Comments on: On Plantinga’s Argument for Theism from “Intentionality” (Updated) http://dmitrychernikov.com/blog/2007/09/06/on-plantingas-argument-for-theism-from-intentionality/ Philosophy, theology, economics, and liberty. Wed, 03 Mar 2010 06:38:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: DRM http://dmitrychernikov.com/blog/2007/09/06/on-plantingas-argument-for-theism-from-intentionality/comment-page-1/#comment-4134 DRM Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:15:27 +0000 http://dmitrychernikov.com/blog/2007/09/06/on-plantingas-argument-for-theism-from-intentionality/#comment-4134 I think you're getting him wrong, I'm just not sure how to reconstruct his argument better than you did. Note that this is the argument from <i>intentionality</i> and your premises take no note of that. I think what you miss, is the quote from Aquinas: <i>(Aquinas, De Veritate "Even if there were no human intellects, there could be truths because of their relation to the divine intellect. But if, per impossibile, there were no intellects at all, but things continued to exist, then there would be no such reality as truth.")</i> I think Plantinga is linking truth and propositions+intentionality here. So Truth is a two-sided affair. Only propositions are true. They are true in virtue of representing things as they actually are. So if we suppose propositions come into being with the thinking of them, then if God did not exist, there would be a time when nothing was true. But it seems absurd to say that there was a time when nothing was true. I think you’re getting him wrong, I’m just not sure how to reconstruct his argument better than you did. Note that this is the argument from intentionality and your premises take no note of that.

I think what you miss, is the quote from Aquinas:

(Aquinas, De Veritate “Even if there were no human intellects, there could be truths because of their relation to the divine intellect. But if, per impossibile, there were no intellects at all, but things continued to exist, then there would be no such reality as truth.”)

I think Plantinga is linking truth and propositions+intentionality here. So Truth is a two-sided affair. Only propositions are true. They are true in virtue of representing things as they actually are. So if we suppose propositions come into being with the thinking of them, then if God did not exist, there would be a time when nothing was true. But it seems absurd to say that there was a time when nothing was true.

]]>