David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 89 (2):122-156 (2007)
This paper intends to show that Aquinas gives a non-deterministic account of free decision. Angelic sin is the eminent <span class='Hi'>test</span> case: ex hypothesi, angels are supremely intelligent and not subject to ignorance, passions, or negatively disposing habits. Nothing predetermines their choice; rather it ultimately depends on their freedom alone. All angels acted based upon reasons, but why certain angels acted for an inadequate reason whereas others for an adequate reason cannot be fully explained. Thomas's action theory allows him to explain angelic choice as contingent and selfdetermined. The salient features of this explanation are transferable to human free decision.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
J. Patout Burns (1988). Augustine on the Origin and Progress of Evil. Journal of Religious Ethics 16 (1):9 - 27.
Harm Goris (2003). The Angelic Doctor and Angelic Speech: The Development of Thomas Aquinas's Thought on How Angels Communicate. Medieval Philosophy and Theology 11 (01):87-105.
Tobias Hoffmann (2010). Duns Scotus’s Action Theory in the Context of His Angelology. In Ludger Honnefelder (ed.), Johannes Duns Scotus 1308–2008: Die philosophischen Perspektiven seines Werkes / Investigations into his Philosophy. Proceedings of “The Quadruple Congress” on John Duns Scotus, part 3. Franciscan Institute Publications; Aschendorff.
Timothy B. Noone (2011). Saint Bonaventure and Angelic Natural Knowledge of Singulars. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 85 (1):143-159.
Joseph Y. Halpern & Yoram Moses (1986). Taken by Surprise: The Paradox of the Surprise Test Revisited. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophical Logic 15 (3):281 - 304.
Gerald J. Erion (2001). The Cartesian Test for Automatism. Minds and Machines 11 (1):29-39.
W. Matthews Grant (2001). Aquinas Among Libertarians and Compatibilists. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 75:221-235.
Robert A. Wilson (2004). Test Cases, Resolvability, and Group Selection: A Critical Examination of the Myxoma Case. Philosophy of Science 71 (3):380-401.
Paul Schweizer (1998). The Truly Total Turing Test. Minds and Machines 8 (2):263-272.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads52 ( #33,143 of 1,100,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #190,060 of 1,100,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?