What is Wrong with Concurrentism?

Yıl 2014, Sayı: 23 - Kaygı (23) 2014, 129 - 144, 30.10.2014

Nazif Muhtaroğlu

https://doi.org/10.20981/kuufefd.28590

Cited By: 1

Öz

Concurrentism and occasionalism are two principal theistic approaches to the nature of divine causality. Whereas the former affirms the causal efficacy of created beings along with the continuous action of God, the latter explicitly denies any causality to finite beings and considers God to be the only genuine causal agent. In “What is Wrong with Occasionalism?” Katherin A. Rogers examines the implications of these theories in relation to the following topics: our knowledge about the external world, the intelligibility of core ontological concepts and human free will together with moral responsibility. What she concludes from her analysis is that occasionalism has problematic implications with respect to these three points and concurrentism is superior to occasionalism in responding to the problems occasionalism faces in this context. In this paper, contrary to Rogers’, I argue that Rogers’ criticisms of occasionalism are in principle applicable to concurrentism and when they are applied, this theory faces more troubles than occasionalism has faced.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Katherin Rogers; Divine Causality; Continuous Creation; Knowledge; Substantiality; Free Will; Moral Responsibility; Occasionalism

Kaynakça

• Al-GHAZALI (1997) The Incoherence of the Philosophers (Tahāfut al-falāsifah), a Parallel English-Arabic Text, İng.’e çev. M. E. Marmura, Provo (Utah): BrighamYoung University Press.
• DESCARTES, Rene (1985) The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, vol. I, İng.’e çev. John Cottingham, Robert Stoothoff, Dugald Murdoch, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• DESCARTES, Rene (1897) Oeuvres de Descartes, 11 vols, ed. Charles Adam and Paul Tannery, Paris.
• FAKHRY, Majid (1958) Islamic Occasionalism, and its Critique by Averroes and Aquinas, London: G. Allen & Unwin.
• FREDDOSO, Alfred J. (1988) “Medieval Aristotelianism and the Case Against Secondary Causation in Nature.” In Divine and Human Action: Essays in the Metaphysics of Theism, ed. Thomas V. Morris, 74-118. Ithaca: NY, Cornell Un. Press.
• MALEBRANCHE, Nicholas (1962-1978) Ouvres Completes de Malebranche, gen. ed. A. Robinet, 20 vols. Paris: Vrin.
• MALEBRANCHE, Nicholas (1997) The Search After Truth, İng.’e çev. Thomas M. Lennon & Paul J. Oscamp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
• McCANN, Hugh J. & Jonathan L. KVANVIG (1991) “The Occasionalist Proselytizer: A Modified Catechism.” Philosophical Perspectives, 5, Philosophy of Religion (1991): 587-615.
• MUHTAROGLU, Nazif (2010) “An Occasionalist Defense of Free Will” In Classic Issues in Islamic Philosophy and Theology Today, ed. A. T. Tymieniecka and N. Muhtaroglu, 45-62. Dordrecht: Springer.
• ROGERS, Katherine A (2001) “What is wrong with Occasionalism?” American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 75, no: 3 (2001): 345-369.
• SEYYID, Mehmed (2011) Usul-u Fıkıh Dersleri, İstanbul: Işık Yayınları.
• WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1968) Philosophical investigations, İng.’e çev. G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford, Basil: Blackwell.