Rescuing the (Open) Theistic Multiverse Against Two Recent Challenges

IF 0.5 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Sophia Pub Date : 2024-02-07 DOI:10.1007/s11841-024-01003-3
Kirk Lougheed, Timothy Blank
{"title":"Rescuing the (Open) Theistic Multiverse Against Two Recent Challenges","authors":"Kirk Lougheed, Timothy Blank","doi":"10.1007/s11841-024-01003-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One theistic account of creation says that God created the best possible world in the form of a multiverse containing all and only all of the universes sufficiently good enough to create. Certain proponents of this view urge that it solves the problem of no best world and need not commit one to affirming divine middle knowledge. We address two recent challenges to the (open) theistic multiverse. First, Marshall Naylor argues that what he calls the Cantorian account of divine creation is better than any theistic multiverse account because it provides more satisfying answers to a number of philosophical problems (2020). Second, Elliot Crozat criticizes the open theistic multiverse by arguing that if God lacks middle knowledge, God cannot know infallibly that the universe <i>token</i> he creates will be the right <i>type</i> (i.e., sufficiently good enough for inclusion in the multiverse) (2019). We show that Naylor’s alternative violates incredibly strong moral intuitions and that Crozat’s objection fails to appreciate that on open theism God still knows all the possible future outcomes. Theistic multiverse accounts of divine creation in general, and one cojoined with open theism in particular, remain unscathed in the face of the criticisms offered by Naylor and Crozat.</p>","PeriodicalId":44736,"journal":{"name":"Sophia","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sophia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-024-01003-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One theistic account of creation says that God created the best possible world in the form of a multiverse containing all and only all of the universes sufficiently good enough to create. Certain proponents of this view urge that it solves the problem of no best world and need not commit one to affirming divine middle knowledge. We address two recent challenges to the (open) theistic multiverse. First, Marshall Naylor argues that what he calls the Cantorian account of divine creation is better than any theistic multiverse account because it provides more satisfying answers to a number of philosophical problems (2020). Second, Elliot Crozat criticizes the open theistic multiverse by arguing that if God lacks middle knowledge, God cannot know infallibly that the universe token he creates will be the right type (i.e., sufficiently good enough for inclusion in the multiverse) (2019). We show that Naylor’s alternative violates incredibly strong moral intuitions and that Crozat’s objection fails to appreciate that on open theism God still knows all the possible future outcomes. Theistic multiverse accounts of divine creation in general, and one cojoined with open theism in particular, remain unscathed in the face of the criticisms offered by Naylor and Crozat.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
拯救(开放的)有神论多元宇宙,应对最近的两大挑战
一种有神论的创世说认为,上帝以多元宇宙的形式创造了一个可能的最佳世界,这个多元宇宙包含了所有且仅包含所有足够好的宇宙。这种观点的某些支持者认为,它解决了没有最好世界的问题,而且不必让人们去肯定神的中间知识。我们将讨论最近对(开放的)有神论多元宇宙提出的两个挑战。首先,马歇尔-内勒(Marshall Naylor)认为,他所谓的康托尔神创论比任何有神论多元宇宙论都要好,因为它为许多哲学问题提供了更令人满意的答案(2020)。其次,埃利奥特-克罗扎特(Elliot Crozat)批评了开放的有神论多元宇宙,认为如果上帝缺乏中间知识,那么上帝就不可能准确无误地知道他创造的宇宙令牌将是正确的类型(即足够好,足以被纳入多元宇宙)(2019)。我们表明,奈勒的替代方案违反了令人难以置信的强烈道德直觉,而克罗扎特的反对意见没有认识到,在开放有神论中,上帝仍然知道所有可能的未来结果。有神论的多重宇宙神创论,尤其是与开放有神论相结合的多重宇宙神创论,在面对奈勒和克罗扎特的批评时毫发无损。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sophia
Sophia PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Sophia is now published by Springer. The back files, all the way to Volume 1:1, are available via SpringerLink!   Covers both analytic and continental philosophy of religionConsiders both western and non-western perspectives, including Asian and indigenousIncludes specialist contributions, e.g. on feminist and postcolonial philosophy of religionSince its inception in 1962, Sophia has been devoted to providing a forum for discussions in philosophy and religion, focusing on the interstices between metaphysics and theological thinking. The discussions take cognizance of the wider ambience of the sciences (''natural'' philosophy and human/social sciences), ethical and moral concerns in the public sphere, critical feminist theology and cross-cultural perspectives. Sophia''s cross-cultural and cross-frontier approach is reflected not only in the international composition of its editorial board, but also in its consideration of analytic, continental, Asian and indigenous responses to issues and developments in the field of philosophy of religion.
期刊最新文献
Buddhaghosa’s Model of Temporality seen through the Prism of Bergson’s Duration What Kind of ‘God’ do Hindu Arguments for the Divine Show? Five Novel Divine Attributes of Brahman Reconstructing William Lane Craig’s Explanation of Absolute Time Based on Mulla Sadra’s Philosophy Mirabai Seeks God: A Journey of Devotional Love and Longing “Palamism” and “Barlaamism” in the Russian Name-Glorifiers Controversy of the 1910s: The Philosophical Background
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1