Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response

This paper responds to the modal collapse argument against divine simplicity or classical theism offered by neo-classical or complex theists. The modal collapse argument claims that if God is both absolutely simple and absolutely necessary, then God’s act of creation is absolutely necessary, and the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Khalil Andani
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Rijeka. Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences 2022-01-01
Series:European Journal of Analytic Philosophy
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/416065
_version_ 1811291142976700416
author Khalil Andani
author_facet Khalil Andani
author_sort Khalil Andani
collection DOAJ
description This paper responds to the modal collapse argument against divine simplicity or classical theism offered by neo-classical or complex theists. The modal collapse argument claims that if God is both absolutely simple and absolutely necessary, then God’s act of creation is absolutely necessary, and therefore, the existence of the created world is also absolutely necessary. This means that God and His creation collapse into a single modal category of absolute necessity without any contingent beings. My response is grounded in the Islamic Neoplatonic philosophy of Ibn Sina and the Ismaili tradition. I offer four arguments that allow a Muslim Neoplatonist to absorb a modal collapse in a possible worlds modality while negating modal collapse within an Avicennian modality: First, the modal collapse objection is based on a possible worlds framework whose concept of necessity is overly broad; this framework fails to distinguish between God as ontologically necessary in Himself, created being as dependently necessary through another, and mere logical necessity, all of which are recognized by Ibn Sina and Islamic thinkers. Second, modal collapse arguments only demonstrate that creation is necessary through another but fails to prove that creation has ontological necessity or aseity––which only pertains to God; thus, no consequential modal collapse ensues when one’s modality recognizes creation as a “dependent necessary being” despite being modally necessary. Third, Islamic philosophers have a non-libertarian concept of God’s will and freedom that is immune to modal collapse objections. Finally, I argue that all classical and neo-classical theists must embrace a modally necessary creation because libertarian models of God’s will entail uncaused and brutely contingent effects.
first_indexed 2024-04-13T04:24:02Z
format Article
id doaj.art-767085cfe910426bb1443a5e286250b7
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1845-8475
1849-0514
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-13T04:24:02Z
publishDate 2022-01-01
publisher University of Rijeka. Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
record_format Article
series European Journal of Analytic Philosophy
spelling doaj.art-767085cfe910426bb1443a5e286250b72022-12-22T03:02:36ZengUniversity of Rijeka. Faculty of Humanities and Social SciencesEuropean Journal of Analytic Philosophy1845-84751849-05142022-01-01182S733Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic ResponseKhalil Andani0Augustana CollegeThis paper responds to the modal collapse argument against divine simplicity or classical theism offered by neo-classical or complex theists. The modal collapse argument claims that if God is both absolutely simple and absolutely necessary, then God’s act of creation is absolutely necessary, and therefore, the existence of the created world is also absolutely necessary. This means that God and His creation collapse into a single modal category of absolute necessity without any contingent beings. My response is grounded in the Islamic Neoplatonic philosophy of Ibn Sina and the Ismaili tradition. I offer four arguments that allow a Muslim Neoplatonist to absorb a modal collapse in a possible worlds modality while negating modal collapse within an Avicennian modality: First, the modal collapse objection is based on a possible worlds framework whose concept of necessity is overly broad; this framework fails to distinguish between God as ontologically necessary in Himself, created being as dependently necessary through another, and mere logical necessity, all of which are recognized by Ibn Sina and Islamic thinkers. Second, modal collapse arguments only demonstrate that creation is necessary through another but fails to prove that creation has ontological necessity or aseity––which only pertains to God; thus, no consequential modal collapse ensues when one’s modality recognizes creation as a “dependent necessary being” despite being modally necessary. Third, Islamic philosophers have a non-libertarian concept of God’s will and freedom that is immune to modal collapse objections. Finally, I argue that all classical and neo-classical theists must embrace a modally necessary creation because libertarian models of God’s will entail uncaused and brutely contingent effects.https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/416065modal collapsedivine simplicityIsmailiAvicennalibertariantheism
spellingShingle Khalil Andani
Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response
European Journal of Analytic Philosophy
modal collapse
divine simplicity
Ismaili
Avicenna
libertarian
theism
title Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response
title_full Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response
title_fullStr Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response
title_full_unstemmed Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response
title_short Divine Simplicity and The Myth of Modal Collapse: An Islamic Neoplatonic Response
title_sort divine simplicity and the myth of modal collapse an islamic neoplatonic response
topic modal collapse
divine simplicity
Ismaili
Avicenna
libertarian
theism
url https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/416065
work_keys_str_mv AT khalilandani divinesimplicityandthemythofmodalcollapseanislamicneoplatonicresponse