A puzzle about natural laws and the existence of God

The existence of natural laws, whether deterministic or indeterministic, and whether exceptionless or ceteris paribus, seems puzzling because it implies that mindless bits of matter behave in a consistent and co-ordinated way. I explain this puzzle by showing that a number of attempted solutions fai...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Frederick, Danny (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Springer Science + Business Media B. V 2013
In: International journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2013, Volume: 73, Issue: 3, Pages: 269-283
Further subjects:B Natural laws
B Ceteris paribus
B Science
B Necessity
B Commands
B Possibility
B God
B Chance
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Electronic

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1821415361
003 DE-627
005 20221110052721.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221110s2013 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1007/s11153-012-9343-8  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1821415361 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1821415361 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Frederick, Danny  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 2 |a A puzzle about natural laws and the existence of God 
264 1 |c 2013 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The existence of natural laws, whether deterministic or indeterministic, and whether exceptionless or ceteris paribus, seems puzzling because it implies that mindless bits of matter behave in a consistent and co-ordinated way. I explain this puzzle by showing that a number of attempted solutions fail. The puzzle could be resolved if it were assumed that natural laws are a manifestation of God’s activity. This argument from natural law to God’s existence differs from its traditional counterparts in that, whereas the latter seek to explain the fact of natural laws, the former seeks to explain their possibility. The customary objections to the traditional arguments cannot be successfully adapted to counter this new argument, with one exception which has only limited effect. I rebut four claims that the theistic solution to the puzzle about natural laws is paradoxical, though I concede that one of these claims has merit. I consider four objections to the new argument but find three of them more or less unsatisfactory. The fourth, if successful, would undermine our claims to know the truth about the world. 
650 4 |a Science 
650 4 |a Possibility 
650 4 |a Necessity 
650 4 |a Natural laws 
650 4 |a God 
650 4 |a Commands 
650 4 |a Chance 
650 4 |a Ceteris paribus 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t International journal for philosophy of religion  |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1970  |g 73(2013), 3, Seite 269-283  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320442098  |w (DE-600)2005049-5  |w (DE-576)103746927  |x 1572-8684  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:73  |g year:2013  |g number:3  |g pages:269-283 
776 |i Erscheint auch als  |n elektronische Ausgabe  |w (DE-627)1632312107  |k Electronic 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/24709293  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-012-9343-8  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 73  |j 2013  |e 3  |h 269-283 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4208219378 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1821415361 
LOK |0 005 20221110052721 
LOK |0 008 221110||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-09-28#67BA3B921084E998615FA7932CC817ADA674A0F8 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/24709293 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL