Response to Flint
| Abstract | In defending his rejection of Maverick Molinism (Faith and Philosophy 20.1, (January 2003), pp. 91-100) from my criticisms (Faith and Philosophy 19 (2002), pp. 348-357), Tom Flint attributes three central claims to my argument, and disagrees with two of them. He also notes my request for a defense of the Law of Conditional Excluded Middle, which his argument employs. He portrays that discussion as taking “potshots” at his argument, in part because I denied that concerns about the Law are compelling, but it is a mistake to think that controversial premises need no defense simply because the case against them is not compelling. Regarding the points where Flint is more forthcoming, one of his points places further demands on his rejection of this version of Molinism. The other point involves a serious misrepresentation of my argument. | |||||||||
| 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: 5,672 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesThomas P. Flint (1992). The Nature of God. Faith and Philosophy 9 (3):392-398.
William Hasker (1990). Response to Thomas Flint. Philosophical Studies 60 (1-2):117 - 126.
Kent Reames (1999). A Response to Swinburne's Latest Defense of the Argument For Dualism. Faith and Philosophy 16 (1):90-97.
Joseph Shieber (2009). Personal Responsibility and Middle Knowledge: A Challenge for the Molinist. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 66 (2):61 - 70.
Erik J. Wielenberg (2000). Many Are Culled but Few Are Chosen. Religious Studies 36 (1):81-93.
Thomas P. Flint (2003). The Multiple Muddles of Maverick Molinism. Faith and Philosophy 20 (1):91-100.
Wes Morriston (2001). Explanatory Priority and the Counterfactuals of Freedom. Faith and Philosophy 18 (1):21-35.
William Hasker (2000). Are Alternative Pasts Plausible? A Reply to Thomas Flint. Religious Studies 36 (1):103-105.
Jonathan Kvanvig (2002). On Behalf of Maverick Molinism. Faith and Philosophy 19 (3):348-357.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads32 ( #37,900 of 549,065 )Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,703 of 549,065 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
