A scotistic discussion of “deus est” as a propositio per se Nota
Vivarium 33 (2):197-234 (1995)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesH. C. Baldry (1962). Deus Ex Machina Andreas Spira: Untersuchungen Zum Deus Ex Machina Bei Sophokles Und Euripides. Pp. 167. Kallmünz: Lassleben, 1960. Paper, DM. 12. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 12 (02):129-131.
Laurent Cesalli (2005). Le «Pan-Propositionnalisme» de Jean Wyclif. Vivarium 43 (1):124-155.
J. S. Russell (2000). Trial by Slogan: Natural Law and Lex Iniusta Non Est Lex. Law and Philosophy 19 (4):433 - 449.
Francisco Soares Gomes (1970). Nota Bibliográfica Sobre o Problema de Deus. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 26 (3/4):362 - 381.
Dennis Vanden Auweele (2010). Atheism, Radical Evil, and Kant. Philosophy and Theology 22 (1/2):155-176.
Norman Kretzmann (1970). Medieval Logicians on the Meaning of the Propositio. Journal of Philosophy 67 (20):767-787.
E. P. Bos (1995). A Scotistic Discussion of “Deus Est” as a Propositio Per Se Nota. Vivarium 33 (2):197-234.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads8 ( #123,092 of 549,084 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,084 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
