Religious Studies 38 (2):201-213 (2002)
|Abstract||In this paper I reply to Keith Yandell's recent charge that Anselmian theists cannot also be Trinitarians. Yandell's case turns on the contention that it is impossible to individuate Trinitarian members, if they exist necessarily. Since the ranks of Anselmian Trinitarians includes the likes of Alvin Plantinga, Robert Adams, and Thomas Flint, Yandell's claim is of considerable interest and import. I argue, by contrast, that Anselmians can appeal to what Plantinga calls an essence or haecceity – a property essentially unique to an object – to distinguish Trinitarian members. I go on to show that the main Yandellian objection to this individuative strategy is not successful.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Keith E. Yandell (1974). Review Article. Journal of Value Inquiry 8 (2):143-157.
Keith E. Yandell (1993). The Epistemology of Religious Experience. Cambridge University.
Keith E. Yandell (1969). A Premature Farewell to Theism (A Reply to Roland Puccetti). Religious Studies 5 (2):251 - 255.
Keith Chrzan (1991). God and Gratuitous Evil: A Reply to Yandell. Religious Studies 27 (1):99 - 103.
Keith E. Yandell (1994). The Most Brutal and Inexcusable Error in Counting?: Trinity and Consistency. Religious Studies 30 (2):201 - 217.
Keith E. Yandell (1972). Theism and Evil: A Reply. Sophia 11 (1).
Keith E. Yandell (1990). Hume's "Inexplicable Mystery": His Views on Religion. Temple University Press.
Keith E. Yandell (1981). The Problem of Evil. Philosophical Topics 12 (3):7-38.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #25,360 of 549,125 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,125 )
How can I increase my downloads?