-
678Naturalism: A Critical Analysis (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (4): 576-577. 2001.Review of Craig And Mroeland: *Naturalism: A Critical Analysis*
-
405Review 'The Rationality of Theism', ed. by P. Copan and P. Moser (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (3): 535-8. 2004.Critical review of *The Rationality of Theism*, a collection of new essays edited by Paul Copan and Paul Moser.
-
510Leftow on God and NecessityEuropean Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6 (3): 5-16. 2014.This paper is a critical examination of some of the major themes of Brian Leftow's book *God and Necessity*.
-
1383Sceptical theism and evidential arguments from evilAustralasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (4). 2003.Sceptical theists--e.g., William Alston and Michael Bergmann--have claimed that considerations concerning human cognitive limitations are alone sufficient to undermine evidential arguments from evil. We argue that, if the considerations deployed by sceptical theists are sufficient to undermine evidential arguments from evil, then those considerations are also sufficient to undermine inferences that play a crucial role in ordinary moral reasoning. If cogent, our argument suffices to discredit sce…Read more
-
960Craig’s Kalam CosmologyPhilo 12 (2): 200-216. 2009.Hypotheses about the shape of causal reality admit of both theistic and non-theistic interpretations. I argue that, on the simplest hypotheses about the causal shape of reality—infinite regress, contingent initial boundary, necessary initial boundary—there is good reason to suppose that non-theism is always either preferable to, or at least the equal of, theism, at least insofar as we restrict our attention merely to the domain of explanation of existence. Moreover, I suggest that it is perfectl…Read more
-
645'The Divine Lawmaker', by John Foster (review)Faith and Philosophy 23 (1): 111-16. 2006.Short, critical review of John Foster's book *The Divine Lawmaker*
-
1001Koons' Cosmological ArgumentFaith and Philosophy 16 (3): 378-389. 1999.Robert Koons has recently defended what he claims is a successful argument for the existence of a necessary first cause, and which he develops by taking “a new look” at traditional arguments from contingency. I argue that Koons’ argument is less than successful; in particular, I claim that his attempt to “shift the burden of proof” to non-theists amounts to nothing more than an ill-disguised begging of one of the central questions upon which theists and non-theists disagree. I also argue that hi…Read more
-
629Objection to a simplified ontological argumentAnalysis 71 (1): 105-106. 2011.This paper offers a short extension of the dialogue between Anselm and the Fool that is contained in "The Ontological Argument Simplified" by Gary Matthews and Lynne Rudder Baker. My extension of the dialogue ends with the Fool proclaiming that "what looks like an argument of elegant simplicity turns out to be no argument at all".
-
26Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion (edited book)Routledge. 2015.This book is a collection of chapters on contemporary philosophy of religion by a wide range of authors: Beverley Clack; John Manoussakis; Nick Trakakis; Trent Dougherty; Logan Paul Gage; Genia Schonbaumsfeld; Harriet Harris; Karyn Lai; Imran Aijaz; Monima Chadha; John Bishop; Jerome Gellman; Mark Wynn; Bryan Frances; Ed Feser; Michael Scott; Roger M. White; David Bartholomew; Kevin Hart; Victoria Harrison; Marci Hamilton; Medhi Aminrazavi; Daniel McKaughan; Michael Smith; David Oderberg; Neil L…Read more
-
250
-
605Hume and the argument for biological designBiology and Philosophy 11 (4): 519-534. 1996.There seems to be a widespread conviction — evidenced, for example, in the work of Mackie, Dawkins and Sober — that it is Darwinian rather than Humean considerations which deal the fatal logical blow to arguments for intelligent design. I argue that this conviction cannot be well-founded. If there are current logically decisive objections to design arguments, they must be Humean — for Darwinian considerations count not at all against design arguments based upon apparent cosmological fine-tuning.…Read more
-
551“Uncaused Beginnings” RevisitedFaith and Philosophy 32 (2): 205-210. 2015.This paper is a response to William Lane Craig's criticisms of my previous paper "Uncaused Beginnings". I argue that Craig's criticisms do not inflict any damage on the arguments of that earlier paper.
-
298On behalf of the foolAnalysis 71 (2): 304-306. 2011.This paper responds to a previous paper by Gary Matthews and Lynne Rudder Baker. Their paper, in turn, was a response to my reply to an even earlier paper of theirs. (The relevant bibliographical details are in this paper.) They claim to have a new, improved, simple ontological argument. I argue that the new, simple ontological argument is not, in any way, improved.
-
2276Religious Language GamesIn Michael Scott & Adrian Moore (eds.), Realism and Religion, Ashgate. pp. 103-29. 2007.This paper is a critique of Witgensteinian approaches to philosophy of religion. In particular, it provides a close critique of the views of D. Z. Phillips.
-
301From physics to philosophy. Jeremy buttereld, Constantine Pagonis (review)Mind 110 (439): 732-736. 2001.This is a review of *From Physics to Philosophy* (edited by Jeremy Butterfield and Constantine Pagonis).
-
15'The History of Western Philosophy of Religion' brings together an international team of over 100 leading scholars to provide authoritative exposition of how history's most important philosophical thinkers - from antiquity to the present day - have sought to analyse the concepts and tenets central to Western religious belief, especially Christianity. Divided chronologically into five volumes, 'The History of Western Philosophy of Religion' is designed to be accessible to a wide range of readers,…Read more
-
346Norms of assertionIn Dirk Greimann & Geo Siegwart (eds.), Truth and Speech Acts: Studies in the Philosophy of Language, Routledge. pp. 5--226. 2007.This chapter discusses norms of assertion. I defend the view that the sole constitutive norm of assertion is that you should not assert what you do not believe. I also discuss the views of some--e.g. Grice, Williamson--who have defended the stronger view that the sole constitutive norm of assertion is that you should not assert what you do not know.
-
234Arguing About GodsCambridge University Press. 2006.In this book, Graham Oppy examines arguments for and against the existence of God. He shows that none of these arguments is powerful enough to change the minds of reasonable participants in debates on the question of the existence of God. His conclusion is supported by detailed analyses of the arguments as well as by the development of a theory about the purpose of arguments and the criteria that should be used in judging whether or not arguments are successful. Oppy discusses the work of a wide…Read more
-
239Philosophical Perspectives on InfinityCambridge University Press. 2006.This book is an exploration of philosophical questions about infinity. Graham Oppy examines how the infinite lurks everywhere, both in science and in our ordinary thoughts about the world. He also analyses the many puzzles and paradoxes that follow in the train of the infinite. Even simple notions, such as counting, adding and maximising present serious difficulties. Other topics examined include the nature of space and time, infinities in physical science, infinities in theories of probability …Read more
-
90Describing Gods: An Investigation of Divine AttributesCambridge University Press. 2014.This book begins with a careful taxonomy of divine attributes. It continues with detailed examinations of: divine infinity; divine simplicity; divine perfection; divine necessity; omnipotence; omniscience; divine goodness; divine beauty; divine fundamentality; divine will; divine freedom; etc.
-
659Salmon on the contingent a priori and the necessary a posterioriPhilosophical Studies 73 (1). 1994.This paper is an examination of the contingent a priori and the necessary a posteriori. In particular, it considers -- and assesses -- the criticisms that Nathan Salmon makes of the views of Saul Kripke.
-
586Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument (Again)Philo 10 (1): 72-84. 2007.In “On Oppy’s Objections to the Modal Perfection Argument,” Philo 8, 2, 2005, 123–30, Robert Maydole argues that his modal perfection argument—set out in his “The Modal Perfection Argument for a Supreme Being,” Philo 6, 2, 2003, 299–313—“remains arguably sound” in the face of the criticisms that I made of this argument in my “Maydole’s 2QS5 Argument,” Philo 7, 2, 2004, 203–11. I reply that Maydole is wrong: his argument is fatally flawed, and his attempts to avoid the criticisms that I have made…Read more
-
280Makin on the Ontological ArgumentPhilosophy 66 (255). 1991.This paper is a critique of Stephen Makin's ontological argument. To some extent, the argument of this paper is recapitulated in *Ontological Arguments and Belief in God* (CUP, 1996).
-
1Inter-Christian Philosophical Dialogues (edited book)Routledge. 2017.This book is a collection of exchanges between Christian philosophers who adopt very different perspectives on Christianity.
-
183Response to MaydoleIn Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today, Ontos Verlag. pp. 445-68. 2012.This paper is my second contribution to the Szatkowski volume. In the first paper, I provide a critical discussion of Bob Maydole's ontological arguments. In this second paper, I respond to Maydole's critical response to my first paper. My overall verdict is that Maydole does not successfully defend his arguments against my critical attack.
-
525As the chapter headings--and title--reveal, the book is about the role of causation and chance in modern science, and, in particular, in modern cosmology. However, because the book is shot through with serious conceptual confusion, anyone who is interested in actually learning something about the role of causation and chance in modern science is advised to look elsewhere.
-
281Biblical Science? (review)Philo 1 (2): 68-78. 1998.Short critical review of Gerard Schroeder's *The Science of God*.
-
45Reinventing Philosophy of Religion: An Opinionated IntroductionPalgrave-Macmillan. 2014.This book is an opinionated introduction to philosophy of religion. It is divided into three parts: one on epistemology, one on metaphysics, and one on values. The book embodies an approach to philosophy of religion that is very different from prevalent contemporary approaches.
-
308A fairly lengthy book review that appears at the Secular Web.
Areas of Specialization
Philosophy of Religion |
Areas of Interest
Epistemology |
Metaphysics |
Philosophy of Language |