dc.rights.license | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Davis, Richard Brian, 1963- | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-05-08T18:48:34Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-05-08T18:48:34Z | |
dc.date.copyright | 2002-06 | |
dc.date.issued | 2002-06 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Davis, Richard Brian. “Haecceities, Individuation and the Trinity: A Reply to Keith Yandell.” Religious Studies 38, no. 2 (June 2002): 201-213. DOI: 10.107/S0034412502006005 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0034-4125 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://digitalcollections.tyndale.ca/handle/20.500.12730/2594 | |
dc.description.abstract | In this paper I reply to Keith Yandell’s recent charge that Anselmian theists cannot also be Trinitarians. Yandell’s case turns on the contention that it is impossible to individuate Trinitarian members, if they exist necessarily. Since the ranks of Anselmian Trinitarians includes the likes of Alvin Plantinga, Robert Adams, and Thomas Flint, Yandell’s claim is of considerable interest and import. I argue, by
contrast, that Anselmians can appeal to what Plantinga calls an essence or haecceity – a property essentially unique to an object – to distinguish Trinitarian members. I go on to show that the main Yandellian objection to this individuative strategy is not successful. | en |
dc.format.medium | Paper | en_US |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Cambridge University Press | en_US |
dc.rights | Copyright, Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. | en_US |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Yandell, Keith E., 1938- | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Trinitarians | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Theism | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Trinity | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Plantinga, Alvin | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Haecceity (Philosophy) | en_US |
dc.subject.lcsh | Individuation (Philosophy) | en_US |
dc.title | Haecceities, Individuation and the Trinity: A Reply to Keith Yandell | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Tyndale University College & Seminary | en_US |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Philosophy | en_US |
dc.contributor.repository | Tyndale University, J. William Horsey Library, 3377 Bayview Ave., Toronto, ON, M2M 3S4, Canada. Contact: repository@tyndale.ca | en_US |
dc.identifier.bibrecord | https://tyndale.on.worldcat.org/oclc/980501957 | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.107/S0034412502006005 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | no. 2 | en_US |
dc.identifier.journal | Religious studies | en_US |
dc.identifier.orcid | https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4608-6172 | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 38 | en_US |
dc.publisher.place | Cambridge, UK | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | https://www.cambridge.org/about-us/rights-permissions | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Yandell, Keith E., 1938- | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Anselmian theists | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Theism | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Trinitarians | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Anselmians | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Trinity | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Plantinga, Alvin | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Haecceity (Philosophy) | en_US |
dc.subject.keyword | Individuation (Philosophy) | en_US |
dc.description.chapterpage | 201-213 | en_US |
dc.description.note | Accepted manuscript is not available for uploading to the TDC repository | en_US |
dc.description.note | For AODA accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact repository@tyndale.ca | en_US |