Omniscience and Worthiness of Worship

International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 70 (2):147-153 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

At first glance, the properties being omniscient and being worthy of worship might appear to be perfectly co-instantiable. But there are reasons to be worried about this co-instantiability, as it turns out that, depending on our commitments with respect to certain kinds of knowledge and notions of personhood, it might be the case that no being—God included—could instantiate both. In this paper, I lay out and motivate this claim before going on to consider a variety of responses—some more plausible than others—that may be offered by the theist

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

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

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-07-12

Downloads
161 (#25,118)

6 months
19 (#786,843)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Wesley Cray
Texas Christian University

Citations of this work

A Conceptual Analysis of Glory.Paul Silva - 2018 - Res Philosophica 95 (3):561-582.
A Conceptual Analysis of Glory.Paul Silva - 2018 - Res Philosophica 95 (3):561-582.

Add more citations

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (October):435-50.
Epiphenomenal qualia.Frank Jackson - 1982 - Philosophical Quarterly 32 (April):127-136.
What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1979 - In Mortal questions. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 435 - 450.
What Mary Didn't Know.Frank Jackson - 1986 - Journal of Philosophy 83 (5):291-295.
What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 2004 - In Tim Crane & Katalin Farkas (eds.), Metaphysics: a guide and anthology. New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 27 references / Add more references