The Holy Trinity and the Ontology of Relations

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…Lowe's and John Heil's notion of a mode. Paoletti (2019) then applied this reformulated theory of O-Roles to certain logical issues concerning the Trinity. Despite the plausibility of Paloletti's proposal, this development cannot affirm the numerical identity (yet qualitative distinctiveness) of the members of the Trinity-as a mode is not identical to its bearer-and thus, given this, I will stick with Orilia's position that O-Roles are simply sui generis properties (which, however, provides 'conceptual room' to conceive of them as aspects within a theistic context).…”

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…Lowe's and John Heil's notion of a mode. Paoletti (2019) then applied this reformulated theory of O-Roles to certain logical issues concerning the Trinity. Despite the plausibility of Paloletti's proposal, this development cannot affirm the numerical identity (yet qualitative distinctiveness) of the members of the Trinity-as a mode is not identical to its bearer-and thus, given this, I will stick with Orilia's position that O-Roles are simply sui generis properties (which, however, provides 'conceptual room' to conceive of them as aspects within a theistic context).…”

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…Lowe's and John Heil's notion of a mode. Paoletti (2019) then applied this reformulated theory of O-Roles to certain logical issues concerning the Trinity. Despite the plausibility of Paloletti's proposal, this development cannot affirm the numerical identity (yet qualitative distinctiveness) of the members of the Trinity-as a mode is not identical to its bearer-and thus, given this, I will stick with Orilia's position that O-Roles are simply sui generis properties (which, however, provides 'conceptual room' to conceive of them as aspects within a theistic context).…”

The Logical Problem of the Trinity: A New Solution

“…Lowe's and John Heil's notion of a mode. Paoletti (2019) then applied this reformulated theory of O-Roles to certain logical issues concerning the Trinity. Despite the plausibility of Paloletti's proposal, this development cannot affirm the numerical identity (yet qualitative distinctiveness) of the members of the Trinity-as a mode is not identical to its bearer-and thus, given this, I will stick with Orilia's position that O-Roles are simply sui generis properties (which, however, provides 'conceptual room' to conceive of them as aspects within a theistic context).…”