Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||This paper traces a rather peculiar debate between William Ockham, Walter Chatton, and Robert Holcot over whether it is possible for God to know more than he knows. Although the debate specifically addresses a theological question about divine knowledge, the central issue at stake in it is a purely philosophical question about the nature and ontological status of propositions. The theories of propositions that emerge from the discussion appear deeply puzzling, however. My aim in this paper is to show that there is a way of making sense of these views (and, by implication, of much of what is puzzling about medieval theories of propositions). The key, I argue, lies in getting clear about the precise theoretical roles these thinkers assign to propositions in their accounts of propositional attitudes.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Peter Hanks (2009). Recent Work on Propositions. Philosophy Compass 4 (3):469-486.
Robert Pasnau (ed.) (2002). Mind and Knowledge. Cambridge University Press.
William J. Rapaport (1976). On Cogito Propositions. Philosophical Studies 29 (1):63-68.
Richard Davis (2006). God and Counterpossibles. Religious Studies 42 (4):371 - 391.
Jeffrey C. King (2013). On Fineness of Grain. Philosophical Studies 163 (3):763-781.
Simo Knuuttila (2010). Medieval Commentators on Future Contingents in De Interpretatione. Vivarium 48 (1-2):75-95.
Michael J. Cholbi (2003). Contingency and Divine Knowledge in Ockham. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (1):81-91.
Stephen Schiffer (2007). Propositions, What Are They Good For? In R. Schantz (ed.), Current Issues in Theoretical Philosophy: Prospects for Meaning Vol. 3. Walter de Gruyter.
Added to index2009-08-06
Total downloads43 ( #30,837 of 740,168 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 740,168 )
How can I increase my downloads?