-
253Analysis of Existing: Barry Miller's Approach to God, by Elmar J. Kremer: New York: Bloomsbury, 2014, pp. xiv + 143, AU$148 (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93 (2): 409-410. 2015.Review of Kremer's book on Barry Miller's approach to God. (I have discussed Miller's argument from contingency in other publications.)
-
162Contemporary Readings in the Foundations of Metaphysics (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77 (4): 519-521. 1999.Book review.
-
313"Humean" Supervenience?Philosophical Studies 101 (1): 77-105. 2000.As with many aspects of David Lewis’s work, it is hard to provide a better summary of his views than he provided himself. So the following introduction to what the Humean Supervenience view is will follow the opening pages of Lewis (1994a) extremely closely. But for those readers who haven’t read that paper, here’s the nickel version.
-
561Weak agnosticism defendedInternational Journal for Philosophy of Religion 36 (3). 1994.Agnosticism has had some bad press in recent years. Nonetheless, I hope to show that agnosticism can be so formulated that it is no less philosophically respectable than theism and atheism. This is not a mere philosophical exercise; for, as it happens, the formulated position is--I think--the one to which I subscribe. I include a qualification here since it may be that the position to which I subscribe is better characterised as fallibilist atheism--but more of that anon
-
1528Anselm and the ontological argumentIn Jeff Jordan (ed.), Philosophy of Religion: The Key Thinkers, Continuum. pp. 22-43. 2011.This chapter gives an exposition and critique of Anselm's Proslogion II argument.
-
163Review of "Bangs, crunches, shrieks, whispers" by J Earman (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76 (2): 352-4. 1998.Positive review of John Earman's *Bangs, Crunches, Shrieks, Whispers*.
-
1461From the Tristram Shandy Paradox to the Christmas Shandy Paradox: Reply to OderbergArs Disputandi 3 172-195. 2003.This paper is a response to David Oderberg's criticisms of a previous paper of mine. (Bibliographical details are provided in the article.)
-
555The Ontological Argument (Cambridge Classic Philosophical Arguments Series) (edited book)Cambridge University Press. 2018.In this Introduction, we begin with two relatively uncontroversial matters: the broad contours of the history of discussion of ontological arguments, and the major topics that require discussion in connection with ontological arguments. We then move on to consideration of the much more difficult task of the characterisation of ontological arguments—i.e. the task of saying exactly what ontological arguments are and explaining how they differ from, say, cosmological, teleological, and moral argume…Read more
-
306Natural theologyIn Deane-Peter Baker (ed.), Alvin Plantinga: Contemporary Philosophy in Focus, Cambridge University Press. pp. 15-47. 2007.This paper is a careful examination of the various approaches that Alvin Plantinga has taken towards natural theology over the course of his academic career (from *God and Other Minds* to *Warranted Christian Belief*). In his earliest works, Plantinga has a very clear and strict conception of the project of natural theology, and he argues very clearly (and correctly) that that project fails. In his middle works, Plantinga has a tolerably clear and slightly less strict conception of the project o…Read more
-
872Where’s the biff?Erkenntnis 68 (2): 149-68. 2008.This paper presents an attempt to integrate theories of causal processes—of the kind developed by Wesley Salmon and Phil Dowe—into a theory of causal models using Bayesian networks. We suggest that arcs in causal models must correspond to possible causal processes. Moreover, we suggest that when processes are rendered physically impossible by what occurs on distinct paths, the original model must be restricted by removing the relevant arc. These two techniques suffice to explain cases of late pr…Read more
-
980Professor William Craig’s Criticisms of Critiques of Kalam Cosmological Arguments By Paul Davies, Stephen Hawking, and Adolf GrunbaumFaith and Philosophy 12 (2): 237-250. 1995.Kalam cosmological arguments have recently been the subject of criticisms, at least inter alia, by physicists---Paul Davies, Stephen Hawking---and philosophers of science---Adolf Grunbaum. In a series of recent articles, William Craig has attempted to show that these criticisms are “superficial, iII-conceived, and based on misunderstanding.” I argue that, while some of the discussion of Davies and Hawking is not philosophically sophisticated, the points raised by Davies, Hawking and Grunbaum do …Read more
-
323The Philosophical Insignificance of Gödel's SlingshotMind 106 (421): 121-142. 1997.This paper is a critical examination of Stephen Neale's *The Philosophical Significance of Godel's slingshot*. I am sceptical of the philosophical significance of Godel’s Slingshot (and of Slingshot arguments in general). In particular, I do not believe that Godel’s Slingshot has any interesting and important philosophical consequences for theories of facts or for referential treatments of definite descriptions. More generally, I do not believe that any Slingshot arguments have interesting and i…Read more
-
472Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology (review)Faith and Philosophy 13 (1): 125-133. 1996.This paper is a critical review of *Big Bang Cosmology* by Quentin Smith and William Lane Craig. (The book is a collection of previously published papers; most are concerned, in one way or another, with kalam cosmological arguments for the existence of God.).
-
518Maydole’s 2QS5 ArgumentPhilo 7 (2): 203-211. 2004.This paper is a reply to Robert Maydole’s “The Modal Perfection Argument for the Existence of a Supreme Being,” published in Philo 6, 2, 2003. I argue that Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument fails, and that there is no evident way in which it can be repaired.
-
366Paley’s Argument Revisited: Reply to SchupbachPhilosophia Christi 10 (2): 443-450. 2008.This paper is a reply to Jonah Schupbach's critique of a previous paper of mine on Paley's argument for design. (Bibliographical details for earlier publications are available in the paper.)
-
358Colonizing the galaxiesSophia 39 (2): 117-142. 2000.Paper presented in East-West Symposium on Science, Philosophy and Religion, Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy Meeting with Australasian Association of Philosophy Annual Conference, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, July 1999.
-
266Reply to Richard DavisPhilosophia Christi 11 (2): 423-436. 2009.This paper is a response to a paper by Rich Davis in which he argues that David Lewis' modal realism is inconsistent with classical theism. I provide what I take to be a coherent modal realist formulation of classical theism.
-
231Bruce Langtry's ‘God, the Best and Evil’ is a fine contribution to the literature. Here, I review the contents of the book, and then provide some critical remarks that, as fas as I know, have not been made elsewhere. In particular, I argue that his criticism of my formulations of logical arguments from evil (in my Arguing about Gods) is unsuccessful.
-
895Reply to Trakakis and NagasawaArs Disputandi 5 5-11. 2005.Nick Trakakis and Yujin Nagasawa criticise the argument in Almeida and Oppy . According to Trakakis and Nagasawa, we are mistaken in our claim that the sceptical theist response to evidential arguments from evil is unacceptable because it would undermine ordinary moral reasoning. In their view, there is no good reason to think that sceptical theism leads to an objectionable form of moral scepticism. We disagree. In this paper, we explain why we think that the argument of Nagasawa and Trakakis fa…Read more
Areas of Specialization
Philosophy of Religion |
Areas of Interest
Epistemology |
Metaphysics |
Philosophy of Language |