den Bok (1994), John Duns Scotus, Contingency and Freedom. Kretzmann, with Essays by Richard Sorabji, Norman Kretzmann, and Mario Mignucci, 3-15. Blank, with Boethius, On Aristotle: On Interpretation 9, first and second Commentaries, trans. “The Tree Deterministic Arguments Opposed by Ammonius.” In Ammonius, On Aristotle: On Interpretation 9. Theology at Paris, 1316-1345: Peter Aureol and the Problem of Divine Foreknowledge and Future Contingents. “Ockham’s Reliabilism and the Intuition of Non-Existents.” In Rethinking the History of Skepticism: The Missing Medieval Background, edited by Henrik Lagerlund, 97–118. “Scotus’s Modal Theory.” In The Cambridge Companion to Duns Scotus, edited by Thomas Williams, 129-160. Kretzmann, with Essays by Richard Sorabji, Norman Kretzmann, and Mario Mignucci, 53–86. “Ammonius’ Sea Battle.” In Ammonius, On Aristotle: On Interpretation 9.
![ockham predestination ockham predestination](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41dxmY-YaxL._SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_.jpg)
Le Teorie delle Modalità, edited by Giovanna Corsi, Corrado Mangione, and Massimo Mugnai, 47-78. “Truth and Modality in Late Antiquity: Boethius on Future Contingent Propositions.” In Atti del convegno Internazionale di Storia della Logica. Éditions de l’Institut Supérieur de Philosophie, Louvain, Paris: Peeters. The Role of the Categories in the Development of Abelard’s Theory of Possibility.” In La Tradition médiévale des Categories (XIIe-XIVe siècles, edited by Joël Biard and Irène Rosier-Catach, 225–242. Le temps, l’éternité et la prescience de Boète à Thomas d’Aquin. “Vocalism, Nominalism and the Commentaries on the Categories from the Earlier Twelfth Century.” Vivarium 30: 51–61. Kretzmann, with Essays by Richard Sorabji, Norman Kretzmann, and Mario Mignucci, 24–52. “Boethius and the Truth about Tomorrow’s Sea Battle.” In Ammonius, On Aristotle: On Interpretation 9. 2015, “Medieval Theories of Future Contingents.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Duns Scotus and the Foundations of Logical Modalities.” In John Duns Scotus: Metaphysics and Ethics, edited by Lodger Honnefelder, Rega Wood, and Mechthild Dreyer, 127–143. “La bataille navale d’aujourd’hui: De interpretatione 9.” Revue de Philosophie Ancienne 6: 5–37. “Logico-Theological Schools from the Second Half of the 12th Century: A List of Sources.” Vivarium 30: 173–210. Time and Necessity: Studies in Aristotle’s Theory of Modality. Thomas Aquinas on God’s Infallible Foreknowledge and Irresistible Will. Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters. It Could Have Been Otherwise: Contingency and Necessity in Dominican Theology at Oxford 1300-1350. Das Problem der Contingentia Futura in De Interpretatione 9. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.įrede, Dorothea. Luis de Molina, On Divine Foreknowledge, Part IV of the Concordia, trans. “Truth and Necessity in De interpretatione 9.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 1: 23–47.įreddoso, Alfred J. “What Must One Have an Opinion About.” Vivarium 30: 62–79.įine, Gail. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.ĭekker, Eef.
![ockham predestination ockham predestination](http://kotomatrix.ru/images/lolz/2013/05/23/kotomatritsa_ha.jpg)
The Problem of Divine Foreknowledge and Future Contingents from Aristotle to Suarez. Walter Chatton on Future Contingents: Between Formalism and Ontology. Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy. William of Ockham: Predestination, God’s Foreknowledge, and Future Contingents. Later thinkers thought that the doctrine of the scientia media sheds light on this question perhaps it is easier to understand than the retroactive model which is not contradictory but difficult to imagine, as Tkaczyk concludes his paper.Īdams, McCord Marilyn, and Norman Kretzmann. While Ockham held that no past or present thing follows from future things as an effect follows from its cause, this causal link is defended by Tkaczyk.
Ockham predestination free#
The content of God’s past knowledge attitude remains contingent before the free choice takes place because God’s knowledge could be different similarly as the truth-value of the proposition. Ockham’s theological view was that God eternally has an intuitive and immutable knowledge of all possibilities as well as whether they are ever actualized or not (Panaccio & Piché 2010). This paper discusses the main lines of medieval Latin approaches to future contingents with some remarks on Marcin Tkaczyk’s paper “The antinomy of future contingent events.” Tkaczyk’s theory shows some similarity with the general frame of the views of Ockham and Scotus, the difference being that while medieval authors argued for the temporal necessity of the past, Tkaczyk is sceptical of the general validity of this necessity.