On the Argument from Divine Arbitrariness |
| |
Authors: | Peter Forrest |
| |
Institution: | 1. School of Humanities, UNE, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
|
| |
Abstract: | William Rowe in his Can God be Free? (2004) argues that God, if there is a God, necessarily chooses the best. Combined with the premise that there is no best act of creation, this provides an a priori argument for atheism. Rowe assumes that necessarily God is a ??morally unsurpassable?? being, and it is for that reason that God chooses the best. In this article I drop that assumption and I consider a successor to Rowe??s argument, the Argument from Arbitrariness, based on the premise that God does not act arbitrarily. My chief conclusion will be that this argument fails because, for all we know, there can be non-arbitrary divine choices even if there is no best act of creation. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|