David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Zygon 39 (3):577-590 (2004)
. In Minding God Gregory Peterson takes a careful look at the kind of freedom that human persons have. He concludes that humans are constrained to be free and unpacks this into a version of compatibilism. That is, humans are not metaphysically free under current existence because of the causal determination inherent in their physical nature, but they can take credit for the origination of selfforming decisions because the causes occur inside of us. Peterson does advocate an eschatological hope looking forward to the breaking of causal determination by God's own action. Thus, Minding God presents an eschatologically limited compatibilism. Compatibilism of any kind, however, presents serious challenges to most Christian theologies and to many religious traditions broadly considered. After I interpret Peterson's position I make the argument that compatibilism is neither desirable nor required for a theological anthropology intent on serious engagement of cognitive science
|Keywords||Cognitive Science Incompatibilism Neuroscience Science Barth James|
|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
Thomas S. Kuhn (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Thomas S. Kuhn (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Vol. The University of Chicago Press.
Robert H. Kane (1996). The Significance of Free Will. Oxford University Press.
Imre Lakatos (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
James W. Haag (2006). Between Physicalism and Mentalism: Philip Clayton on Mind and Emergence. Zygon 41 (3):633-647.
Similar books and articles
William Bechtel (2010). How Can Philosophy Be a True Cognitive Science Discipline? Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (3):357-366.
Anthony E. Kelly (2011). Can Cognitive Neuroscience Ground a Science of Learning? Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (1):17-23.
William P. Bechtel (1986). What Happens to Accounts of Mind-Brain Relations If We Forgo an Architecture of Rules and Representations? Philosophy of Science Association 1986:159 - 171.
Robert A. Wilson & Lucia Foglia (2011). Embodied Cognition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Zoe Drayson (2009). Embodied Cognitive Science and its Implications for Psychopathology. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 16 (4):329-340.
Keith Butler (1994). Neural Constraints in Cognitive Science. Minds and Machines 4 (2):129-62.
Jonathan Trigg & Michael Kalish (2011). Explaining How the Mind Works: On the Relation Between Cognitive Science and Philosophy. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):399-424.
David M. Braun (1991). Content, Causation, and Cognitive Science. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 69 (December):375-89.
William Bechtel (2009). Constructing a Philosophy of Science of Cognitive Science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1 (3):548-569.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #166,303 of 1,907,187 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #45,569 of 1,907,187 )
How can I increase my downloads?