Abstract
Abstract
The basic question of this article is whether Thomas Aquinas's doctrine of divine providence through his understanding of primary and secondary causation can be understood as a theological causal or non-causal explanation. To answer this question, I will consider some contemporary discussions about the nature of causal and non-causal explanations in philosophy of science and metaphysics, in order to integrate them into a theological discourse that appeals to the classical distinction between God as first cause and creatures as secondary causes to explain God's presence and providence in the created universe. My main argument will hold that, even if there are some philosophical models of explanation that seem to allow one to suggest that, at least partially, this doctrine could be seen as a non-causal theological explanation, there are other models that offer seemingly stronger reasons to see this doctrine in full as a causal theological explanation.
Funder
John Templeton Foundation
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference24 articles.
1. Does the counterfactual theory of explanation apply to non-causal explanations in metaphysics?;Reutlinger;European Journal for Philosophy of Science,2017a
2. Plurality as the epistemic good: theological explanation in science-religion debate;Oleksowicz;Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies,2021
3. Causal explanation and the periodic table;Ross;Synthese,2021
4. Revisiting Aquinas on providence and rising to the challenge of divine action in nature;Silva;The Journal of Religion,2014
5. Participation in God
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Science-Engaged Thomism;Religions;2024-05-11