Volume 36, Issue 3, July 2019
Hugh Burling
Pages 343-371
https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201987127
The Reference of ¡°God¡± Revisited
I argue that the reference for ¡°God¡± is determined by the definite description ¡°the being that is worthy of our worship.¡± I describe two desiderata for rival theories of the reference of ¡°God¡± to meet: accessibility and scope. I explain the deficiencies of a view where God is dubbed ¡°God¡± and the name passed down by causal chains and a view where ¡°God¡± picks out the unique satisfier of a traditional definite description. After articulating the ¡°Worship-Worthiness¡± view, I show how it best satisfies the desiderata. I then respond to some putative counterexamples to the view.