University of California, riverside
His research project is:
Divine Foreknowledge, the Philosophy of Time, and the Metaphysics of Dependence: Some New Approaches to an Old Problem.
Perhaps the main position discussed in the contemporary literature on the foreknowledge problem has become known as ‘Ockhamism’. Roughly, the central contention of the Ockhamist concerns a point about the order of explanation. According to the Ockhamist, it is because of what we do that God (long ago) believed that we would do these things. That is, God’s past beliefs depend in an important sense on what we do, and thus, says the Ockhamist, we can sometimes have a choice about God’s past beliefs. The overarching goal of this project is to develop and assess this core Ockhamist thesis along two underexplored dimensions: the philosophy of time, and the metaphysics of dependence – both of which have seen an explosion of recent interest.
B.A., philosophy, Baylor University 2001 – 2005
M.A., philosophy, University of Missouri 2005 – 2007
Ph.D., philosophy, University of California-Riverside 2007 – present
Areas of Interest
- Metaphysics, Philosophy of Action (free will/moral responsibility), Ethics, Philosophy of Religion
- ‘Manipulation’, forthcoming, International Encyclopedia of Ethics (Blackwell).
- ‘The Truth About Freedom: A Reply to Merricks’, (with John Martin Fischer), The Philosophical Review, Vol. 120, No. 1 (January 2011): 97 – 115.
- ‘A New Approach to Manipulation Arguments’, Philosophical Studies, Vol. 152, No. 1 (January 2011): 127-133.
- ‘Geachianism’, Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion Volume III, ed. Jonathan Kvanvig. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.)
- 'Re-reading Nelson Pike's 'Divine Omniscience and Voluntary Action'' (with John Martin Fischer and Neal Tognazzini), Philosophical Papers, Vol. 38: 2 (July 2009): 247-270.
- ‘A Problem for Guidance Control’ (with Neal Tognazzini), The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 58, No. 233 (2008): 685-692.