View topic on PhilPapers for more information
Related categories

18 found
Order:
More results on PhilPapers
  1. added 2020-04-23
    Notes and Comments on Leibniz's Contigency.Florian Millo - 2020
    Contigency is a definition for which is noted for not having the principle of contradiction in itself, for which gives a different truths from what we are used to derive from geometry as an essential field for knowledge of creating strong logics. Leibniz clearly states one of his ideas for God, and why there must be contigent truths and necessary truths.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. added 2019-09-09
    Edward Feser: Five Proofs of the Existence of God. [REVIEW]Logan Paul Gage - 2019 - Philosophia Christi 21 (1):228-232.
    A review of Edward Feser's Five Proofs of the Existence of God.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. added 2019-07-09
    The Role of Essentially Ordered Causal Series in Avicenna’s Proof for the Necessary Existent in the Metaphysics of the Salvation.Celia Byrne - 2019 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 36 (2):121-138.
    Avicenna's proof for the existence of God (the Necessary Existent) in the Metaphysics of the Salvation relies on the claim that every possible existent shares a common cause. I argue that Avicenna has good reason to hold this claim given that he thinks that (1) every essentially ordered causal series originates in a first, common cause and that (2) every possible existent belongs to an essentially ordered series. Showing Avicenna's commitment to 1 and 2 allows me to respond to Herbert (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. added 2018-07-17
    Causation and Sufficient Reason (Atheism).Felipe Leon - 2019 - In Joseph W. Koterski & Graham Oppy (eds.), Theism and Atheism: Opposing Arguments in Philosophy. MacMillan Reference.
    This chapter provides an overview and critical discussion of cosmological arguments for theism, with special focus on the Kalam argument and arguments from contingency.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. added 2017-06-23
    Religious Experience and the Probability of Theism: Comments on Swinburne.Christoph Jäger - 2017 - Religious Studies 53 (3):353-370.
    I discuss Richard Swinburne’s account of religious experience in his probabilistic case for theism. I argue, pace Swinburne, that even if cosmological considerations render theism not too improbable, religious experience does not render it more probable than not.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. added 2016-12-12
    Why Is There Anything At All?Peter van Inwagen & E. J. Lowe - 1996 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 70 (1):95-120.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  7. added 2016-03-16
    O'Connor's Cosmological Argument.Graham Oppy - 2011 - Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion: Vol. 3 3:166.
    This chapter is a critical discussion of the third chapter of Tim O ' Connor ' s * Theism and Ultimate Explanation *. In this chapter, O ' Connor advances the & quot ; existence stage & quot ; of his cosmological argument from contingency. I argue that naturalists have good reason to think that on each of the live hypotheses -- infinite regress, brute contingency, brute necessity -- naturalism is preferable to theism.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. added 2016-03-07
    On ‘a New Cosmological Argument’.Graham Oppy - 2000 - Religious Studies 36 (3):345-353.
    Richard Gale and Alexander Pruss contend that their ‘new cosmological argument’ is an improvement over familiar cosmological arguments because it relies upon a weaker version of the Principle of Sufficient Reason than that used in those more familiar arguments. However, I note that their ‘weaker’ version of the Principle of Sufficient Reason entails the ‘stronger’ version of that principle which is used in more familiar arguments, so that the alleged advantage of their proof turns out to be illusory. Moreover, I (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  9. added 2016-03-03
    The Shape of Causal Reality: A Naturalistic Adaptation of O’Connor’s Cosmological Argument.Graham Oppy - 2010 - Philosophia Christi 12 (2):281-288.
    This paper is a companion to an article that I published in *Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion*. The OSPR discusses the third chapter of Tim O'Connor's *Theism and Ultimate Explanation. This paper discusses a range of other issues that are not picked up in the OSPR discussion.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. added 2016-03-03
    Faulty Reasoning About Default Principles in Cosmological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2004 - Faith and Philosophy 21 (2):242-249.
    Robert Koons claims that my previous critique of his “new” cosmological argument is vitiated by confusion about the nature of defeasible argumentation.In response, I claim that Koons misrepresents—and perhaps misunderstands—the nature of my objections to his “new” cosmological argument. The main claims which I defend are: (1) that the move from a non-defeasible to a defeasible causal principle makes absolutely no difference to the success of the cosmological argument in which it is contained; and (2) that, since it is perfectly (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  11. added 2015-12-09
    Frédéric Guillaud, Dieu existe. Arguments philosophiques, Éditions du Cerf, Paris 2013 (« La nuit surveillée »), pp. 416. [REVIEW]Alejandro Pérez - 2015 - Acta Philosophica 24 (2):424-425.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. added 2015-09-16
    Is Descartes a Temporal Atomist?Ken Levy - 2005 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 13 (4):627 – 674.
    I argue that Descartes' Second Causal Proof of God in the Third Meditation evidences, and commits him to, the belief that time is "strongly discontinuous" -- that is, that there is actually a gap between each consecutive moment of time. Much of my article attempts to reconcile this interpretation, the "received view," with Descartes' statements about time, space, and matter in his other writings, including his correspondence with various philosophers.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  13. added 2015-09-14
    Regresses, Sufficient Reasons, and Cosmological Arguments.Patrick Francken & Heimir Geirsson - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Research 24:285-304.
    Most of the historically salient versions of the Cosmological Argument rest on two assumptions. The first assumption is that some contingeney (i.e., contingent fact) is such that a necessity is required to explain it. Against that assumption we will argue that necessities alone cannot explain any contingency and, furthermore, that it is impossible to explain the totality of contingencies at all.The second assumption is the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Against the Principle of Sufficient Reason we will argue that it is (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  14. added 2015-02-17
    A Defense of the Crucial Premise of the Third Way.Steven M. Duncan - manuscript
    Aquinas' Third Way is often dismissed as a howler, because he infers from the fact that, since the universe is metaphysically contingent that there was some time in the past when it didn't exist. I offer an argument to justify this inference.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. added 2013-10-08
    Philosophy and Cosmology 2011 (The Journal of International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology (ISPC) ).Oleg Bazaluk (ed.) - 2011 - ISPC.
    Philosophy and Cosmology is an open access, peer-reviewed and refereed journal that focuses on theoretical and conceptual problems and issues in philosophical and cosmological research. Philosophy and Cosmology is published by International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology. The objective of Philosophy and Cosmology is to promote exchange and collaboration among philosophers, social, technical and natural science researchers throughout the world. In pursuit of this objective the journal not only publishes high quality research papers but also ensures that the published papers (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. added 2013-10-08
    Philosophy and Cosmology 2008 (The Journal of International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology (ISPC) ).Oleg Bazaluk (ed.) - 2008 - ISPC.
    Philosophy and Cosmology is an open access, peer-reviewed and refereed journal that focuses on theoretical and conceptual problems and issues in philosophical and cosmological research. Philosophy and Cosmology is published by International Society of Philosophy and Cosmology. The objective of Philosophy and Cosmology is to promote exchange and collaboration among philosophers, social, technical and natural science researchers throughout the world. In pursuit of this objective the journal not only publishes high quality research papers but also ensures that the published papers (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. added 2012-04-27
    Cosmological Argument: A Pragmatic Defense.Evan Sandsmark & Jason L. Megill - 2010 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 2 (1):127 - 142.
    We formulate a sort of "generic" cosmological argument, i.e., a cosmological argument that shares premises (e.g., "contingent, concretely existing entities have a cause") with numerous versions of the argument. We then defend each of the premises by offering pragmatic arguments for them. We show that an endorsement of each premise will lead to an increase in expected utility; so in the absence of strong evidence that the premises are false, it is rational to endorse them. Therefore, it is rational to (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. added 2010-01-08
    Cartesian Knowledge and Confirmation.Joel Pust - 2007 - Journal of Philosophy 104 (6):269-289.
    Bayesian conceptions of evidence have been invoked in recent arguments regarding the existence of God, the hypothesis of multiple physical universes, and the Doomsday Argument. Philosophers writing on these topics often claim that, given a Bayesian account of evidence, our existence or something entailed by our existence (perhaps in conjunction with some background knowledge or assumption) may serve as evidence for each of us. In this paper, I argue that this widespread view is mistaken. The mere fact of one's existence (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations