Faith and Philosophy 27 (3):287-305 (2010)

Authors
Michael W. Rota
University of St. Thomas, Minnesota
Abstract
In God, Time, and Knowledge, William Hasker presents a powerful argument against “theological compatibilism,” which, in this context, refers to the view that divine foreknowledge is compatible with libertarian free will. In this paper I show that Hasker’s views on free will, as expressed in God, Time, and Knowledge, are inconsistent with his own account of hard facts. I then consider four ways to remove the inconsistency and argue that the first two are untenable for the libertarian, while the remaining two leave the theological compatibilist in a good position to respond to the dilemma of freedom and foreknowledge. Along the way, I attempt to defuse Hasker’s argument that Anselmian eternalism is “fatal to libertarian free will.”
Keywords Contemporary Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0739-7046
DOI faithphil201027330
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,587
External links

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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hasker on Omniscience.Bruce Reichenbach - 1987 - Faith and Philosophy 4 (1):86-92.
Against Limited Foreknowledge.Patrick Todd - 2014 - Philosophia 42 (2):523-538.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-02-17

Total views
5 ( #1,182,567 of 2,461,948 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #298,784 of 2,461,948 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes