• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Joshua C. Thurow

University of Texas at San Antonio
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    38
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    12

 More details
  • University of Texas at San Antonio
    Department of Philosophy and Classics
    Professor
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 2007
Email (login required)
San Antonio, Texas, United States of America
Areas of Specialization
Epistemology
Metaphysics
Philosophy of Religion
Areas of Interest
Meta-Ethics
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Cognitive Science
General Philosophy of Science
Applied Ethics
17th/18th Century Philosophy
Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
2 more
  • All publications (38)
  •  6
    On Counterfactuals of Libertarian Freedom: Is There Anything I Would Have Done if I Could Have Done Otherwise?
    with Paul C. Anders and Kenneth Hochstetter
    American Philosophical Quarterly 51 (1): 85-94. 2014.
    Alternative PossibilitiesLibertarianism about Free WillFree Will, Misc
  •  88
    Natural Signs and Knowledge of God: A New Look at Theistic Arguments, by C. Stephen Evans (review)
    Faith and Philosophy 30 (2): 221-224. 2013.
    Philosophy of ReligionReligious TopicsThe Number of Gods
  •  108
    Christian Philosophical Theology (review)
    Faith and Philosophy 25 (1): 113-116. 2008.
    Christianity
  •  71
    Evolutionary Religion (review)
    International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 6 (4). 2016.
    _ Source: _Page Count 4
    Divine Hiddenness
  •  153
    Experientially defeasible a priori justification
    Philosophical Quarterly 56 (225). 2006.
    In his recent book Albert Casullo rejects the claim that if a belief is defeasible by non-experiential evidence then it is defeasible by experiential evidence. This claim is a crucial premise in a simple argument for the experiential defeasibility of a priori justification. I defend the premise against Casullo's objection, the main problem with which is that he does not take into account the evidential role of multiple corroborating sources of testimony. I conclude that the crucial premise is tr…Read more
    In his recent book Albert Casullo rejects the claim that if a belief is defeasible by non-experiential evidence then it is defeasible by experiential evidence. This claim is a crucial premise in a simple argument for the experiential defeasibility of a priori justification. I defend the premise against Casullo's objection, the main problem with which is that he does not take into account the evidential role of multiple corroborating sources of testimony. I conclude that the crucial premise is true and that the simple argument is sound; thus many of our a priori justified beliefs are experientially defeasible
    The A Priori
  •  3
    Does Religious Disagreement Actually Aid the Case for Theism?
    In Jake Chandler & Victoria S. Harrison (eds.), Probability in the Philosophy of Religion, Oxford University Press. 2012.
    Epistemology of DisagreementReligious SkepticismReligious Diversity, Misc
  • Religion, 'Religion', and Tolerance
    In Steve Clark Russell Powell & Julian Savulescu (eds.), Religion, Intolerance, and Conflict: A Scientific and Conceptual Investigation, Oxford University Press. pp. 146-162. 2013.
    Ethics and ReligionToleration in Normative Theories
  •  144
    Communal Substitutionary Atonement
    Journal of Analytic Theology 3 47-69. 2015.
    In this paper I develop and defend a new theory of the Atonement - the Communal Substitution Theory. According to the Communal Substitution Theory, by dying on the cross Jesus either takes on the punishment for, or offers satisfaction for, the sins of the human community. Individual humans have sinned, but human communities have sinned as well. Jesus dies for the communal sins. As a result, human communities are forgiven and reconciled to God, and through the event of communal forgiveness, i…Read more
    In this paper I develop and defend a new theory of the Atonement - the Communal Substitution Theory. According to the Communal Substitution Theory, by dying on the cross Jesus either takes on the punishment for, or offers satisfaction for, the sins of the human community. Individual humans have sinned, but human communities have sinned as well. Jesus dies for the communal sins. As a result, human communities are forgiven and reconciled to God, and through the event of communal forgiveness, individual human sins can be forgiven as well. Moving the focal point of atonement to communal sins has various advantages: well-known objections to satisfaction and penal theories are avoided, and many of the advantages of other theories of the atonement are organically integrated into the communal substitution theory.
    SinAtonementChristian Ethics
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback