The article aims at formulating a philosophical framework and by this giving some means at hand to save human libertarian freedom, God’s omniscience and God’s ”eternity’. This threefold aim is achieved by 1) conceiving of an agent as having different possibilities to act, 2) regarding God’s knowledge -- with respect to agents -- not only as being ”propositional’ in character but also as being ”experiential’: God knows an agent also from the ”first person perspective’, as the agent knows herself, and, (...) 3), formulating ”eternity’ and ”temporality’ as being homeomorphically related to each other. This gives rise to a coherent interplay that saves both human libertarian freedom and God’s omniscient ”view from eternity’. (shrink)

The aim of the present article is to make the notion of an ontology of fields mathematically rigorous. The conclusion will be that couching an ontology in terms of mathematical bundles and cross-sections (i.e. fields) both (1) captures many important intuitions of conventional ontologies, including the universal-particular paradigm, the connection of universals and their ‘instantiations’, and the notion of ‘possibility’, and (2) makes possible the framing of ontologies without ‘substrata’, bare particulars, and primitive particularizers (a goal that trope ontologies, for (...) example, have sought to attain). (shrink)

Seemingly, metaphysics is trapped between the Scylla of being superfluous, on the one hand, and the Charybdis of being esoteric, on the other. Is there a wayout? In discussing two large-scale metaphysical projects that are very different in character, the article analyses one of the roots of this impasse – the ontological paradigm. The author tries, further, to argue for another stance towards the theoretical task metaphysics has to submit itself to: the paradigm of transcendentals. The structural-systematic philosophy will be (...) a point in case. (shrink)

The present paper formulates a reconstruction of Leibniz’s theory of space and time from a metaphysical point of view. Leibniz’s theory of space-time is considered a prototype of an “unrealist,” “nonsubstantivalist” and “relationalist” theory of space-time. These attributions to Leibniz’s view are, at face value, well-founded in his corpus.

The present paper formulates a reconstruction of Leibniz’s theory of space and time from a metaphysical point of view. Leibniz’s theory of space-time is considered a prototype of an “unrealist,” “nonsubstantivalist” and “relationalist” theory of space-time. These attributions to Leibniz’s view are, at face value, well-founded in his corpus.

The aim of the present article is to make the notion of an ontology of fields mathematically rigorous. The conclusion will be that couching an ontology in terms of mathematical bundles and cross‐sections both captures many important intuitions of conventional ontologies, including the universal‐particular paradigm, the connection of universals and their ‘instantiations’, and the notion of ‘possibility’, and makes possible the framing of ontologies without ‘substrata’, bare particulars, and primitive particularizers.

This approach does not define a probability measure by syntactical structures. It reveals a link between modal logic and mathematical probability theory. This is shown (1) by adding an operator (and two further connectives and constants) to a system of lower predicate calculus and (2) regarding the models of that extended system. These models are models of the modal system S₅ (without the Barcan formula), where a usual probability measure is defined on their set of possible worlds. Mathematical probability models (...) can be seen as models of S₅. (shrink)