Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:17:34.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The aloneness argument against classical theism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2021

JOSEPH C. SCHMID Open the ORCID record for JOSEPH C. SCHMID [Opens in a new window]  and
R. T. MULLINS Open the ORCID record for R. T. MULLINS [Opens in a new window]
JOSEPH C. SCHMID*
Affiliation:
Purdue University, 610 Purdue Mall, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
R. T. MULLINS*
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki, Yliopistonkatu 4, 00100 Helsinki, Finland
*
e-mail: schmi215@purdue.edu
e-mail: rtmullins@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that there is a conflict among classical theism's commitments to divine simplicity, divine creative freedom, and omniscience. We start by defining key terms for the debate related to classical theism. Then we articulate a new argument, the Aloneness Argument, aiming to establish a conflict among these attributes. In broad outline, the argument proceeds as follows. Under classical theism, it's possible that God exists without anything apart from Him. Any knowledge God has in such a world would be wholly intrinsic. But there are contingent truths in every world, including the world in which God exists alone. So, it's possible that God (given His omniscience) contingently has wholly intrinsic knowledge. But whatever is contingent and wholly intrinsic is an accident. So, God possibly has an accident. This is incompatible with classical theism. Finally, we consider and rebut several objections.

Type
Original Article
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , June 2022 , pp. 401 - 419
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aquinas, T. (1936) Summa Theologiae (London: Burns, Oates, & Washbourne).Google Scholar
Augustine, S. (1991) The Trinity (Hyde Park: New City Press).Google Scholar
Bergmann, M. & Brower, J. E. (2006) ‘A theistic argument against platonism (and in support of truthmakers and divine simplicity)’, in Zimmerman, D. W. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Metaphysics (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 357–386.Google Scholar
Bonaventure (1963) The Works of Bonaventure: The Breviloquium II (New York: St Anthony Guild Press).Google Scholar
Broadie, A. (2010) ‘Scotistic Metaphysics and creation ex nihilo’, in Burrell, D. B., Soskice, J. M., & Stoeger, W. R. (eds) Creation and the God of Abraham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 53–64.Google Scholar
Brower, J. E. (2009) ‘Simplicity and aseity’, in Flint, T. P. & Rea, M. C. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 105–128.Google Scholar
Brunner, E. (1952) The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption (London: Lutterworth Press).Google Scholar
Burrell, D. B. (1993) Freedom and Creation in Three Traditions (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press).Google Scholar
Craig, W. L. (2001) God, Time and Eternity. The Coherence of Theism II: Eternity (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers).10.1007/978-94-017-1715-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolezal, J. E. (2011) God Without Parts: Divine Simplicity and the Metaphysics of God's Absoluteness (Eugene: Pickwick Publications).Google Scholar
Duby, S. J. (2016) Divine Simplicity: A Dogmatic Account (London: Bloomsbury).Google Scholar
Fakhri, O. (forthcoming) ‘Another look at the modal collapse argument’, European Journal for Philosophy of Religion.Google Scholar
Florio, C. D. & Frigerio, A. (2019) Divine Omniscience and Human Free Will: A Logical and Metaphysical Analysis (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan).10.1007/978-3-030-31300-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, G. (2014) ‘Aquinas and Scotus on the source of contingency’, Oxford Studies in Medieval Philosophy 2 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 46–66.Google Scholar
Garcia, L. L. (1992) ‘Divine freedom and creation’, The Philosophical Quarterly, 42, 191–213.10.2307/2220215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goris, H. (2005) ‘Divine foreknowledge, providence, predestination, and human freedom’, in Nieuwenhove, R. V. & Wawrykow, J. (eds) The Theology of Thomas Aquinas (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press), 99–123.Google Scholar
Grant, W. M. (2012) ‘Divine Simplicity, contingent truths, and extrinsic models of divine knowing’, Faith and Philosophy, 29, 254–274.10.5840/faithphil201229328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, W. M. (2019) Free Will and God's Universal Causality: The Dual Sources Account (London: Bloomsbury Academic).10.5040/9781350082939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highfield, R. (2015) The Faithful Creator: Affirming Creation and Providence in an Age of Anxiety (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press).Google Scholar
Hughes, C. (2018) ‘Aquinas on the nature and implications of divine simplicity’, European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 10, 1–22.10.24204/ejpr.v10i2.2553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humberstone, I. L. (1996) ‘Intrinsic/extrinsic’, Synthese, 108, 205–267.10.1007/BF00413498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, G. (2019) Aquinas and the Metaphysics of Creation (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/oso/9780190941307.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kretzmann, N. (1991) ‘A general problem of creation: why would God create anything at all?’, in MacDonald, S. (ed.) Being and Goodness: The Concepts of the Good in Metaphysics and Philosophical Theology (London: Cornell University Press), 208–228.Google Scholar
Leftow, B. (2012) God and Necessity (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263356.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leftow, B. (2016) ‘Two Pictures of divine choice’, in McCann, H. J. (ed.) Free Will and Classical Theism: The Significance of Freedom in Perfect Being Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 152–172.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1983) ‘Extrinsic properties’, Philosophical Studies, 44, 197–200.10.1007/BF00354100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. (1986) On the Plurality of Worlds (Malden: Blackwell).Google Scholar
Lombard, P. (2007) The Sentences Book 1: The Mystery of the Trinity (Ontario: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies).Google Scholar
Mawson, T. (2018) The Divine Attributes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).10.1017/9781108598101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molina, L. D. (1988) On Divine Foreknowledge: Part IV of the Concordia (Ithaca: Cornell University).Google Scholar
Mullins, R. T. (2016) The End of the Timeless God (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198755180.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullins, R. T. (2018) ‘Why can't the impassible God suffer?’, TheoLogica, 2, 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullins, R. T. (2020) ‘Divine temporality and providential bodgery’, TheoLogica, 5, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullins, R. T. (forthcoming) ‘Classical theism’, in Arcadi, J. M. & Turner, J. T. (eds) T&T Clark Handbook of Analytic Theology (New York: T&T Clark).Google Scholar
Oord, T. J. ed. (2015) Theologies of Creation: Creatio Ex Nihilo and Its New Rivals (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
Pruss, A. R. (2008) ‘On Two problems of divine simplicity’, in Kvanvig, J. L. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 150–167.Google Scholar
Pruss, A. R. (2017) ‘Divine creative freedom’, in Kvanvig, J. L. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 213–238.Google Scholar
Rogers, K. A. (1996) ‘The traditional doctrine of divine simplicity’, Religious Studies, 32, 165–186.10.1017/S0034412500024215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, K. A. (2000) Perfect Being Theology (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press).Google Scholar
Skrzypek, J. W. (2017) ‘A Better solution to the general problem of creation’, European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 9, 147–162.10.24204/ejpr.v9i1.1868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stump, E. (2003) Aquinas (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Vallicella, W. F. (2019) ‘Divine simplicity’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/divine-simplicity/>..>Google Scholar
Vicens, L. & Kittle, S. (2019) God and Human Freedom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Williams, T. (2013) ‘Introduction to classical theism’, in Diller, J. & Kasher, A. (eds) Models of God and Alternative Ultimate Realities (New York: Springer), 95–100.Google Scholar