Contemporary Versions

Contemporary Versions - Contemporary Versions: My Argument...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Contemporary Versions: My Argument he argument in my article on the cosmological argument follows the usual pattern. Hence, we can discuss it by considering the usual four headings: focus, rationale, temporality, modality and closure. Finally, I will discuss my responses to several objections. Focus The focus of my argument is broader than any that we have seen. I assume that every fact of a certain kind has a cause. By "fact", I mean a concrete part of the world, like an event, process, condition or state of affairs. Facts are the kinds of things that make declarative sentences, like "Caesar has died", true. Facts enter into cause and effect relations with other facts. We can distinguish between "types" and "tokens", to use terms introduced into philosophy by C. S. Peirce. Each individual penny is a token, and the property or kind of penny-hood is a type. Each penny is a token of one and the same type, which is multiply realized in different places at different times. My argument concerns fact-tokens, not fact-types. For example, we can use the phrases "that Caesar died", "Caesar's dying" or "Caesar's death" to refer either to a fact-token, the
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/09/2011 for the course PHI PHI2010 taught by Professor Jorgerigol during the Fall '09 term at Broward College.

Page1 / 2

Contemporary Versions - Contemporary Versions: My Argument...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online