Tuesday, September 22, 2020


 Just a cheap trick to drive up the clicks. But Duns Scotus does make an appearance in the current issue of Faith and Philosophy. Here is the abstract:

Accounting for the Whole - Why Pantheism is on a Metaphysical Par with Complex Theism
Pantheists are often accused of lacking a sufficient account of the unity of the cosmos and its supposed priority over its many parts. I argue that complex the­ists, those who think that God has ontologically distinct parts or attributes, face the same problems. Current proposals for the metaphysics of complex theism do not offer any greater unity or ontological independence than pantheism, since they are modeled on priority monism. I then discuss whether the for­mal distinction of John Duns Scotus offers a way forward for complex theists. I show that only those classical theists who affirm divine simplicity are better off with respect to aseity and unity than pantheists. Only proponents of divine simplicity can fairly claim to have found a fully independent ultimate being


Matthew said...


Lee Faber said...

It is interesting that Scotus is not grouped among the proponents of divine simplicity, but a different group. Given the massive number of Scotists throughout the ages it seems rather absurd to classify the scotist position in this way, since in the end, there are or have been probably more people holding to the scotist position than the recent position that divine simplicity is only to be found in the three A's.