Counterpossible Dependence and the Efficacy of the Divine Will

Faith and Philosophy 34 (1):3-16 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The will of an omnipotent being would be perfectly efficacious. Alexander Pruss and I have provided an analysis of perfect efficacy that relies on non-trivial counterpossible conditionals. Scott Hill has objected that not all of the required counterpossibles are true of God. Sarah Adams has objected that perfect efficacy of will (on any analysis) would be an extrinsic property and so is not suitable as a divine attribute. I argue that both of these objections can be answered if the divine will is taken to be the ground, rather than the cause, of its fulfillment.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,953

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

Grounding Entails Counterpossible Non‐Triviality.Alastair Wilson - 2018 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 96 (3):716-728.
Understanding Omnipotence.Kenneth L. Pearce & Alexander R. Pruss - 2012 - Religious Studies 48 (3):403-414.
New Puzzles About Divine Attributes.Moti Mizrahi - 2013 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 5 (2):147-157.
A New Paradox of Omnipotence.Sarah Adams - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (3):759-785.
Omnipotence.Kenneth L. Pearce - 2011 - The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Omnipotence.Graham Oppy - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):58–84.
Two Omnipotent Beings?Aldo Frigerio & Ciro Florio - 2015 - Philosophia 43 (2):309-324.
Impossible Worlds.Ira Kiourti - 2012 - Oxford Bibliographies in Philosophy.
Omnipotence Again.Erik J. Wielenberg - 2000 - Faith and Philosophy 17 (1):26-47.
Who's Afraid of Impossible Worlds?Edwin D. Mares - 1997 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 38 (4):516-526.
The divine attributes.Nicholas Everitt - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (1):78-90.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-09-15

Downloads
156 (#125,184)

6 months
20 (#138,999)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kenneth L. Pearce
James Madison University

Citations of this work

Counterpossibles.Alexander W. Kocurek - 2021 - Philosophy Compass 16 (11):e12787.
Are We Free to Break the Laws of Providence?Kenneth L. Pearce - 2020 - Faith and Philosophy 37 (2):158-180.
Why Not? God.Kenneth L. Pearce - 2024 - In Mirosław Szatkowski (ed.), Ontology of Divinity. De Gruyter. pp. 249-266.
God's Perfect Will: Remarks on Johnston and O'Connor.Kenneth L. Pearce - 2022 - Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion 10:248-254.

Add more citations

References found in this work

On what grounds what.Jonathan Schaffer - 2009 - In David Manley, David J. Chalmers & Ryan Wasserman (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press. pp. 347-383.
No Work for a Theory of Grounding.Jessica M. Wilson - 2014 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 57 (5-6):535-579.
Guide to Ground.Kit Fine - 2012 - In Fabrice Correia & Benjamin Schnieder (eds.), Metaphysical Grounding. Cambridge University Press. pp. 37--80.
The question of realism.Kit Fine - 2001 - Philosophers' Imprint 1:1-30.
A clarification and defense of the notion of grounding.Paul Audi - 2012 - In Fabrice Correia & Benjamin Schnieder (eds.), Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality. Cambridge University Press. pp. 101-121.

View all 25 references / Add more references