Tom 21 Nr 1 (2024)
Artykuły

Contingency and Necessity: Metatheological Considerations

PDF (Angielski)
  • Jonathan L. Kvanvig
Jonathan L. Kvanvig
Washington University in St. Louis

Opublikowane 17.10.2024

Słowa kluczowe

  • creation,
  • creator theology,
  • metatheology,
  • modality,
  • necessitarianism,
  • perfect being theology
    • ...More
    Less

Prawa autorskie (c) 2024 Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy

Creative Commons License

Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne 4.0 Międzynarodowe.

Jak cytować

Kvanvig, Jonathan L. “Contingency and Necessity: Metatheological Considerations”. Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy , vol. 21, no. 1, Oct. 2024, https://doi.org/10.53763/fag.2024.21.1.237.

Abstrakt

This paper addresses two questions. The first inquires about the line between the contingent and the necessary, and the second about how to explain contingency itself. The goal is a unified explanation of the two. In doing so, we favor approaches that offer plausible explanations even if we agree that no explanation may be needed, resisting only the stronger claim that no explanation is possible. Then we embrace the idea that a unified account of these two aspects of contingency is to be preferred over alternatives, leading to important metatheological results. Those results involve two different approaches to what is fundamental to the nature of deity, and the argument shows a preference for endorsing Creator Theology over a rival Worship-Worthiness approach and, by implication, over Perfect Being Theology as well.

PDF (Angielski)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Bibliografia

  1. Almeida Michael J., The Metaphysics of Perfect Beings, Routledge, Boston 2008.
  2. Augustine, Eighty-Three Different Questions, Catholic University of America Press, trans. David L. Moshe, Washington 1982.
  3. DeRose Keith, Epistemic Possibilities, Philosophical Review 1991, Vol. 100, No. 4, pp. 581–605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2185175
  4. Egan Andy and Weatherson B., Epistemic Modality, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009.
  5. Fetzer James H., On »Epistemic Possibility«, Philosophia 1974, Vol. 4, No. 2–3, pp. 327–335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379231
  6. Hintikka Jaakko, Knowledge and Belief, Cornell University Press, Ithaca 1962.
  7. Hoffman Joshua and Rosenkrantz Gary, Hard and Soft Facts, Philosophical Review 1984, Vol. 93, No. 3, pp. 419–434. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2184544
  8. Huemer Michael, Epistemic Possibility, Synthese 2007, Vol. 156, No. 1, pp. 119 –142. Knobe Joshua and Seth Yalcin, Epistemic Modals and Context: Experimental Data, Semantics and Pragmatics 2014, Vol. 7, No. 10, pp. 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-4782-8
  9. Kvanvig Jonathan L., Depicting Deity: A Metatheological Approach, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192896452.001.0001
  10. Lewis David, Truthmaking and Difference-Making, Noûs 2001, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 602–615. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0029-4624.00354
  11. Marcus Ruth Barcan, Modalities and Intensional Languages, Synthese 1961, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 303–322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00486629
  12. Menzel Christopher, The Possibilism-Actualism Debate, in: Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, https://tiny.pl/nn4fr9s2.
  13. Menzel Christopher, In Defense of the Possibilism — Actualism Distinction, Philosophical Studies 2020, Vol. 177, No. 7, pp. 1971–1997, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11098-019-01294-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-019-01294-0
  14. Morris Thomas, Perfect Being Theology, Noûs 1987, Vol. 21, No. 1, p. 24 [19–30].
  15. Murphy Mark C., God’s Own Ethics: Norms of Divine Agency and the Argument From Evil, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198796916.001.0001
  16. Nagasawa Yujin, Maximal God: A New Defense of Perfect Being Theism, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198758686.003.0005
  17. Plantinga Alvin, The Nature of Necessity, Cornell University Press, Ithaca 1978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0198244142.001.0001
  18. Ramsey Frank P., Critical Notice of L. Wittgenstein’s Tractatus logico-philosophicus, Mind 1923, Vol. 32, No. 128, pp. 465–478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/XXXII.128.465
  19. Reed Baron, Fallibilism, Epistemic Possibility, and Epistemic Agency, Philosophical Issues 2013, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 40–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phis.12003
  20. Russell Bertrand, Possibility and Necessity, in: Alasdair Urquhart and Albert C. Lewis (eds.), The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Volume 4: Foundations of Logic, 1903–1905, Routledge, Boston 1994, pp. 507–521.
  21. Schaffer Jonathan, Laws for Metaphysical Explanation, Philosophical Issues 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 302–321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phis.12111
  22. Sorensen Roy, Meta-Agnosticism: Higher Order Epistemic Possibility, Mind 2009, Vol. 118, No. 471, pp. 777–784. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzp105
  23. Taylor Richard, Fatalism, Philosophical Review 1962, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp. 56–66, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2183681. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2183681
  24. Teller Paul, Epistemic Possibility, Philosophia 1972, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 303–320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02381591
  25. Teller Paul, Professor Fetzer on Epistemic Possibility, Philosophia 1974, Vol. 4, No. 2–3, pp. 337–338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379232
  26. Williamson Timothy, Knowledge and Its Limits, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2000.
  27. Williamson Timothy, Modal Logic as Metaphysics, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552078.001.0001
  28. Wilson Jessica M., Nonlinearity and Metaphysical Emergence, in: Stephen Mumford and Matthew Tugby (eds.), Metaphysics and Science, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2013, pp. 201–231.
  29. Wilson Jessica M., No Work for a Theory of Grounding, Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 2014, Vol. 57, No. 5–6, pp. 535–579. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2014.907542
  30. Yalcin Seth, Epistemic Modals, Mind 2007, Vol. 116, No. 464, pp. 983–1026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzm983
  31. Yalcin Seth, More on Epistemic Modals, Mind 2009, Vol. 118, No. 471, pp. 785–793. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzp106