Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
MolinismThe Contemporary Debate$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Ken Perszyk

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780199590629

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199590629.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 24 March 2017

Pro Haskeris Contradictione

Pro Haskeris Contradictione

Chapter:
(p.78) 5 Pro Haskeris Contradictione
Source:
Molinism
Author(s):

Dean Zimmerman

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199590629.003.0006

In “Truth and Molinism”, Trenton Merricks criticizes the argument against Molinism at the core of William Hasker's book, God, Time, and Knowledge. Merricks claims that, if Hasker's argument against Molinism is a good one, it also refutes theories of subjunctive and counterfactual conditionals that endorse ‘centering’ (like those of Stalnaker and Lewis). Merricks also offers a direct objection to Hasker's argument. But Hasker's anti‐Molinist argument can be embraced by advocates of centering; and Merricks's refutation of Hasker fails

Keywords:   centering, conditionals, William Hasker, Trenton Merricks, Molinism, middle knowledge

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .