Naturalism, classical theism, and first causes
Enric F. Gel has recently argued that classical theism enjoys a significant advantage over Graham Oppy's naturalism. According to Gel, classical theism - unlike Oppy's naturalism - satisfactorily answers two questions: first, how many first causes are there, and second, why is it that numb...
| Κύριος συγγραφέας: | |
|---|---|
| Τύπος μέσου: | Ηλεκτρονική πηγή Άρθρο |
| Γλώσσα: | Αγγλικά |
| Έλεγχος διαθεσιμότητας: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Φόρτωση...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Έκδοση: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
2023
|
| Στο/Στη: |
Religious studies
Έτος: 2023, Τόμος: 59, Τεύχος: 1, Σελίδες: 63-77 |
| Τυποποιημένες (ακολουθίες) λέξεων-κλειδιών: | B
Θεϊσμός
/ Νατουραλισμός (φιλοσοφία) (Φιλοσοφία (μοτίβο))
/ Κοσμολογική απόδειξη της ύπαρξης του Θεού
|
| Σημειογραφίες IxTheo: | AB Φιλοσοφία της θρησκείας, Κριτική της θρησκείας, Αθεϊσμός NBC Δόγμα του Θεού |
| Άλλες λέξεις-κλειδιά: | B
first cause
B Naturalism B Classical Theism B God B gap problem |
| Διαθέσιμο Online: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Σύνοψη: | Enric F. Gel has recently argued that classical theism enjoys a significant advantage over Graham Oppy's naturalism. According to Gel, classical theism - unlike Oppy's naturalism - satisfactorily answers two questions: first, how many first causes are there, and second, why is it that number rather than another? In this article, I reply to Gel's argument for classical theism's advantage over Oppy's naturalism. I also draw out wider implications of my investigation for the gap problem and Christian doctrine along the way. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-901X |
| Περιλαμβάνει: | Enthalten in: Religious studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0034412522000051 |