冲突的过程正义论

Process Studies Pub Date : 2019-04-01 DOI:10.5840/PROCESS20194813

R. Edwards

{"title":"冲突的过程正义论","authors":"R. Edwards","doi":"10.5840/PROCESS20194813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the process theodicies of David Ray Griffin and Philip Clayton. It explains their differences on such issues as God’s primordial power and voluntary self-limitation, creativity as an independent metaphysical principle that limits God, creation out of nothing or out of chaos, and God’s voluntary causal naturalism. Difficulties with their positions are discussed. The Clayton-Knapp “no-not-once” principle is explained, and a more comprehensive theodicy is outlined.","PeriodicalId":315123,"journal":{"name":"Process Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conflicting Process Theodicies\",\"authors\":\"R. Edwards\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/PROCESS20194813\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines the process theodicies of David Ray Griffin and Philip Clayton. It explains their differences on such issues as God’s primordial power and voluntary self-limitation, creativity as an independent metaphysical principle that limits God, creation out of nothing or out of chaos, and God’s voluntary causal naturalism. Difficulties with their positions are discussed. The Clayton-Knapp “no-not-once” principle is explained, and a more comprehensive theodicy is outlined.\",\"PeriodicalId\":315123,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Process Studies\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Process Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/PROCESS20194813\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Process Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/PROCESS20194813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考察了大卫·雷·格里芬和菲利普·克莱顿的过程神正论。解释了他们在上帝的原始力量和自愿自我限制、创造力作为一种独立的形而上学原则限制上帝、从无到有或从混沌中创造、上帝的自愿因果自然主义等问题上的分歧。讨论了他们立场上的困难。本文解释了克莱顿-纳普的“不-不-一次”原则，并概述了一个更全面的神正论。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Conflicting Process Theodicies

This article examines the process theodicies of David Ray Griffin and Philip Clayton. It explains their differences on such issues as God’s primordial power and voluntary self-limitation, creativity as an independent metaphysical principle that limits God, creation out of nothing or out of chaos, and God’s voluntary causal naturalism. Difficulties with their positions are discussed. The Clayton-Knapp “no-not-once” principle is explained, and a more comprehensive theodicy is outlined.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Process Studies

自引率

0.00%

发文量