PhilArchive
open access
Cartesian Dualism and the Intermediate State: A Reply to Turner Jr
In this paper, I propose to analyse two objections raised by Turner Jr in his paper “On Two Reasons Christian Theologians Should Reject The Intermediate State” in order to show that the intermediate state is an incoherent theory. As we shall see, the two untoward consequences that he mentions do not imply a metaphysical or logical contradiction. Consequently, I shall defend an Intermediate State and I shall propose briefly one metaphysical conception of the human being able to reply to Turner Jr’s objections.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- A Sound Cartesian Argument from Doubt for Dualism#723803
- Turner as a Daoist Sage#17620
- Comments on Mark Kalderon's “The Open Question Argument, Frege's Puzzle, and Leibniz's Law”#116459
- Quantum Holism: Reconciling Extended Simples with Supersubstantivalism#744850
- Priestley Duality for Bilattices#89999
Record · ID 761566
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive