Correspondence vs. Disquotation

In my previous two posts I have discussed the correspondence theory of truth and disquotation principles. In this post I’m going to use the former to argue against the latter.Ā More specifically, I’m going to argue that the “if and only if” of the disquotation principles should be merely an “only if”. In other words, insteadā€¦ Read More »

Truth and Disquotation Principles

In my previous post I talked about the correspondence theory of truth and its relation to truthmaker theory. I’m going to follow itĀ up with a series of posts on various issues concerning truth and ontology that I’ve been mulling over off-and-on over the past several years.Ā The current post concerns disquotation principles. I distinguish between sententialā€¦ Read More »

Responding to Craig and Hunt (Part 5 ā€“ the metaphysical argument)

This is the fifth installment in a series of posts responding to a 2013Ā paperĀ by William Lane Craig and David Hunt (hereafter, C&H) entitled ā€œPerils of the Open Roadā€. In the paper C&H critique two papers defending open theism: a 2006Ā paperĀ (hereafter, RBB) that I co-wrote with Greg Boyd and Tom Belt entitled ā€œOpen Theism, Omniscience, andā€¦ Read More »

Responding to Craig and Hunt (Part 4 ā€“ the semantic argument)

This is the fourthĀ installment in a series of posts in which I respond to a recent 2013Ā paperĀ entitled ā€œPerils of the Open Roadā€ authored by William Lane Craig and David Hunt (hereafter, C&H).Ā In their paper C&H critique two papers defending open theism: a 2006Ā paperĀ (hereafter, RBB) that I co-wrote with Greg Boyd and Tom Belt entitled ā€œOpenā€¦ Read More »

Open Theism and Impassibility in Feeling

Among open theists there has been a running in-house debate between what I will call the “passibilist” and “impassibilist” camps. T. C. Moore has lately been leading the charge on behalf of the passibilists, while Tom Belt and Dwayne Polk have been leading the charge for the impassibilists. (As noted below, by “passibilism” and “impassibilism”ā€¦ Read More »

Responding to Craig and Hunt (Part 3 – the SFV/OFV distinction)

This is the third installment in a series of posts in which I respond to a 2013 paper entitled ā€œPerils of the Open Roadā€ authored by William Lane Craig and David Hunt (hereafter, C&H). In the paper C&H critique two papers defending open theism: a 2006 paper (hereafter, RBB) that I co-wrote with Greg Boydā€¦ Read More »

Wolterstorff’s Dialogical Imperative

In October 1998 eminent Christian philosopher Nicholas Wolterstorff (Yale University, emeritus) delivered a lecture entitled “Tertullian’s Enduring Question”. The lecture was subsequently printed in a publication calledĀ The Cresset in 1999 and it is now available as chapter 13 in the first volume of Wolterstorff’s collected papers. In the lecture Wolterstorff reflects on Tertullian’s famous questionā€¦ Read More »

Responding to Craig and Hunt (Part 2 – “The Argument”)

This is the second installment in a series of posts in which I respond to a recent 2013 paper by William Lane Craig and David Hunt (hereafter, C&H). Entitled “Perils of the Open Road,” C&H critique two papers defending open theism: a 2006 paper that I co-wrote with Greg Boyd and Tom Belt entitled “Openā€¦ Read More »