This article aims to show that the simple foreknowledge model does not provide an adequate explanation of God’s providential action. In order to do that, we advance two arguments: the first argument emphasizes the difficulties surrounding the very concept of God’s intervention within history; the second argument advocates the view according to which, for the providence, it seems unavoidable some form of counterfactual reasoning. This suggests the departure for simple foreknowledge in favour of some kind of molinist account.
De Florio, C., Frigerio, A., SIMPLE FOREKNOWLEDGE E PROVVIDENZA, <<NUOVO GIORNALE DI FILOSOFIA DELLA RELIGIONE>>, 2021; (1): 58-76 [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/188961]
SIMPLE FOREKNOWLEDGE E PROVVIDENZA
De Florio, Ciro;Frigerio, Aldo
2021
Abstract
This article aims to show that the simple foreknowledge model does not provide an adequate explanation of God’s providential action. In order to do that, we advance two arguments: the first argument emphasizes the difficulties surrounding the very concept of God’s intervention within history; the second argument advocates the view according to which, for the providence, it seems unavoidable some form of counterfactual reasoning. This suggests the departure for simple foreknowledge in favour of some kind of molinist account.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
