David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Religious Studies 38 (2):147-166 (2002)
In a series of much discussed articles and books, William Lane Craig defends the view that the past could not consist in a beginningless series of events. In the present paper, I cast a critical eye on just one part of Craig's case for the finitude of the past – viz. his philosophical argument against the possibility of actually infinite sets of objects in the ‘real world’. I shall try to show that this argument is unsuccessful. I shall also take a close look at several considerations that are often thought to favour the possibility of an actual infinite, arguing in each case that Craig's response is inadequate.
|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
Stephen Puryear (forthcoming). Finitism, Divisibility, and the Beginning of the Universe: Replies to Loke and Dumsday. Australasian Journal of Philosophy.
Travis Dumsday (forthcoming). Finitism and Divisibility: A Reply to Puryear. Australasian Journal of Philosophy:1-6.
Jacobus Erasmus & Anné Hendrik Verhoef (2015). The Kalām Cosmological Argument and the Infinite God Objection. Sophia 54 (4):411-427.
Andrew Ter Ern Loke (forthcoming). On Finitism and the Beginning of the Universe: A Reply to Stephen Puryear. Australasian Journal of Philosophy:1-5.
Similar books and articles
Paul Helm (2002). Time and Time Again: Two Volumes by William Lane Craig William Lane Craig the Tensed Theory of Time: A Critical Examination. Synthese Library Volume 293. (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000). Pp. V+287. £78.00 (Hbk). ISBN 0792366344. William Lane Craig the Tenseless Theory of Time: A Critical Examination. Synthese Library Volume 294. (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000). Pp. V+256. £65.00 (Hbk). ISBN 0792366352. [REVIEW] Religious Studies 38 (4):489-498.
David B. Myers (2003). Rejoinder to William Lane Craig. Religious Studies 39 (4):427-430.
Paul Kabay (2005). An Infinite Temporal Regress is Compatible with the Doctrine of Creatio Originans. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 57 (2):123 - 138.
Quentin Smith (1987). Infinity and the Past. Philosophy of Science 54 (1):63-75.
William Lane Craig (1979). Whitrow and Popper on the Impossibility of an Infinite Past. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30 (2):165-170.
Eric Sotnak (1999). The Kalam Cosmological Argument and the Possibility of an Actually Infinite Future. Philo 2 (2):41-52.
Arnold T. Guminski (2002). The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Philo 5 (2):196-215.
Wes Morriston (2010). Beginningless Past, Endless Future, and the Actual Infinite. Faith and Philosophy 27 (4):439-450.
William Lane Craig (2010). Taking Tense Seriously in Differentiating Past and Future. Faith and Philosophy 27 (4):451-456.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads51 ( #80,880 of 1,793,012 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #101,828 of 1,793,012 )
How can I increase my downloads?