Article contents
The Trinity is still unconstitutional
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 June 2020
Abstract
I argue that we should not model the Trinity using the concept of constitution, and reply to William Hasker's recent defence of the constitutionalist position, also developing my own views in some respects.
- Type
- Original Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Baker, Lynn Rudder (2007) The Metaphysics of Everyday Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, Karen (2020) ‘Having a Part Twice Over’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, DOI: 10.1080/00048402.2011.637936 (iFirst article): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, Jeffrey, & Rea, Michael (2009) ‘Material Constitution and the Trinity’, in McCall, Thomas & Rea, Michael (eds) Philosophical and Theological Essays on the Trinity (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 263–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotnoir, Aaron & Bacon, Andrew (2012) ‘Non-well-founded Mereology’, Review of Symbolic Logic, 5, 187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Effingham, Nikk (2010) ‘Mereological Explanation and Time Travel’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 88, 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmore, Cody (2007) ‘Time travel, coinciding objects, and persistence’, Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, 3, 177–198.Google Scholar
Gilmore, Cody (2014) ‘Parts of propositions’, in Kleinschmidt, Schieva (ed.) Mereology and Location (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 156–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Nelson (1951) The Structure of Appearance (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Hasker, William (2013) Metaphysics and the Tri-Personal God (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinschmidt, Schieva (2011) ‘Multilocation and mereology’, Philosophical Perspectives, 25, 253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuggy, Dale (2013) ‘Constitution Trinitarianism: an appraisal’, Philosophy and Theology, 25, 129–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2
- Cited by