Aquinas and Naturalism
Aquinass actual response to a naturalistic challenge at St I.2.3 is one which most naturalists would find unimpressive. However, I shall argue that there is a stronger response latent in his philosophical system. I take Quine as an example of a methodological naturalist, examine the roots of his po...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
University of Innsbruck in cooperation with the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Birmingham
[2011]
|
In: |
European journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2011, Volume: 3, Issue: 2, Pages: 369-385 |
Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) Volltext (teilw. kostenfrei) |
Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
Summary: | Aquinass actual response to a naturalistic challenge at St I.2.3 is one which most naturalists would find unimpressive. However, I shall argue that there is a stronger response latent in his philosophical system. I take Quine as an example of a methodological naturalist, examine the roots of his position and look at two critical responses to his views (those of BonJour and Boghossian). If one adjusts some of the problematical aspects of their responses and establishes a hybrid position on the epistemology and metaphysics of an anti-naturalistic stance, it turns out to be the position Aquinas himself takes on meaning and knowledge. |
---|---|
Contains: | Enthalten in: European journal for philosophy of religion
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.24204/ejpr.v3i2.401 |