Free Creatures Research Articles

Апология «Апологии от свободы воли» Ал­вина Плантинги

According to A. Plantinga’s Free will defence, God cannot actualize morally perfect world containing free creatures but no wrongdoings. The Defence is strengthened by the Transworld Depravity argument: the free agents must have wrongdoings in the pos­sible worlds containing them. In the recent paper (2012) A. Pruss proposed the counter­examples to the Free will defence. Pruss introduced the categorical domination princi­ple combined with the molinist’s counterfactuals of free creatures (which represent the Plantinga’s understanding of the compatibility of God’s foreknowledge with free will of agents) and drawn from these the counterexamples, according to which God can actualize morally perfect world containing free creatures. I believe that his counterexam­ples are false and Free will defence could be successfully defended with its key presup­positions. My defence of the Free will defence consists of the four interrelated argu­ments: (1) the Pruss’s worlds do not contain free persons; therefore God cannot actualize them, since the significantly moral freedom required that an agent must take the good action as the wrongs one; I also propose the additional Transworld Goodness argument; (2) the wrong-thoughts argument treats the thoughts as the kind of actions, ascribes them the moral properties and incorporate them into the process of the conciseness free choice; (3) the argument from the principle of the good/evil opposition, according to which the evil and the good mutually senseless without each other and one’ performing of wrongs actions requires the one’s performing of goods actions and vice versa: the lat­ter characterizes the free agent as free as such as; (4) finally, I argue for the non-com­plete description of Pruss’s worlds which restricts analysis of agents’s actions only by the boundaries by single time-slice; instead of this we should examine them in the do­main of such families of possible worlds, as the chains of sequences of the worlds with the time indices.

Molinist Thomist Calvinism: A Synthesis

AbstractAbstract: In recent years, attempts to reconcile God's exhaustive providential control over the future and human freedom frequently appeal to Molinism. Through the theory of Middle Knowledge, it is claimed, God can exercise meticulous providence over free creatures while preserving the libertarian agency of those creatures. Historically, both Thomist and Reformed theologians have critiqued the theory of Middle Knowledge for effectively eliminating God's aseity, making God's knowledge in some sense dependent on some non‐God reality. In this paper, I aim to push the discussion forward by integrating Thomist, Molinist, and Reformed perspectives in the view I call Molinist Thomist Calvinism. By resourcing each of these views, I try to offer a coherent way to affirm God's meticulous providence, including God's unconditional election of some and not others, and morally significant human freedom.

Muhammad Iqbal's Thoughts and its Relevance to Sustainable Development

Muhammad Iqbal as a Muslim philosopher also a humanitarian activist who voices the rise of Muslim people to achieve equality and justice that always carries the theme of nature in his works. He had deep thoughts in many scientific fields,much research has been done on them, but it rarely mentions his development ideas. In fact, environmental damage and steep economic inequality that are inconsistant with the doctrine of human as universe caliph in Islam, are the impact of technology driven by a capitalistic paradigm that ignores the sustainability of all resources in the world. For that reason, this article is structured through library research as an effort to dissect Muhammad Iqbal's thoughts in the sustainable development.The results are; first, humans are free creatures who can only submit to God, not others. Second, the universe was created by God for the benefit of humans. Both have inseparable existential relationships to maintain sustainability. Be ing responsible humans to understand, manage and utilize it. The relationship between humans and nature is as close as the relationship between humans and God, growth in sustainable creativity.

اختر رضا سلیمی کے ناولوں میں اسلامی تہذیب اور ہزارہ ثقافت کا عکس: "جاگے ہیں خواب میں "اور" جندر"کا اختصاصی مطالعہ

Akhtar Raza Salimi's novels "Jage Hain Khwab Mein" and "Jander" are mirror of the cultural phenomena born from the establishment of the Islamic Empire of Syed Ahmad Shaheed in the mountain ranges of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the Hazara Valley and the Mujahideen's resistance to the British and the Sikhs. These novels describe the existential crisis and the importance of the characters and events in terms of symbolism. By showing the components of the decaying civilization and struggling with the oppression of the industrial era, Akhtar Raza Salimi has highlighted the freedom of human temperament and the freedom of personal choice. He presents in an allegorical way that the industrial era prevented man from living as a free creature.

Enfeoffment to Use, Legalism, and Humanism in Gower's Mirour de l'Omme

Enfeoffment to Use, Legalism, and Humanism in Gower's <i>Mirour de l'Omme</i>

Tanrı’nın Ön Bilgisi Meselesinde Orta Bilgi Teorisinin Yeri ve İncelenmesi

In this paper, with God's foreknowledge, the question of whether man is free or not is discussed based on what the middle information theory offers as a solution. Is God's foreknowledge an obstacle to man's freedom of action? What is the relationship between God's foreknowledge and human freedom? These questions have been answered in various ways. According to the theistic perspective, God knows everything perfectly well, and at the same time, his knowledge is infallible. Furthermore, theism accepts that man is responsible for his actions as he has the choice of the good and evil, and it sees him as a free being. This perspective implies that God has foreknowledge and human beings are free in their actions. However, if God has foreknowledge and this foreknowledge is infallible, how can man be free in his actions? Ultimately, since God’s knowledge is infallible, it is impossible for that knowledge not to come true. Therefore, if all our actions are based on divine foreknowledge, we cannot talk about human freedom then. Various ways of solving this problem have been proposed. The first is the Boethian solution. God is a timeless being and is free from temporal quality. Therefore, God, as a timeless being, is eternal, and eternity is having a full, simultaneous and perfect life without limits. For God, everything is at the moment. This includes what is in the future for us. This is because He is not within the flow of time. As there is no future for God, there is no foreknowledge for Him. Therefore, there is hardly a clash between God's foreknowledge and human freedom. The second is the Ockhamist solution. God is eternal, but contrary to the Boethian understanding, God is not considered outside of time according to the Ockhamist perspective but rather as a temporal eternity with no beginning or end. God's knowledge of someone is not knowledge outside of time. The idea here is that God has different pieces of knowledge in different times. The basic idea in this theory is that propositions about the future are not essential; they simply contain the possibility of being wrong until the moment they occur. Here, the divine regulation or determination of the created will are not obligatory but it exists freely and optionally. The third is the middle knowledge theory, which is the focus of this study. According to this theory, God has two kinds of knowledge: natural knowledge and free knowledge. Middle knowledge is the knowledge of God prior to what actually occurs. In this respect, middle knowledge resembles natural knowledge in terms of being pre-willed. In addition to knowing essential propositions including logical and mathematical ones thanks to his natural knowledge, God knows all not only the probabilities of particular beings but also the complex probabilities resulting from the actions of such beings. This knowledge is the knowledge that God knows by his own nature. This knowledge includes all the possibilities that God can create, all possible particulars and all possible situations in which He can put them, all possible behaviors, along with all possible worlds and arrangements He can create. While the object of God's natural knowledge is possible future probabilities, the object of free knowledge is actual and absolute future probabilities. Middle knowledge, on the other hand, has conditional future possibilities that are between the possible and the actual as an object. With His middle knowledge, God knows how to propose what is not metaphysically necessary but possible. God knows the range of possible worlds thanks to his Natural knowledge. He knows the appropriate range of worlds with His middle knowledge. With His free knowledge, he knows the real world. The most striking aspect of the middle knowledge doctrine concerns how God knows the possible future. Middle knowledge theory not only provides room for human freedom but also offers God the choice to create free creatures. By knowing how humans make free choices under possible circumstances, God can achieve His ultimate purpose of creation. Thus, using his counterfactual knowledge, He can construct a whole world without destroying the freedom of creation because what people will do freely under different conditions has already been put into the equation by God. According to this theory, divine foreknowledge does not prevent man from performing free actions.

Mengontrol Kebebasan Perilaku Menggunakan Teknologi Digital dengan Digital Detox

&#x0D; The development of the times led to the emergence of various kinds of digital technology that can be accessed easily. The emergence of various kinds of digital technology has become an important need for many people. Its use cannot be separated from everyday life. The frequency of using digital technology that cannot be controlled, results in various kinds of adverse effects on humans, one of which can lead to digital addiction. Although in essence humans are free creatures and have the freedom to behave in their daily lives, if this freedom is not controlled properly it will be detrimental to many parties. To overcome this, the need for digital fasting or Digital Detox so that humans can control their freedom in the use of digital technology.

Let's Play GOLF!

A central feature of the “free will defense” as developed by Alvin Plantinga is his response to the claim that God can create a world containing creatures with libertarian freedom that contains no moral evil. Plantinga’s response appeals to the notion of “morally significant freedom” according to which free creatures, in order to do moral good, must be capable of moral evil. In this paper, I argue, first, that morally significant freedom is not required for free creatures to do moral good and, second, that other recent attempts to necessitate a creaturely capability for evil likewise fail. The upshot of my paper is that the free will defense simply won’t work because it is possible and feasible for God to create a world containing libertarianly free creatures capable of moral good and yet containing no moral evil.

Turning to the East, Rescuing the West: Sufism and Humanism in Ivan Aguéli’s Thought

ABSTRACT Ivan Aguéli became a celebrated painter in Sweden, his native country. However, his pioneering role in the rapprochement between West and East in the early twentieth century has remained largely unexplored. Aguéli’s universal humanism, with Sufism as its main lever, is analysed and located within a transnational intellectual landscape through networks of people, ideas and print media. By attracting Western pilgrims, Sufism served as a nexus of cultural transfer from the Middle East to Europe, thus casting doubts on the prevailing paradigm of Western enlightenment as the backbone of global intellectual history. Sufism was presented by Aguéli as a spiritual philosophy that dealt with the liberation of man from materialism and selfishness. The article deals with a number of issues: How did Aguéli transform Islam and Sufism into a cosmopolitan vision? To what extent was his humanism nurtured by anarchist philosophy, which promoted a just society? Did Aguéli reconcile the anarchist perception of human beings as free creatures with the Sufi perception of total submission to a Sufi master? Consideration of these questions will shed light on a moralist intellectual, whose own personal experience captured a defiant European mood, intertwining rationalism and esotericism, material progress and universal brotherhood.

THE THEOLOGICAL PROBLEM WITH EVOLUTION

AbstractThis article explores hamartiological questions at the interface of evolutionary biology and theology. Such questions include the problem of evil, the possibility of a historical fall, and the meaning of human sinfulness in light of biology. First, I examine some of the leading accounts of animal theodicy, including John Schneider's aesthetic theodicy, Christopher Southgate's compound theodicy, and Joshua Moritz's free creatures’ defense. Second, I review several non‐lapsarian accounts of how sin originated within the human story (e.g., Robert Russell's concept of entropy as the physical origin of sin). Then third, I discuss noteworthy attempts to revise the doctrine of original sin in light of evolutionary psychology. Although the quest for a post‐Darwinian doctrine of sin has prompted fascinating areas of research, I conclude that an evolutionary hamartiology remains a remarkably difficult project.

God and the Playpen: On the Feasibility of Morally Better Worlds

According to the free will defense, God cannot create a world with free creatures, and hence a world with moral goodness, without allowing for the possibility of evil. David Lewis points out that any free will defense must address the “playpen problem”: why didn’t God allow creatures the freedom required for moral goodness, while intervening to ensure that all evil-doing is victimless? More recently, James Sterba has revived the playpen problem by arguing that an omnipotent and benevolent God would have intervened to prevent significant and especially horrendous evil. I argue that it is possible, at least, that such divine intervention would have backfired, and that any attempt to create a world that is morally better than this one would have resulted in a world that is morally worse. I conclude that the atheologian should instead attack the free will defense at its roots: either by denying that the predetermination of our actions is incompatible with our freely per-forming them, or by denying that the actual world—a world with both moral good and evil—is more valuable than a world without any freedom at all.

Must God Create the Best Available Creatures?

Alvin Plantinga rightly challenged J. L. Mackie’s assumption that an omnipotent God can directly create just any possible world. However, Mackie also assumed that God, given the option, must create a person who would freely choose rightly rather than one who would freely choose wrongly. Instead of challenging this assumption, Plantinga suggests that every possible free creature would have sinned had God created them, an idea I consider highly improbable. More importantly, under Mackie’s assumption, for almost all conceivable arrangements of the counterfactuals of creaturely freedom, this assumption renders libertarian free will impossible for nearly every possible creature.

The Space and Place of Humans and Humanity in Language: Arabic and Indonesian Compared

Language, aside from representing the culture of a people, also constructs humankind and humanity. Arabic conceptualizes humanity differently than the world's other languages, such as Indonesian. In Arabic, humans are positioned as subordinate, as dependent on God, whereas in Indonesian they are characterized as autonomous. This article seeks to analyse how language positions humans within their relationships with God, other humans, and nature. Arabic and Indonesian both incorporate implicit concepts of human being, godliness, and humanity, and thus these languages have broad space for defining humanity's relationship with God. This article concludes that Arabic positions humans as creatures whose values and attitudes are dependent on God, while Indonesian positions humans as autonomous and free creatures. The link between Arabic and religion and between Indonesian and culture has informed how these languages conceptualize and position humanity. This study recommends a comprehensive comparative investigation of how various languages position and understand humans and humanity.

DOA BAPA KAMI SEBAGAI LANDASAN TINGKAH LAKU ORANG PERCAYA KEPADA YESUS

Humans are free creatures, because humans have a will in their lives, in the ability to implement their thoughts, humans can do what they want, with the advantages that humans have that exceed other God's creatures, humans can be called the pinnacle of all creation systems. However, humans must have a foundation or basis in living life. The Lord's Prayer is a prayer that has deep meaning. There are many studies on the prayer of Our Father from previous researchers, therefore this research focuses on the prayer of our father as the basis for the behavior of believers in Jesus. The method used, namely data collection, is qualitative research, where deep emphasis is placed on the prayer of Our Father from the point of view as the basis for the behavior of believers in Jesus by conducting document studies or library research in obtaining the information or data needed in this study. The results of this research can be said that the prayer of Our Father becomes the foundation of human behavior.

WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT EVERYONE IS DEPRAVED?

Abstract Why does God allow evil? One hypothesis is that God desires the existence and activity of free creatures but He was unable to create a world with such creatures and such activity without also allowing evil. If Molinism is true, what probability should be assigned to this hypothesis? Some philosophers claim that a low probability should be assigned because there are an infinite number of possible people and because we have no reason to suppose that such creatures will choose one way rather than another. Arguments like this depend on the principle of indifference. But that principle is rejected by most philosophers of probability. Some philosophers claim that a low probability should be assigned because doing otherwise violates intuitions about freewill. But such arguments can be addressed through strategies commonly employed to defend theories with counterintuitive results across ethics and metaphysics.

Representasi Maskulinitas Pria dalam Iklan Televisi Men’s Biore Cool Oil Clear

The purpose of this research is to analyze the meaning contained in Men’s Biore Cool Oil Clear advertisement in three different versions namely version #BeMagnetic 2019, #RefreshSangatLo! 2018, and Long Riding 2017, and discuss the myths and male masculinity representation by using Roland Barthes's semiotic theory. The results showed that the three ads represent men into 8 myths, namely Men as free creatures, Men as good-looking creatures, Men as charismatic creatures, Men as leaders, Men as optimistic beings, Men as rulers, and Men as narcissist beings. The masculine traits contained are Give em Hell, Metrosexual, Be a Big Wheel, Be a Sturdy Oak, and New man as narcissist. The message of masculinity formed is an easy way to wash face to be able to become a masculine, namely men who pay attention to cleanliness and appearance of themselves, which opens new perspectives in the wider community over the stereotypes of masculine images that have been circulating.

Doświadczenie wspólnoty osób jako źródła przezwyciężania chaosu aksjonormatywnego współczesnego świata. Rozważania w perspektywie koncepcji Dietricha von Hildebranda

The article presents an analysis of the selected thoughts of Dietrich von Hildebrand from the perspective of showing the community of people as a source of overcoming axionormative chaos. The central categories around which the considerations are conducted are: the person; community; cognition; the world of values; crisis and chaos. In the phenomeno- logist’s concept; the world; both in the ontic and axiological dimensions; is neither accidental nor chaotic but orderly and hierarchical. A person as a rational and free creature has full abilities; so that this order can not only be read correctly; but also on the basis of this ontic and normative order to build an orderly individual and collective life in various dimensions.

The humanistic credo of A. S. Pushkin

The author of the article underlines that the works of the great Russian poet A.&nbsp;S.&nbsp;Pushkin are imbued with the spirit of humanism, the philosophical search for the foundations of truth, goodness and beauty, and are aimed at glorifying man as a free creature and overcoming the base and vulgar in him. It is sressed that Pushkin was able to deeply comprehend and exactky express in his works the quintessence of Russian humanism. So, the purpose of the article is to show that the scale of values ​​and moral concepts which were important for Pushkin are not outdated and retain their significance at present. The author puts the question of what is priority in Pushkin’s humanism, and then he reveals and analyzes the poet’s humanistic credo. This is done with the help of some judgments of the leading Russian thinkers, who focused in their studies on Pushkin’s philanthropy, patriotism, the understanding that people should live in harmony, concord, and not in conflict either with nature or with each other. The quality of Pushkin’s ethical views is analyzed in the context of the idea that hedonism and eudaimonism (a sense of pleasure and an experience of personal happiness) will be reduced to banal egoism and self-love if categorical imperatives are violated, i.e., unconditional and universal instructions that must be followed by everyone. It is concluded that the works of the Russian national genius are the basic value and identification potential of the golden fund of Russian culture.

Repenser la Providence sans perdre Dieu dans l’opération

À l’écoute de suggestions actuelles pour repenser la Providence, en affinité avec l’ Open Theism , cet article mène un exercice de discernement puis de reconstruction. L’examen critique porte sur trois remaniements sensibles : un transfert inaperçu de souveraineté de Dieu vers l’être humain, une autodétermination de Dieu à se laisser déterminer par ses créatures libres, une suspension de l’omniscience divine au bénéfice supposé de la liberté humaine. De tels déplacements sont mesurés à leurs lourdes conséquences. La reconstruction revisite l’affrontement des images de Dieu, païennes ou chrétienne ; puis considère les rapports étonnants entre nécessités et libertés selon l’évangile de Luc. Cela conduit à reformuler l’essentiel de la foi en la Providence suivant les trois articles du Credo , en termes de souveraineté, mystère pascal et synergie.

Alvin Plantinga on the problem of evil: an examination

The existence of God is an enduring and popular philosophical problem that entwines with many aspects of human experience. One of these aspects is the reality or experience of evil. This experience creates a serious embarrassment to all official theological doctrines and monistic philosophy which claim that the source of all that happen and exists in our world is a makeup of an omnipotent and perfect Being (God) who is traditionally thought to be good. This embarrassment is captured by the existential and intellectual difficulty to believe that a world with such a vast amount of evil as our world contains is the creation of, and under the sovereign control of, a supremely good, omnipotent and omniscient Being. Now, if this Good Being is the source of all that there is, where then does evil come from? If he is all good and we still see evil in the world, then there must be something wrong with his power, perhaps he is not really omnipotent and/or there is an independent source of evil that he cannot control but struggles against. Scholars like St. Augustine, St. Aquinas, and Leibniz provided argument to defend the righteousness, perfection and omnipotence of God in the face of the indubitable experience of evil. Alvin Plantinga in his view offers an understanding of the terms ‘freewill’ and ‘omnipotence’ in other to make a case with his views of Mackie and Flew (both of whom are atheist), asserting that God cannot actualize a world in which truly free creatures do only what is morally good, for conditioning them to do so is a logical impossibility that contradicts the created order. Thus, God’s gift or freewill to man is a greater good which should not be eliminated because it is only with such gift that man can express love and appreciation to their creator. The researcher adopts the method of exposition and analysis. This is done by employing basically library based literatures on the concerned subject of discussion.