In defence of omnipotence

Philosophical Quarterly 28 (112):215-228 (1978)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A distinction is drawn between the "outcome", Or result of a certain exercise of power, And the "act", Or the manner in which that result is accomplished. Omnipotence is then defined solely in terms of its possible outcomes, And the definition used to dispel certain "paradoxes" recently discussed in articles by j l mackie, P t geach and r g swinburne, Among others. Finally, It is argued that god's inability to do certain things, Such as telling a lie or breaking a promise, Is not incompatible with his omnipotence

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,846

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

Omnipotence Again.Erik J. Wielenberg - 2000 - Faith and Philosophy 17 (1):26-47.
Omnipotence.Graham Oppy - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):58–84.
Omniscience and maximal power.Thomas Metcalf - 2004 - Religious Studies 40 (3):289-306.
Understanding Omnipotence.Kenneth L. Pearce & Alexander R. Pruss - 2012 - Religious Studies 48 (3):403-414.
Omniscience and omnipotence: How they may help - or hurt - in a game.Steven J. Brams - 1982 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 25 (2):217 – 231.
Gale on Omnipotence.Theodore M. Drange - 2003 - Philo 6 (1):23-26.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
69 (#236,574)

6 months
12 (#213,237)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references