-
54The probability of particular eventsPhilosophy of Science 38 (3): 327-343. 1971.The paper investigates what are the proper procedures for calculating the probability on certain evidence of a particular object e having a property, Q, e.g. of Eclipse winning the Derby. Let `α ' denote the conjunction of properties known to be possessed by e, and P(Q)/α the probability of an object which is α being Q. One view is that the probability of e being Q is given by the best confirmed value of P(Q)/α . This view is shown not to be generally true, but to provide a useful approximation …Read more
-
301MiraclesPhilosophical Quarterly 18 (73): 320-328. 1968.(I UNDERSTAND BY A MIRACLE, A VIOLATION OF A LAW OF NATURE BY A GOD.) A VIOLATION OF A LAW OF NATURE IS THE OCCURRENCE OF A NON-REPEATABLE COUNTER-INSTANCE TO IT. CONTRARY TO HUME’S VIEW, THERE COULD BE GOOD HISTORICAL EVIDENCE BOTH THAT A VIOLATION HAD OCCURRED AND THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE ACT OF A GOD
-
75Choosing between confirmation theoriesPhilosophy of Science 37 (4): 602-613. 1970.ON WHAT GROUNDS OUGHT WE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN COMPETING CONFIRMATION THEORIES? THE ARTICLE BEGINS BY DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN CONFIRMATION THEORIES AND OTHER THEORIES WHICH MIGHT BE CONFUSED WITH THEM, SUCH AS THEORIES OF ACCEPTABILITY. IT THEN ARGUES THAT A CONFIRMATION THEORY OUGHT TO ANALYSE RATHER THAN EXPLICATE OUR ORDINARY STANDARDS OF CONFIRMATION. IT WILL DO THIS IN SO FAR AS IT IS COHERENT AND DOES NOT YIELD COUNTERINTUITIVE JUDGMENTS
-
35Cohen on evidential supportMind 81 (322): 244-248. 1972.CENTRAL TO COHEN’S NEW THEORY OF INDUCTION IS THE CLAIM THAT THE SUPPORT GIVEN BY EVIDENCE TO A HYPOTHESIS IS NOT A FUNCTION WHICH OBEYS THE AXIOMS OF THE PROBABILITY CALCULUS. THIS CLAIM DEPENDS ON THE TRUTH OF COHEN’S INSTANTIAL COMPARABILITY PRINCIPLE. UNDER NATURAL INTERPRETATIONS OF ’SUPPORT’, THIS PRINCIPLE IS FALSE. EVEN IF IT IS TRUE UNDER OTHER INTERPRETATIONS OF ’SUPPORT’, THAT DOES NOT SHOW THAT CONFIRMATION IN CARNAP’S SENSE DOES NOT OBEY THE AXIOMS
-
154Phenomenal Conservatism and Religious ExperienceIn Matthew A. Benton, John Hawthorne & Dani Rabinowitz (eds.), Knowledge, Belief, and God: New Insights in Religious Epistemology, Oxford University Press. pp. 322-338. 2018.
-
Review of Clark N. Glymour: Theory and Evidence (review)British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32 (3): 314-318. 1981.
-
38Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks By Nicholas Wolterstorff Cambridge University Press, 1995, 326 pp., £37.50 hb, £12.95 pb (review)Philosophy 71 (277): 465-. 1996.
-
32Could God Become Man?Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series 25 53-70. 1989.The central doctrine of Christianity is that God intervened in human history in the person of Jesus Christ in a unique way; and that quickly became understood as the doctrine that in Jesus Christ God became man. In AD 451 the Council of Chalcedon formulated that doctrine in a precise way utilizing the current philosophical terminology, which provided a standard for the orthodoxy of subsequent thought on this issue. It affirmed its belief in ‘our Lord Jesus Christ, … truly God and truly man, … in…Read more
-
54Richard Swinburne: Christian Philosophy in a Modern World (edited book)Ontos Verlag. 2008.Richard Swinburne is one of the most influential contemporaryproponents of the analytical philosophy of religion.
-
50William Hasker: Metaphysics and the Tri-personal god: Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013, 269 pp. $90.00International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 76 (1): 99-101. 2014.This is the first full-length study of the doctrine of the Trinity by an analytic philosopher. It appears in a new series, “Oxford Studies in Analytic Theology,” and so reflects the growing interest within analytic philosophy of religion in the application of the tools and results of analytic philosophy to Christian doctrinal claims. Hasker is concerned almost entirely to make sense of the doctrine rather than justify it, and claims to have reached “a coherent, meaningful, scripturally adequate,…Read more
-
2The Argument from Laws of Nature ReassessedIn M. Ruse & W. Dembski (eds.), Debating Design: From Darwin to Dna, Cambridge University Press. 2004.I analyze different accounts of laws of nature: the Hume-Lewis regularity account, the Armstrong-Tooley relations between universals account, and my preferred account in terms of the powers and liabilities of individual substances. On any account it is most unlikely a priori that a universe would be governed by simple laws of nature. But if there is a God, it is quite probable that he will choose to create free agents of limited power, and to put them in a universe governed by simple laws of nat…Read more
-
715Bayes' TheoremRevue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 194 (2): 250-251. 2004.Richard Swinburne: Introduction Elliott Sober: Bayesianism - its scopes and limits Colin Howson: Bayesianism in Statistics A P Dawid: Bayes's Theorem and Weighing Evidence by Juries John Earman: Bayes, Hume, Price, and Miracles David Miller: Propensities May Satisfy Bayes's Theorem 'An Essay Towards Solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances' by Thomas Bayes, presented to the Royal Society by Richard Price. Preceded by a historical introduction by G A Barnard
-
181Relations between universals,or divine laws?Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (2). 2006.Armstrong's theory of laws of nature as relations between universals gives an initially plausible account of why the causal powers of substances are bound together only in certain ways, so that the world is a very regular place. But its resulting theory of causation cannot account for intentional causation, since this involves an agent trying to do something, and trying is causing. This kind of causation is thus a state of an agent and does not involve the operation of a law. It is simpler to su…Read more
-
2The Vocation of a Natural TheologianIn K. J. Clark (ed.), Philosophers Who Believe, Clark, Kelly James (Ed), Intervarsity Pr. 1994.I outlined my academic career, and my reasons for writing the books which I did --to analyze the meaning and bring out the justification of the central claims of the Christian religion. For the first ten years of my academic career I wrote on the philosophy of science. Having developed a view about what confirms what, I applied it first to the claim that there is a God, in my trilogy on "The Philosophy of Theism"; and then to the specific claims of Christianity.
-
113Some Major Strands of TheodicyIn D. Howard-Snycer (ed.), The Evidential Argument From Evil, Indiana Univ Pr. pp. 30-48. 1996.Theodicy would be an impossible task if the only good states were pleasures and the only bad states were pains. This paper lists many other and greater goods, and shows that many of these cannot be had without corresponding bad states. These goods include the satisfaction of persistent desires, desires for incompatible good states, compassion with people in serious trouble, free choice of the good despite temptation, and being of use to others in providing knowledge and opportunities of certain …Read more
-
74The Modal Argument is Not CircularFaith and Philosophy 15 (3): 371-372. 1998.Hasker’s claim that my modal argument for substance dualism is epistemically circular is implausible. Someone can accept Premise 2 (which, Hasker claims, is the premise which generates the circularity) without ever understanding the conclusion, or without accepting Premise 3.
-
Eddy Nahmias, D. Justin Coates, and Trevor kvaranIn Peter A. French & Howard K. Wettstein (eds.), Philosophy and the Empirical, Blackwell. pp. 31--5. 2007.
-
Intellectual AutobiographyIn Richard Swinburne & Alan G. Padgett (eds.), Reason and the Christian Religion: Essays in Honour of Richard Swinburne, Oxford University Press. pp. 1--18. 1994.
-
3Philosophical theismIn D. Z. Phillips & Timothy Tessin (eds.), Philosophy of religion in the 21st century, Palgrave. pp. 3--20. 2001.