Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport/konference proceedingBidrag til bog/antologiForskningpeer review

Resumé

The founding father of modern temporal logic, A.N. Prior, held that there is a
logical tension between the Christian doctrines of human freedom and divine
foreknowledge. He argued that future contingents cannot be true now, since there is no way to settle them now. In consequence, he found that the classical doctrine of divine foreknowledge has to be rejected. In this paper, it is shown that this argument can be turned around—i.e., if we hold that there are true future contingents, then we have to accept that their truths at least in part rely on some kind of transcendence that makes it possible to assume that even future contingents can be settled. This alternative argument supports the classical views held by William of Ockham and Luis de Molina.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TitelGod, Time, Infinity
RedaktørerMirosław Szatkowski
Antal sider16
Udgivelses stedBerlin/Boston
ForlagDe Gruyter
Publikationsdato2018
Sider131-146
ISBN (Elektronisk)9783110594164
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2018
NavnPhilosophische Analyse
Vol/bind75

Emneord

  • divine foreknowledge
  • future contingents
  • William of Ockham
  • Luis de Molina
  • A.N. Prior
  • tense-logic

Citer dette

Øhrstrøm, P. (2018). Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence. I M. Szatkowski (red.), God, Time, Infinity (s. 131-146). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. Philosophische Analyse , Bind. 75 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110594164-009
Øhrstrøm, Peter. / Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence. God, Time, Infinity. red. / Mirosław Szatkowski. Berlin/Boston : De Gruyter, 2018. s. 131-146 (Philosophische Analyse , Bind 75).
@inbook{47cc35964af4499b9b50fef9e786080d,
title = "Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence",
abstract = "The founding father of modern temporal logic, A.N. Prior, held that there is alogical tension between the Christian doctrines of human freedom and divineforeknowledge. He argued that future contingents cannot be true now, since there is no way to settle them now. In consequence, he found that the classical doctrine of divine foreknowledge has to be rejected. In this paper, it is shown that this argument can be turned around—i.e., if we hold that there are true future contingents, then we have to accept that their truths at least in part rely on some kind of transcendence that makes it possible to assume that even future contingents can be settled. This alternative argument supports the classical views held by William of Ockham and Luis de Molina.",
keywords = "divine foreknowledge, future contingents, William of Ockham, Luis de Molina, A.N. Prior, tense-logic",
author = "Peter {\O}hrstr{\o}m",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1515/9783110594164-009",
language = "English",
pages = "131--146",
editor = "Mirosław Szatkowski",
booktitle = "God, Time, Infinity",
publisher = "De Gruyter",

}

Øhrstrøm, P 2018, Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence. i M Szatkowski (red.), God, Time, Infinity. De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, Philosophische Analyse , bind 75, s. 131-146. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110594164-009

Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence. / Øhrstrøm, Peter.

God, Time, Infinity. red. / Mirosław Szatkowski. Berlin/Boston : De Gruyter, 2018. s. 131-146 (Philosophische Analyse , Bind 75).

Publikation: Bidrag til bog/antologi/rapport/konference proceedingBidrag til bog/antologiForskningpeer review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence

AU - Øhrstrøm, Peter

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - The founding father of modern temporal logic, A.N. Prior, held that there is alogical tension between the Christian doctrines of human freedom and divineforeknowledge. He argued that future contingents cannot be true now, since there is no way to settle them now. In consequence, he found that the classical doctrine of divine foreknowledge has to be rejected. In this paper, it is shown that this argument can be turned around—i.e., if we hold that there are true future contingents, then we have to accept that their truths at least in part rely on some kind of transcendence that makes it possible to assume that even future contingents can be settled. This alternative argument supports the classical views held by William of Ockham and Luis de Molina.

AB - The founding father of modern temporal logic, A.N. Prior, held that there is alogical tension between the Christian doctrines of human freedom and divineforeknowledge. He argued that future contingents cannot be true now, since there is no way to settle them now. In consequence, he found that the classical doctrine of divine foreknowledge has to be rejected. In this paper, it is shown that this argument can be turned around—i.e., if we hold that there are true future contingents, then we have to accept that their truths at least in part rely on some kind of transcendence that makes it possible to assume that even future contingents can be settled. This alternative argument supports the classical views held by William of Ockham and Luis de Molina.

KW - divine foreknowledge

KW - future contingents

KW - William of Ockham

KW - Luis de Molina

KW - A.N. Prior

KW - tense-logic

U2 - 10.1515/9783110594164-009

DO - 10.1515/9783110594164-009

M3 - Book chapter

SP - 131

EP - 146

BT - God, Time, Infinity

A2 - Szatkowski, Mirosław

PB - De Gruyter

CY - Berlin/Boston

ER -

Øhrstrøm P. Thoughts on Time, Truth, and Transcendence. I Szatkowski M, red., God, Time, Infinity. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. 2018. s. 131-146. (Philosophische Analyse , Bind 75). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110594164-009