Medieval Philosophy and Theology 7 (02):129-156 (1998)
|Abstract||Throughout much of this century the most prominent exegetes maintained that Aquinass causal authority and the composition of the list of later works did little to unsettle their shared conviction that Aristotles insistence that the will can move itself, at least in some fashion, apart from the influence of the intellect. 1|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter Forrest (2010). Why Richard Swinburne Won't 'Rot in Hell': A Defense of Tough-Minded Theodicy. [REVIEW] Sophia 49 (1):37-47.
Brett Gaul (2004). Is the Problem of Evil a Problem for Descartes? Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 78:209-220.
Anthony J. Lisska (unknown). A Look at Inner Sense in Aquinas: A Long-Neglected Faculty Psychology. :1-19.
John O.’Callaghan (2003). More Words on the Verbum. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (2):257-268.
Richard M. Gale (2000). Swinburne on Providence. Religious Studies 36 (2):209-219.
John R. Bowlin (1999). Contingency and Fortune in Aquinas's Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
Eric Silverman (2009). John Hick's Soul-Making Theodicy and the Virtue of Love. Journal of Philosophical Research 34:329-343.
Eric Roark (2006). Aquinas's Unsuccessful Theodicy. Philosophy and Theology 18 (2):247-256.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads2 ( #246,081 of 722,874 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?