-
636Inverse Operations with Transfinite Numbers and the Kalam Cosmological ArgumentInternational Philosophical Quarterly 35 (2): 219-221. 1995.William Lane Craig has argued that there cannot be actual infinities because inverse operations are not well-defined for infinities. I point out that, in fact, there are mathematical systems in which inverse operations for infinities are well-defined. In particular, the theory introduced in John Conway's *On Numbers and Games* yields a well-defined field that includes all of Cantor's transfinite numbers.
-
680Naturalism: A Critical Analysis (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (4): 576-577. 2001.Review of Craig And Mroeland: *Naturalism: A Critical Analysis*
-
883Kalām cosmological arguments: Reply to professor CraigSophia 34 (2): 15-29. 1995.This paper is a reply to Professor William Lane Craig's “Graham Oppy On The kalām Cosmological Argument” Sophia 32.1, 1993, pp. 1–11. Further references to the literature are contained therein.
-
396On the lack of true philosophic spirit in AquinasPhilosophy 76 (4): 615-624. 2001.Mark Nelson claims that Russell's remarks—in his History of Western Philosophy—about Aquinas are ‘breathtakingly supercilious and unfair’ and ‘sniffy’. I argue that Nelson completely misrepresents Russell's criticisms of Aquinas. In particular, I argue that the silly epistemological doctrine which Nelson attributes to Russell plays no role at all in the criticism which Russell actually makes of Aquinas. Since—as Nelson himself concedes—there is no other reason to think that Russell commits himse…Read more
-
43A note about a Quinean argument against direct referencePhilosophia 24 (1-2): 157-170. 1994.In this paper, I argue -- against Steven Wagner -- that Nathan Salmon's semantic theory is not refuted by a suitable variant of Quine's slingshot (Word and Object, 148-9).
-
778Review of Reason for the Hope Within (review)Chapter 1: "Reason for Hope " by Michael J. Murray Chapter 2: "Theistic Arguments" by William C. Davis Chapter 3: "A Scientific Argument for the Existence of God: The Fine- Tuning Design Argument" by Robin Collins Chapter 4: "God, Evil and Suffering" by Daniel Howard Snyder Chapter 5: "Arguments for Atheism" by John O'Leary Hawthorne Chapter 6: "Faith and Reason" by Caleb Miller Chapter 7: "Religious Pluralism" by Timothy O'Connor Chapter 8: "Eastern Religions" by Robin Collins Chapter 9: "Divin…Read more
-
593Higher-order ontological argumentsPhilosophy Compass 3 (5): 1066-1078. 2008.This paper discusses recent work on higher-order ontological arguments, including work on arguments due to Gödel, Maydole and Pruss. After setting out a range of these arguments, the paper seeks to highlight the principal difficulties that these kinds of arguments confront. One important aim of the paper is to cast light on Gödel's ontological argument by way of an examination of a range of related higher-order arguments.
-
1649Ultimate naturalistic casual explanationsIn Ty Goldschmidt (ed.), Why is the something rather than nothing?, Routledge. pp. 46-63. 2013.This paper discusses attempts to explain why there are more than zero instances of the causal relation. In particular, it argues for the conclusion that theism is no better placed than naturalism to provide an "ultimate causal explanation".
-
819O'Connor's Cosmological ArgumentOxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion: Vol. 3 3 (1): 166. 2011.This chapter is a critical discussion of the third chapter of Tim O'Connor's *Theism and Ultimate Explanation*. In this chapter, O'Connor advances the 'existence stage' of his cosmological argument from contingency. I argue that naturalists have good reason to think that on each of the live hypotheses -- infinite regress, brute contingency, brute necessity -- naturalism is preferable to theism.
-
317Review : 'New Essays on the A Priori' ed. by P. Boghossian & C Peacocke (review)Australasian Journal of Philosophy 80 (3): 384-6. 2002.Review of *New Essays on the A Priori*, an excellent collection edited by Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke. Contributors include: Tyler Burge; Quassim Cassam; Philip Kitcher; Penelope Maddy; Hartry Field; Paul Horwich; Peter Railton; Stephen Yablo; Bob Hale; Crispin Wright; Frank Jackson; Stewart Shapiro; Michael Friedman; Martin Davies; Bill Brewer; and Thomas Nagel.
-
602Faulty Reasoning About Default Principles in Cosmological ArgumentsFaith and Philosophy 21 (2): 242-249. 2004.Robert Koons claims that my previous critique of his “new” cosmological argument is vitiated by confusion about the nature of defeasible argumentation.In response, I claim that Koons misrepresents—and perhaps misunderstands—the nature of my objections to his “new” cosmological argument. The main claims which I defend are: (1) that the move from a non-defeasible to a defeasible causal principle makes absolutely no difference to the success of the cosmological argument in which it is contained; an…Read more
-
410The ontological argument from Descartes to Hegel (review) (review)Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (2). 2010.Kevin Harrelson's book commences with the following words: This book provides a philosophical analysis of the several debates concerning the "ontological argument" from the middle of the seventeenth to the beginning of the nineteenth century. My aim in writing it was twofold. First, I wished to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of the history of these debates, which I perceived to be lacking in the scholarly literature. Second, I wanted also to pursue a more philosophically interestin…Read more
-
448Nagel on religion, politics and humanity (review)Analysis 70 (3): 562-567. 2010.Review of Nagel's book, focusing on the chapters that are specifically concerned with religion.
-
1211Arguing About The Kalam Cosmological ArgumentPhilo 5 (1): 34-61. 2002.This paper begins with a fairly careful and detailed discussion of the conditions under which someone who presents an argument ought to be prepared to concede that the argument is unsuccessful. The conclusions reached in this discussion are then applied to William Lane Craig’s defense of what he calls “the kalam cosmological argument.” Perhaps unsurprisingly, the chief contention of the paper is that Craig ought to be prepared to concede that “the kalam cosmological argument” is not a successful…Read more
-
1492Pantheism, Quantification and MereologyThe Monist 80 (2): 320-336. 1997.I provide a classification of varieties of pantheism. I argue that there are two different kinds of commitments that pantheists have. On the one hand, there is an ontological commitment to the existence of a sum of all things. On the other hand, there is an ideological commitment: either collectively or distributively, the sum of all things is divine.
-
338Developmental theism: From pure will to unbounded love – by Peter Forrest (review)Dialectica 62 (4): 549-553. 2008.Review of Peter Forrest's "Development Theism".
-
771Science, Religion, and InfinityIn J. B. Stump & Alan G. Padgett (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Science and Christianity, Wiley. pp. 430-440. 2012.This chapter contains sections titled: * Brief History * How We Talk * Science and Infinity * Religion and Infinity * Concluding Remarks * Notes * References * Further Reading
-
245Maydole on Ontological ArgumentsIn Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today, Ontos Verlag. pp. 445. 2012.This paper is an assessment of Robert Maydole's work on ontological arguments. (Bibliographical details are provided in the text.) I argue that Maydole's ontological arguments are unsuccessful.
-
339Williams on Kaplan on the contingent analyticRatio 8 (2): 189-192. 1995.This paper is a reply to a prior work by C. J. F. Williams in which he criticised David Kaplan's account of the contingent analytic. In this paper, I take myself to be defending Kaplan's views against Williams' attack.
Areas of Specialization
Philosophy of Religion |
Areas of Interest
Epistemology |
Metaphysics |
Philosophy of Language |