-
88Type Crossings: Sentential Meaninglessness in the Border Area of Linguistics and PhilosophyPhilosophical Quarterly 17 (69): 366. 1967.
-
512It is shown how the title question ("Why Be Moral?") can be interpreted in six different ways. Each of the six ways is analyzed and discussed, and, for each of them, an answer to the question is proposed and defended.
-
1160The Argument from Non-BeliefReligious Studies 29 (4): 417-432. 1993.Attempts have been made to prove God's non-existence. Often this takes the form of an appeal to the so-called Argument from Evil: if God were to exist, then he would not permit as much suffering in the world as there actually is. Hence the fact that there is so much suffering constitutes evidence for God's non-existence. In this essay I propose a variation which I shall call ‘The Argument from Non-belief’. Its basic idea is that if God were to exist, then he would not permit as much non-belief i…Read more
-
110Reply to CriticsPhilo 8 (2): 169-182. 2005.In this essay I respond to comments on my work by Stephen T. Davis and Keith Parsons.
-
143Liar SyllogismsAnalysis 50 (1): 1-7. 1990.This article is about self-referential arguments that are akin to the paradox of the liar. They make reference to their own validity, invalidity, soundness, unsoundness, or to the truth or falsity of their own premises or conclusions. Several very puzzling examples of such arguments are considered and their paradoxicality is defended against objections.
-
77My answer to the title question is a qualified "Yes." A certain rare form of creationism is in principle testable and compatible with natural law, and therefore scientific, however, this is a moot point. I arrive at my conclusions purely through thought experiments. But before getting to that, let us first consider the issues of what creationism is and what it means for a theory to be scientific.
Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America
Areas of Interest
| Epistemology |
| Philosophy of Religion |