FUTURE CONTINGENTS: ARISTOTLE VS OCKHAM

Abstract

Future contingents pertain to statements about events and actions that have yet to occur, extending beyond the present moment. The significance of establishing a theological and philosophical foundation for understanding theories of future contingencies is evident. From a philosophical perspective, it can be argued that future contingents adhere to Aristotle's Principle of Bivalence. This principle addresses the potential truth or falsehood of future events, making room for either their realization or non-realization. Aristotle explored these contingents through logical frameworks involving time and potentiality. Theologians, meanwhile, build upon these ideas to construct their doctrinal foundations, often leading to tensions between philosophical and theological perspectives. As a result of these conflicts, the issue of future contingents has emerged as a central philosophical problem. Critics have identified logical flaws within Aristotle's approach to future contingents, offering interpretations that challenge his conclusions. These critiques suggest that Aristotle's framework does not provide a definitive resolution to the problem of future contingents. In contrast, Ockham's approach, recognized for its logical rigor, continues to be influential in contemporary philosophical discussions.