It is widely assumed that theism is superior to metaphysical naturalism in explaining moral phenomena, especially with regard to the practical aspect of morality. In this article, I will firstly clarify what this practical aspect amounts to and present two challenges against metaphysical naturalism, by John Mackie and Richard Joyce. Then, I will critically engage with two main attempts to argue for the superiority of theism over metaphysical naturalism: One of them is the appeal to the existence of afterlife, and (...) the other is Robert Merrihew Adams’ divine command metaethics. I will argue that both are problematic for different reasons. Relying on the main aspects of Adams’ metaethical framework, I will advance my proposal to maintain the practical aspect of morality which lends theism superiority over metaphysical naturalism, and then follow with certain implications of the proposal for theistic metaethics. (shrink)

Tanrısal ön bilgi-özgür irade sorununa ilişkin Ockhamcı çözümler, 1960’lı yıllardan 1990’lı yıllara kadar analitik din felsefesi çevrelerinde önemli bir yer tutmuştur. Bu çalışmada, Ockhamlı William’ın geleceğe ilişkin olumsal önermeler ve tanrısal ön bilgi-özgür irade sorununa ilişkin görüşlerine kısaca değinildikten sonra, çağdaş analitik din felsefesinde tanrısal ön bilgi-özgür irade sorununa ilişkin Ockhamcı çözüm olarak adlandırılan görüş ve buna ilişkin tartışmalar ele alınacaktır. Bu kapsamda Ockhamcı çözüm olarak savunulan görüşlerin tanrısal ön bilgi ile insan özgür iradesini bağdaştırma açısından başarısız olduğu gösterilecektir. Ayrıca, (...) Ockhamcı çözümlerin geleceğe ilişkin olumsal önermeler konusunda varsaydığı görüşün karşılaştığı metafiziksel sorun ortaya konacak ve bu sorunun, tanrısal ön bilgi ile özgür iradeyi bağdaştırmaya yönelik herhangi bir girişim açısından sorun oluşturduğu vurgulanacaktır. (shrink)

Open Theist theologians argue that their view of divine foreknowledge and providence is the correct interpretation of the Bible, and suggest some biblical evidence to support this claim. Among these theologians, Gregory A. Boyd’s case is the most systematic, and also the most comprehensive and rigorous. Taking into consideration (1) the main philosophical claims of Open Theism and its main rivals, namely Calvinism and Molinism, and (2) Open Theist theologians’ interpretative principles for the Bible, the biblical evidence for Open Theism (...) suggested by Boyd can be classified into three groups according to their strength. I will argue that the first group of themes has no evidential value for Open Theism, since these themes can be interpreted just as plausibly from a Calvinist or Molinist perspective. By contrast, the second group of themes has some evidential value and thus constitutes prima facie evidence for Open Theism, since these themes make most sense under an Open Theist interpretation. However, these themes also make some sense on a Molinist reading. The third group of themes, I argue, has most evidential value for Open Theism, since it seems hard to reconcile these themes either with Calvinism or Molinism. (shrink)