence Argument can be constructed for the incompatibility of divine determinism and human freedom. I conclude that those who reject natural compatibilism on the basis of the Consequence Argument should also reject divine compatibilism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alston W. (1993) Divine action, human freedom, and the laws of nature. In: Russell R. J., Murphy N., Isham C. J. (eds) Quantum cosmology and the laws of nature: Scientific perspectives on divine action. Vatican Observatory Publications, Vatican City, pp 185–207

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baker L. R. (2003) Why Christians should not be libertarians: An Augustinian challenge. Faith and Philosophy 20(4): 460–478

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burrell D. (2008) Creator/creatures relation: ‘The distinction’ v. ‘onto-theology’. Faith and Philosophy 25(2): 177–189

    Google Scholar 

  4. Crabtree J. A. (2004) The most real being: A biblical and philosophical defense of divine determinism. Gutenberg College Press, Eugene, OR

    Google Scholar 

  5. Frankfurt H. (1969) Alternative possibilities and moral responsibility. Journal of Philosophy 66(23): 829–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hoefer, C. (2010). Causal determinism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/determinism-causal/.

  7. McCabe H. (1987) “Freedom” God matters. Continuum, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Tanner K. (1994) Human freedom, human sin, and God the creator. In: Tracy T. (eds) The God who acts: Philosophical and theological explorations. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, pp 111–135

    Google Scholar 

  9. Vihvelin, K. (2011). Arguments for incompatibilism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/incompatibilism-arguments/.

  10. Watson, G. (Ed.). (2003). Introduction. In Free will (pp. 1–25). New York: Oxford.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leigh C. Vicens.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vicens, L.C. Divine determinism, human freedom, and the consequence argument. Int J Philos Relig 71, 145–155 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-011-9317-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-011-9317-2

Keywords

Navigation