If human persons & the cosmos are mutually constituted ... random thoughts Part 2

retortion provides compelling intuitive support for real possibilities

Retortion arguments re knowledge, indisputably & empirically, reveal unavoidable performative inconsistencies.

Some may wrongly imagine that retortion's being advanced as a metaphysical claim like the PSR rather than just being transcendentally significant.

In my view, we advance, rather, a fallible metaphysical hypothesis like a weak PSR e.g. Scotistic or Peircean version, where PSR's not an indubitable metaphysical theorem, but an indispensable metanomological heuristic, which is, of course, transcendentally significant.

Asserting the very possibility of a metaphysical hypothesis entails an over against metaphysical ignosticism and of a metanomological heuristic  - an over against nominalism.

Weaker claims vis a vis the PSR will be more universally compelling. For example,
Scotus modally restricts it to "real possibilities," i.e. those consistent with the basic laws (nomicities) and structures (forms) of the physical world. And he primarily applies it - not to accidentally, but - essentially ordered series.

As with Scotus' argument, the real work to be accomplished by any PSR version visa vis theism will not result in a conclusive demonstration (e.g. of an absolutely first efficient cause associated with any essentially ordered series), but instead will provide compelling intuitive support for theism's possibility.

So, we do encounter temporal nomicities, including emergent probabilities, a posteriori & empirically.

And, we can't a priori & rationally conclude whether they are merely temporal & ephemeral or eternal & necessary.

Finally, we can't a priori deny the reality of eternal necessities or Ens Necessarium.