Skip to main content
Log in

The deadlock of absolute divine simplicity

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

Abstract

In this article, I explain how and why different attempts to defend absolute divine simplicity fail. A proponent of absolute divine simplicity has to explain why different attributions do not suppose a metaphysical complexity in God but just one superproperty, why there is no difference between God and His super-property and finally how a absolute simple entity can be the truthmaker of different intrinsic predications. It does not necessarily lead to a rejection of divine simplicity but it shows that we may consider another conception of divine simplicity compatible with some metaphysical complexity in God.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bacon J. (1995) Universals and property instances: The alphabet of being. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann M., Brower J. (2006) A theistic argument against platonism (and in support of truthmakers and divine simplicity). Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 2: 357–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Brower J. (2008) Making sense of divine simplicity. Faith and Philosophy 25(1): 3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brower, J. (2009). Simplicity and aseity. In T. Flint & M. Rea (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophical theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Campbell, K. (1981/2002). The metaphysics of abstract particular. In D. H. Mellor & A. Oliver (Eds.), Properties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Funkhouser E. (2006) The determinable-determinate relation. Noûs 40(3): 548–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes C. (1989) On a complex theory of a simple God: An investigation in Aquinas’ philosophical theology. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Leftow B. (1990) Is God an abstract object?. Noûs 24(4): 581–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe E.J. (2006) The four-category ontology: A metaphysical foundation for natural science. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Marion J.-L. (1991) God without being. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Marion J.-L. (2001) The idol and distance: Five studies. Fordham University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertz D.W. (2006) Essays on realist instance ontology and its logic. OntosVerlag, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga A. (1980) Does God have a nature?. Marquette University Press, Milwaukee

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior A.N. (1949) Determinables, determinates and determinants. Mind 58(229): 1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Pereyra G. (2002) Resemblance nominalism: A solution to the problem of universals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simons P. (1994) Particulars in particular clothing: Three trope theories of substance. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54(3): 553–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolterstorff N. (1991) Divine simplicity. Philosophical Perspectives 5: 531–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yann Schmitt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schmitt, Y. The deadlock of absolute divine simplicity. Int J Philos Relig 74, 117–130 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-012-9336-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-012-9336-7

Keywords

Navigation