Prolegomena to the Concept of God When Dealing with the Question
Is Ethics Without God Possible
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3218205 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel A Dombrowski (Seattle University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 651 |
| Publication date | 2025-05-20 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Religions (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2077-1444 • E-ISSN: 2077-1444 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT) |
| DOI | 10.3390/rel16050651 |
| OpenAlex | W4410517695 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 12 |
This article examines the assumption that, in order to respond adequately to the question in the title, one must have the classical concept of God in mind. Classical theism is criticized and neoclassical/process theism is briefly defended. Specifically, the classical theistic attribute of omnipotence receives four criticisms. The hope is that these criticisms prepare the way for a more fruitful response to the question in the title than is possible when the classical concept of God is assumed
Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Sociology · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Philosophy · Psychology · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Highly cited | No |
|---|