Thomas Aquinas on Contingency in Nature

Studia Neoaristotelica 5 (2):185-196 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper deals with Aristotle’s argument against determinism and in favor of contingency in nature as interpreted by Thomas Aquinas. The case against determinism is based on the idea that there are properly uncaused accidental events in reality. This means that in case there is some coincidental future event e, one cannot trace an unbroken causal chain leading to e back to the present or the past. For a Christian Aristotelian, such as Aquinas, there arises a difficulty concerning divine foreknowledge and volitional determination of events of this sort. Thomas’s solution is based on the claim that the latter divine acts are not within the scope of modal determination (necessity/contingency).

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Aquinas and Aristotelian Hylomorphism.Raymond Hain - 2015 - In Matthew Levering & Gilles Emery (eds.), Aristotle in Aquinas’s Theology. Oxford University Press. pp. 48-69.
Thomas Aquinas.Christopher M. Brown - 2017 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Way of Aquinas: Its Importance for Moral Theology.D. Stephen Long - 2006 - Studies in Christian Ethics 19 (3):339-356.
Aquinas.Anthony Kenny - 1969 - Garden City, N.Y.,: Anchor Books.
Aquinas on the divine ideas as exemplar causes (review).Antoine Côté - 2009 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (4):pp. 624-625.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
47 (#330,788)

6 months
3 (#992,474)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Petr Dvorak
Palacky University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references