Is an Open Infinite Future Impossible? A Reply to Pruss

Faith and Philosophy 37 (3):363-369 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Alexander Pruss has recently argued on probabilistic grounds that Christian philosophers should reject Open Futurism—roughly, the thesis that there are no true future contingents—on account of this view’s alleged inability to handle certain statements about infinite futures in a mathematically or religiously adequate manner. We argue that, once the distinction between being true and becoming true is applied to such statements, it is evident that they pose no problem for Open Futurists.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,440

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
2020-04-03

Downloads
46 (#339,736)

6 months
16 (#150,393)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Elijah Hess
St. Louis Community College-Wildwood
Alan Rhoda
Christian Theological Seminary

Citations of this work

Future truth and freedom.William Hasker - 2021 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 90 (2):109-119.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Non-standard Analysis.Gert Heinz Müller - 2016 - Princeton University Press.
The fivefold openness of the future.Alan R. Rhoda - 2011 - In William Hasker Thomas Jay Oord & Dean Zimmerman (eds.), God in an Open Universe. pp. 69--93.
Probability and the Open Future View.Alexander R. Pruss - 2010 - Faith and Philosophy 27 (2):190-196.
Probability, Truth, and the Openness of the Future.Alan R. Rhoda - 2010 - Faith and Philosophy 27 (2):197-204.
An Open Infinite Future is Impossible.Alexander R. Pruss - 2016 - Faith and Philosophy 33 (4):461-464.

Add more references