Infinite Regress and the Hume-Edwards-Ockham Objection: A Thomistic Analysis
One of the standard objections against the impossibility of infinite regress is associated with David Hume and Paul Edwards, but originates with William Ockham. They claim that in an infinite regress every member of the series is explained, and nothing is unexplained. Every member is explained by th...
| Subtitles: | Themenheft - "The Diakonia of Truth" |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
[publisher not identified]
2021
|
| In: |
Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association
Year: 2021, Volume: 95, Pages: 141-151 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1890261769 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240614083542.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240529s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.5840/acpaproc20231110159 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1890261769 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1890261769 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)1072435012 |0 (DE-627)827493541 |0 (DE-576)433510595 |4 aut |a Shields, Daniel | |
| 109 | |a Shields, Daniel | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Infinite Regress and the Hume-Edwards-Ockham Objection: A Thomistic Analysis |
| 246 | 1 | |i Rubrikentitel |a Themenheft - "The Diakonia of Truth" | |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a One of the standard objections against the impossibility of infinite regress is associated with David Hume and Paul Edwards, but originates with William Ockham. They claim that in an infinite regress every member of the series is explained, and nothing is unexplained. Every member is explained by the one before it, and the series as a whole is nothing over and above its members, and so needs no cause of its own. Utilizing the well-known Thomistic distinction between essentially ordered and accidentally ordered causal series, I show that the Hume-Edwards-Ockham objection fails to touch Aquinas’s argument against the impossibility of infinite regress in an essentially ordered series. However, Aquinas also argues that accidentally ordered causal series can only regress infinitely if supported by an everlasting essential cause. The Hume-Edwards-Ockham objection does raise a question about this thesis, but I show how St. Thomas can reply to it convincingly. | ||
| 601 | |a Regression | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |a American Catholic Philosophical Association |t Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association |d Washington, DC : [Verlag nicht ermittelbar], 1926 |g 95(2021), Seite 141-151 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)376274395 |w (DE-600)2130243-1 |w (DE-576)443083517 |x 2153-7925 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:95 |g year:2021 |g pages:141-151 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc20231110159 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/purchase?openform&fp=acpaproc&id=acpaproc_2021_0095_0141_0151 |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4531426487 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1890261769 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20240529145452 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 240529||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| 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 | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| ORI | |a TA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||