Advertisement

From a necessary being to god

  • Joshua Rasmussen
Article

Abstract

Not a lot of work on theistic arguments has been devoted to drawing connections between a necessary being and theistic properties. In this paper, I identify novel paths from a necessary being to certain theistic properties: volition, infinite power, infinite knowledge, and infinite goodness. The steps in those paths are an outline for future work on what William Rowe (The Cosmological Argument, 1975, p. 6) has called “stage II” of the cosmological argument.

Keywords

Necessary being Stage II Cosmological argument Theism Causal principle 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Flint, T. (1998). Divine providence: The Molinist account. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Gale, R. & Pruss, A. (1999). A new cosmological argument. Religious Studies, 35(4), 461–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gale, R. & Pruss, R. (2002). A response to Oppy and to Davey and Clifton. Religious Studies, 38(1), 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gellman, J. (2000). Prospects for a sound stage III of cosmological arguments. Religious Studies, 36, 195–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Koons, R. (1997). A new look at the cosmological argument. American Philosophical Quarterly, 34(2), 193–211.Google Scholar
  6. Mellor, D. H. (1995). The facts of causation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Morriston, W. (2004). The evidential argument from goodness. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 1(42), 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. O’Connor, T. (1996). From first efficient cause to god: Scotus on the identification stage of the cosmological argument. In L. Honnefelder, R. Wood, & M. Dreyer (Eds.), John Duns scotus: Metaphysics and ethics (pp. 435–454). Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
  9. Oppy, G. (2006). Arguing about Gods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Plantinga, A. (1974). The nature of necessity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Pollock, J. (1984). The foundations of philosophical semantics. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Rasmussen, J. (2008). From states of affairs to a necessary being. Philosophical Studies. doi: 10.1007/s11098-008-9293-2.Google Scholar
  13. Rowe, W. (1975). The cosmological argument. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Tooley, M. (1997). Time, tense, and causation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  15. Wolter, A., OFM. (1987). Duns scotus: Philosophical writings. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company 71 p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations