Is ockham off the Hook?
| Abstract | In his admirably clear, beautifully argued study, Claude Panaccio has provided an able defense of Ockham’s position in response to an argument I presented against Ockham in a discussion with Peter King eight years ago at a meeting in Pittsburgh.1 But after eight years, and even after Claude’s book, I still stand by that argument. So, in these comments I will attempt to explain why I think Ockham may still not be off the hook. | |||||||||
| 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: 5,664 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesPascal Massie (2004). Saving Contingency. Epoché 8 (2):333-350.
Alvin Plantinga (1986). On Ockham's Way Out. Faith and Philosophy 3 (3):235-269.
Alfred Freddoso (1983). Logic, Ontology and Ockham’s Christology. The New Scholasticism 57 (3):293-330.
Stephen Chak Tornay (1938). Ockham: Studies and Selections. La Salle, Ill.,The Open Court Publishing Company.
P. Garcia & F. Esteva (1995). On Ockham Algebras: Congruence Lattices and Subdirectly Irreducible Algebras. Studia Logica 55 (2):319 - 346.
William Ockham (1983). Predestination, Foreknowledge, and Future Contingents. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads19 ( #64,310 of 549,014 )Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,160 of 549,014 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
