Faith and Philosophy

Volume 13, Issue 2, April 1996

Peter Forrest
Pages 179-200

Physicalism and Classical Theism

In this paper I compare two versions of non-eliminative physicalism (reductive physicalism and supervenience physicalism) with four of the five theses of classical theism: divine non-contingency, divine transcendence, divine simplicity, and the aseity thesis. I argue that: 1. Both physicalism (either version) and classical theism require intuition-transcending identifications of some properties or possibilities. 2. Among other identifications, both reductive physicalism and classical theism need to identify psychological with functional properties. 3. Both reductive physicalism and classical theism have a problem with consciousness. 4. Both reductive physicalists and classical theists should distinguish fine and coarse grained theories of properties.