Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Molinists (still) cannot endorse the consequence argument.Yishai Cohen - 2015 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 77 (3):231-246.
    Perszyk has argued that Molinists cannot consistently endorse the consequence argument because of a structurally similar argument for the incompatibility of true Molinist counterfactuals of freedom and the ability to do otherwise. Wierenga has argued that on the proper understanding of CCFs, there is a relevant difference between the consequence argument and the anti-Molinist argument. I argue that, even on Wierenga’s understanding of CCFs, there is in fact no relevant difference between the two arguments. Moreover, I strengthen Perszyk’s challenge by (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Recent Work on Molinism.Ken Perszyk - 2013 - Philosophy Compass 8 (8):755-770.
    Molinism is named after Luis de Molina (1535–1600). Molina and his fellow Jesuits became entangled in a fierce debate over issues involving the doctrine of divine providence, which is a picture of how God runs the world. Molinism reemerged in the 1970s after Alvin Plantinga unwittingly assumed it in his Free Will Defense against the ‘Logical’ Argument from Evil. Molinism has been the subject of vigorous debate in analytic philosophy of religion ever since. The main aim of this essay is (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Molinism, Question-Begging, and Foreknowledge of Indeterminates.John D. Laing - 2018 - Perichoresis 16 (2):55-75.
    John Martin Fischer’s charge that Molinism does not offer a unique answer to the dilemma of divine foreknowledge and human freedom can be seen as a criticism of middle knowledge for begging the question of FF -compatibilism. In this paper, I seek to answer this criticism in two ways. First, I demonstrate that most of the chief arguments against middle knowledge are guilty of begging the question of FF-incompatibilism and conclude that the simple charge of begging the question cannot be (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Leibniz, a Friend of Molinism.Juan Garcia - 2018 - Res Philosophica 95 (3):397-420.
    Leibniz is commonly labeled a foe of Molinism. His rejection of robust libertarian freedom coupled with some explicit passages in which he distances himself from the doctrine of middle knowledge seem to justify this classification. In this paper, I argue that this standard view is not quite correct. I identify the two substantive tenets of Molinism. First, the connection between the conditions for free actions and these free actions is a contingent one: free actions follow contingently from their sufficient conditions. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • God, Evil, and Alvin Plantinga on the Free-Will Defense.Ciro De Florio & Aldo Frigerio - 2013 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 5 (3):75--94.
    In this paper we will give a critical account of Plantinga’s well-known argument to the effect that the existence of an omnipotent and morally perfect God is consistent with the actual presence of evil. After presenting Plantinga’s view, we critically discuss both the idea of divine knowledge of conditionals of freedom and the concept of transworld depravity. Then, we will sketch our own version of the Free-Will Defence, which maintains that moral evil depends on the misuse of human freedom. However, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation