Диссертация (Логико-онтологические основания современной аналитической теологии (на материале концепции Алвина Плантинги)), страница 30
Описание файла
Файл "Диссертация" внутри архива находится в папке "Логико-онтологические основания современной аналитической теологии (на материале концепции Алвина Плантинги)". PDF-файл из архива "Логико-онтологические основания современной аналитической теологии (на материале концепции Алвина Плантинги)", который расположен в категории "". Всё это находится в предмете "философия" из Аспирантура и докторантура, которые можно найти в файловом архиве НИУ ВШЭ. Не смотря на прямую связь этого архива с НИУ ВШЭ, его также можно найти и в других разделах. , а ещё этот архив представляет собой кандидатскую диссертацию, поэтому ещё представлен в разделе всех диссертаций на соискание учёной степени кандидата философских наук.
Просмотр PDF-файла онлайн
Текст 30 страницы из PDF
L. Plantinga’s Transworld Depravity: It’s Got Possibilities //International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. – 1982. – Vol. 13. – P.169–177.90) Cargile J. On Omnipotence // Noûs. – 1967. – Vol. 1. – No. 2. – P. 201–205.91) Cargile J. The Ontological Argument // Philosophy. – 1975. – Vol.
50. –P. 69–80.92) Geach P. T. An Irrelevance of Omnipotence // Philosophy. – 1973. –Vol. 48. – No. 186. – P. 327–333.93) Geach P. T. Good and Evil // Analysis. – 1956. – Vol. 17. – No. 2. – P.33–42.94) Geach P. T. Omnipotence // Philosophy. – 1973. – Vol. 48. – No. 183. –P. 7–20.95) Gellman J. The Paradox of Omnipotence, and Perfection // Sophia. –1975. – Vol.
14. – No. 3. – P. 31–39.96) God and Evil / ed. by N. Pike. – N.J. : Cornell University Press, 1964. –118 p.97) Grim P. In Behalf of “In Behalf of the Fool” // International Journal forPhilosophy of Religion. – 1982. – Vol. 13. – P. 33–42.98) Grim P. Plantinga, Hartshorne, and the Ontological Argument // Sophia.– 1981. – Vol. 20.
– No. 2. – P. 12–16.18799) Grim P. Plantinga’s God // Sophia. – 1979. – Vol. 18. – No. 3. – P. 35–42.100)Guleserian T. God and Possible Worlds: The Modal Problem of Evil// Noûs. – 1983. – Vol. 17. – No. 2. – P. 221–238.101)Hartshorne Сh. Man's Vision of God and the Logic of Theism.Chicago: N.Y., 1941. – P. 360.102)Hartshorne Сh. The Logic of Ontological Argument // The Journal ofPhilosophy. – 1961. – Vol. 58. – No.
17. – P. 471–473.103)Henle P. Uses of the Ontological Argument // The PhilosophicalReview. – 1961. – Vol. 79. – No. 1. – P. 102–109.104)Hintikka J. Are There Nonexistent Objects? Why Not? But WhereAre They? // Hinikka J., Hintikka M. B. The Logic of Epistemology andthe Epistemology of Logic. Selected Essays. – Dordrecht, 1989. – P.37–44.105)Howard-Snyder D., Howard-Snyder F.
How an Unsurpassable BeingCan Create a Surpassable World // Faith and Philosophy. – 1994. – Vol.11. . – No. 2.– P. 260–268.106)Howard-Snyder D., O’Leary-Hawthorne J. Transworld Sanctity andPlantinga’s Free Will Defense // International Journal for Philosophy ofReligion. – 1998. – Vol. 44. – P. 1–21.107)Howsepian A.
A. Compatibilism, Evil, and the Free-Will Defense //Sophia. – 2007. – Vol. 46. – No. 3. – P. 317–236.108)Hueghes G. E. Plantinga on the Rationality of God’s Existence // ThePhilosophical Review. – 1970. – Vol. 79. – No. 2. – P. 246–252.109)Inwagen van P. Ontological Argument // Noûs. – 1977. – Vol. 11. –No. 4. – P. 375–395.110)Inwagen van P. When Is the Wil Free? // Philosophical Perspectives– 1989. – Vol.
3. – No. 1/2. – P. 399–422.188111)Inwagen van P. When the Wil Is Not Free // Philosophical Studies:An International Journal for Philosophy in the AnalyticTradition–1994. – Vol. 75. – No. 1/2. – P. 95–113.112)Kane R. The Modal Ontological Argument // Mind. New Series. –1984. – Vol. 93. – No. 371. – P. 336–350.113)Kaufman G.D. On the Meaning of “God”: Transcendence withoutMythology // The Harvard Theological Review. – 1966. – Vol.
59. – No.2. – P. 105–132.114)Kaufman G.D. Philosophy of Religion: Subjective or Objective //The Journal of Philosophy. – 1958. – Vol. 55. – No. 2. – P. 57–70.115)Khmara E. J. In Defence of Omnipotence // Philosophical Quarterly.– 1978. – Vol. 28. – No. 112 – P. 215–228.116)Khmara E. J. Mackie’s Paradox and the Free Will Defence // Sophia.– 1995. – Vol. 34. – No.
1. – P. 42–48.117)La Croix R. The Impossibility of Defining ‘Omnipotence’ //Philosophical Studies. – 1977. – Vol. 32. – No. 2. – P. 181–190.118)Leftow B. Is a God an Abstract Object? // Noûs. – 1990. – Vol. 24. –No. 4. – P. 581–598.119)Loewer B. Leibniz and the Ontological Argument // PhilosophicalStudies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the AnalyticTradition. – 1978. – Vol. 34.
– P. 105–109.120)Mackie J. L. De What Re is de Re Modality? // The Journal ofPhilosophy. – 1974. – Vol. 71. – No. 16. – P. 551–561.121)Mackie J. L. Evil and Omnipotence // Mind. New Series. – 1955. –Vol. 64. – No. 254. – P. 200–212.122)Mackie J.L. The Miracle of Theism – Oxford : University Press,1982. – 268 p.123)Mackie J. L. Omnipotence // Sophia. – 1962. – Vol. 1. – No. 2. –P. 13–25.189124)Malcolm N.
Anselm’s Ontological Argument // The PhilosophicalReview. – 1960. – Vol. 69. – No. 1. – P. 41–62.125)Mavrodes G. I. Properties, Predicates, and the Ontological Argument// The Journal of Philosophy. – 1966. – Vol. 63. – No. 19. – P. 549–550.126)McCloskey H. J. God and Evil // Philosophical Quarterly. – 1960. –Vol.
10. – No. 39 – P. 97–114.127)McCloskey H. J. On Being an Atheist // Question. – 1962. – Vol. 1–P. 62–69.128)McCloskey H. J. Problem of Evil // Journal of Bible and Religion. –1962. – Vol. 30. – No. 3 – P. 187–197.129)Morris T.V. Necessary Beings // Mind. New Series.
– 1985. –Vol. 94. – No. 374. – P. 263–272.130)Morris T.V. Properties, Modalities, and God // The PhilosophicalReview. – 1984. – Vol. 93. – No. 1. – P. 35–55.131)Ockham. Philosophical Writings / Ed. and transl. by Ph. Boehner. –Edinburgh, 1957. – 272 p.132)Parsons K. M. God and The Burden of Proof: Plantinga, Swinburne,and the Analytic Defense of Theism. – Amherst, N.Y. : PrometheusBooks, 1989. – 156 p.133)Pike N. Good and Evil: A Reconsideration // Ethics.
– 1958. – Vol.68. – No. 2. – P. 116–124.134)Pike N. Hume on Evil // The Philosophical Review. – 1963. – Vol.72. – No. 2. – P. 180–197.135)Plantinga A. A Valid Ontological Argument? // The PhilosophicalReview. – 1961. – Vol. 70. – No. 1. – P. 93–101.136)Plantinga A. De Re et De Dicto // Noûs. – 1969. – Vol. 3. – No. 3. –P. 235–258.137)Plantinga A.
Does God Have a Nature? – Milwaukee, Wisconsin :Marquette University Press, 1980. – 152 p.190138)Plantinga А. Epistemic Justification // Noûs. – 1986. – Vol. 20. – No.1. – P. 3–18.139)Plantinga A. God and Other Minds. A Study of the RationalJustification of Belief in God.
– Ithaca, N.Y. : Cornell University Press,1967. – 278 p.140)Plantinga A. God, Freedom, and Evil. – Cambridge : Wm. B.Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977. – 2nd ed. – 112 p.141)Plantinga A. How to be an Anti-Realist // Proceedings and Addressesof the American Philosophical Association. – 1982. – Vol. 56. – No. 1. –P. 47–70.142)Plantinga A. Is Belief in God Properly Basic? // Noûs. – 1981. – Vol.15. – No. 1. – P. 41–51.143)Plantinga A.
It-s Actual, It Must Be Possible // Philosophical Studies.– 1961. – Vol. 12. – No. 4. – P. 61–64.144)Plantinga A. Kant's Objection to the Ontological Argument // TheJournal of Philosophy. – 1966. – Vol. 63. – No. 19. – P. 537–546.145)Plantinga A.
Pike and Possible Persons // The Journal of Philosophy.– 1966. – Vol. 63. – No. 4. – P. 104–108.146)Plantinga A. The Nature of Necessity. – Oxford : Clarendon Press,1974. – 256 p.147)Plantinga A. The Probabilistic Argument from Evil // PhilosophicalStudies. – 1979. – Vol. 35. – No. 1. – P. 1–53.148)Plantinga A.
What George Could Not have Been // Noûs. – 1971. –Vol. 5. – No. 2. – P. 227–232.149)Plantinga A. Which Worlds Could God have Created? // The Journalof Philosophy. – 1973. – Vol. 70. – No. 17. – P. 539–552.150)Plantinga A. World and Essence // The Philosophical Review. –1970. – Vol. 79. – No.
4. – P. 461–492.191151)Plantinga A., Grim P. Truth, Omniscience & Cantorian Arguments //Philosophical Studies. – 1993. – Vol. 71 – No. 3. – P. 267–306.152)Purtill R. L. Plantinga, Necessity, and God // New Scholastic. –1976. – P. 46–60.153)Robinson W.S. The Ontological Argument // Philosophical Studies:An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition.
–1984. – Vol. 16. – P. 51–59.154)Rowe W.L. Plantinga on Possible Worlds and Evil // The Journal ofPhilosophy. – 1973. – Vol. 70. – No. 17 (Seventieth A1974ual Meetingof the American Philosophical Association Eastern Division). – P. 554–555.155)Savage W.
The Paradox of the Stone. // The Philosophical Review.– 1967. – Vol. 76. – No. 1. – P. 74–79.156)Self Profile: Alvin Plantinga / ed. by J.E. Tomberlin, P. van Inwagen.– Dordrecht; Boston; Lancaster : D. Reidel Publishing Company., 1985.– 422 p.157)Se1974et J.F. Modality, Probability, and Rationality. – Series V. –Philosophy. – Vol. 129. – N.Y. : Peter Lang Publishing., 1992.
– 192 p.158)Stalnaker R.S. Possible worlds // Noûs. – 1976. – Vol. 10. – No. 1. –P. 65–75.159)Steinberg J. R. Leibniz, Creation, and the Best of all Possible Worlds// International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. – 2007. – Vol. 62. –P. 123–133.160)Steinberg J. R. Why an Unsurpassable Being Ca1974ot Create aSurpassable World // Religious Studies. – 2005. – Vol.
41. – P. 323–333.161)Sterba J. God, Plantinga, and a Better World // International Journalfor Philosophy of Religion. – 1976. – Vol. 7. – No. 3. – P. 446–451.192162)Strasser M. Leibniz, Plantinga, and the Test for Existence in PossibleWorlds // International Journal for Philosophy of Religion.
