5 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
David J. Anderson [3]David James Anderson [2]
  1. David James Anderson (2012). Knowledge and Conviction. Synthese 187 (2):377-392.
    Much philosophical effort has been exerted over problems having to do with the correct analysis and application of the concept of epistemic justification. While I do not wish to dispute the central place of this problem in contemporary epistemology, it seems to me that there is a general neglect of the belief condition for knowledge. In this paper I offer an analysis of 'degrees of belief' in terms of a quality I label 'conviction', go on to argue that one requires (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. David James Anderson (2012). Skeptical Theism and Value Judgments. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (1):27-39.
    One of the most prominent objections to skeptical theism in recent literature is that the skeptical theist is forced to deny our competency in making judgments about the all-things-considered value of any natural event. Some skeptical theists accept that their view has this implication, but argue that it is not problematic. I think that there is reason to question the implication itself. I begin by explaining the objection to skeptical theism and the standard response to it. I then identify an (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. David J. Anderson & Joshua L. Watson (2010). The Mystery of Foreknowledge. Philo 13 (2):136-150.
    Many have attempted to respond to arguments for the incompatibility of freedom with divine foreknowledge by claiming that God’s beliefs about the future are explained by what the world is like at that future time. We argue that this response adequately advances the discussion only if the theist is able to articulate a model of foreknowledge that is both clearly possible and compatible with freedom. We investigate various models the theist might articulate and argue that all of these models fail.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. David J. Anderson (2008). Susceptibility to Punishment: A Response to Yaffe. Locke Studies 8:101-106.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David J. Anderson & Edward N. Zalta (2004). Frege, Boolos, and Logical Objects. Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (1):1-26.
    In this paper, the authors discuss Frege's theory of "logical objects" (extensions, numbers, truth-values) and the recent attempts to rehabilitate it. We show that the 'eta' relation George Boolos deployed on Frege's behalf is similar, if not identical, to the encoding mode of predication that underlies the theory of abstract objects. Whereas Boolos accepted unrestricted Comprehension for Properties and used the 'eta' relation to assert the existence of logical objects under certain highly restricted conditions, the theory of abstract objects uses (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation