Talk:Peter van Inwagen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

need work[edit]

Someone should improve this article. --

I agree this page needs a lot of work. --Tim

This does not even begin to cover his work and seems to dwell on one single lesser known argument. Van Inwagen is famous for the consequence argument

I added Robert Kane's assessment of the importance of van Inwagen's Consequence Argument. I also added his Mind Argument Cmsreview (talk) 15:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I also added van Inwagen's recent position that "Free will remains a mystery" - especially his doubts about random chance (indeterminism) causing actions. May we now remove the two warnings? Cmsreview (talk) 16:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Not having received any comments from other "watchers" I have removed the "unsourced" and "unencyclopedic warnings." Cmsreview (talk) 17:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Incoherence of Free Will?[edit]

Inwagen doesn't claim free will is incoherent. This is a misunderstanding of the article. Inwagen tries to describe the problem of free will by showing that it SEEMS like its incompatible with both determinism and indeterminism, and at the same time the denial of free will SEEMS to be incompatible with the notion of moral responsibility. His conclusion is that there must a mistake in one of those arguments ( his bet is on the incompatibility with indeterminism), not that free will is incoherent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)