Теистические доказательства: разум в борьбе за Бога (рецензия на книгу Т.Дэвиса "Бог, разум и теистические доказательства")
This work is a review of the book by Stephen T. Davis “God, Reason, and Theistic Proofs". The author discusses some methodological, logical and ontological advantages and disadvantages of this book as well as some features related to the translation of the book into Russian. The analysis is presented here not in chronological (chapter by chapter), but in a thematic order that enables the reader to get quickly acquainted with topics and problems considered in the book.
In the globalizing culture wars of the twenty-first century, Americans are discovering Russia as a new haven of traditionalism and Russian conservatives are re-inventing themselves as the traditionalist leaders of the world. While American and Russian conservatives reach out to each other, liberal critics and moderate Orthodox put this new alliance into question and reclaim tradition from the traditionalists. This edited volume gathers interviews and original essays for a confrontational debate about the meaning of religion, tradition, and liberalism in Russia and in the United States.
This article deals with the concept of omnipotence very important for contemporary analytic philosophy of religion. Within the analytic tradition it is usual to uncover an apparent tension between God’s omnipotence and other divine attributes. In response, some authors have proposed their own ideas on how classical problems of omnipotence can be solved in terms of possible worlds theory. In this paper we aim to consider the approaches developed by Geach, Adams and Plantinga. While admitting that each of them has made a significant contribution to the refinement of the concept of omnipotence, we still point out a number of important challenges that these authors were not able to overcome.
There were two tendencies in ancient philosophy: according to the first one, our universe is unique (the Eleatics, Plato, Aristoteles), while according to the other, there are several universes, similar or totally dissimilar to ours (the Pythagoreans, the Atomists). Proponents of the first theory diverged in their opinion on the universe’s eternity though. Supporters of the second one argued over the similarity of another universes as well as the question if those universes co-exist or replace each other over time. These questions didn’t stop being actual in medieval Christian philosophy. But if there were no doubts about the question of an actual existence of our universe as being the only and unique, the question if God created only our universe was yet to be answered. St. Thomas Aquinas provides several evidences of the uniqueness of the universe – two from the ‘authority’ and three from himself.
There is a chronological study in this paper consisting of three parts: 1) the conception of simplicity of God maintained by St. Thomas Aquinas, 2) rejection of God’s simplicity undertaken by Alvin Plantinga, and 3) an attempt to return to the idea of the simplicity of God in modern analytic research.
David Humes heritage is considered as philosophy of culture, corresponding to the time of its writing, which marked the beginning of a turn from classical model of culture to nonclassical one. Todays nonclassical philosophy of culture addresses itself to Humes ideas of illusiveness of a Self, to his moral philosophy, philosophy of religion, and to his critic of methodological use of a concept of causality, viewing them as its background.