-
114Probability and defeatersPacific Philosophical Quarterly 84 (3). 2003.Branden Fitelson and Elliott Sober raise several objections to my evolutionary argument against naturalism; I reply to four of them.
-
170On Mereological EssentialismReview of Metaphysics 28 (3). 1975.This paper examines and comments on roderick chisholm's "parts as essential to their wholes", "review of metaphysics", Volume 26, 1973
-
43Christian Philosophy at the End of the 20th CenturyIn Sander Griffioen & Bert Balk (eds.), Christian Philosophy at the Close of the Twentieth Century, . 1995.
-
8Reply to Tooley's opening statementIn Knowledge of God, Blackwell. 2008.This chapter contains sections titled: Justification Tooley's Arguments The Justification of Theistic Belief Is Evil a Defeater for Belief in God?
-
2Induction and Other Minds, IIReview of Metaphysics 21 (3): 524-533. 1968.The analogical position, as traditionally understood, is the claim that a person can inductively infer the existence of other minds from what he knows about his own mind and about physical objects. Of course this body of knowledge must not include such propositions about physical objects as "that human body over there is animated by a human mind," or "this automobile was designed by a human mind"; nor could my evidence for the existence of other minds be that I have it on the authority of some o…Read more
-
71The Reformed Objection to Natural TheologyProceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 54 (n/a): 49. 1980.
-
278Naturalism, Theism, Obligation and SupervenienceFaith and Philosophy 27 (3): 247-272. 2010.Take naturalism to be the idea that there is no such person as God or anything like God. Many philosophers hold that naturalism can accommodate serious moral realism. Many philosophers (and many of the same philosophers) also believe that moral properties supervene on non-moral properties, and even on naturalistic properties (where a naturalistic property is one such that its exemplification is compatible with naturalism). I agree that they do thus supervene, and argue that this makes trouble fo…Read more
-
3Creation and Evolution: A Modest ProposalIn Robert T. Pennock (ed.), In Intelligent Design Creationism and its critics, Mit Press. 2001.
-
1Religious Belief as 'Properly Basic'In Brian Davies (ed.), Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology, Oxford University Press. 2000.
-
56. Gewährleisteter Glaube an GottIn Gewährleisteter Christlicher Glaube, De Gruyter. pp. 193-231. 2015.
-
248The Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism: An Initial Statement of the ArgumentIn Michael Ruse (ed.), Philosophy After Darwin: Classic and Contemporary Readings, Princeton University Press. pp. 301. 2009.This chapter contains sections titled: * Notes
-
108Evolution, Neutrality, and Antecedent Probability: a Reply to Van Till and McMullinChristian Scholar's Review 21 (1): 80-109. 1991.First, I'd like to thank Professors Van Till, Pun, and McMullin for their careful and thoughtful replies. There is a deep level of agreement among all four of us; as is customary with replies and replies to replies, however, I shall concentrate on our areas of disagreement. In the cases of Van Till and McMullin, this may give an impression of deeper disagreement than actually exists. In the case of Pun it leaves me with little to say except Yea and Amen; I find no serious disagreement between us…Read more
-
97Justification and TheismFaith and Philosophy 4 (4): 403-426. 1987.The question is: how should a theist think of justification or positive epistemic status? The answer I suggest is: a belief B has positive epistemic status for S only if S’s faculties are functioning properly (i.e., functioning in the way God intended them to) in producing B, and only if S’s cognitive environment is sufficiently similar to the one for which her faculties are designed; and under those conditions the more firmly S is inclined to accept B, the more positive epistemic status it has …Read more
-
268``An Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism"Logos. Anales Del Seminario de Metafísica [Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España] 12 27--48. 1991.Only in rational creatures is there found a likeness of God which counts as an image . . . . As far as a likeness of the divine nature is concerned, rational creatures seem somehow to attain a representation of [that] type in virtue of imitating God not only in this, that he is and lives, but especially in this, that he understands (ST Ia Q.93 a.6).
-
20Religious experience and religious belief: essays in the epistemology of religion (edited book)University Press of America. 1986.To find more information on Rowman & Littlefield titles, please visit us at www.rowmanlittlefield.com.
-
67. Die Sünde und ihre kognitiven KonsequenzenIn Gewährleisteter Christlicher Glaube, De Gruyter. pp. 232-282. 2015.
-
79The Analytic Theist: An Alvin Plantinga ReaderEerdmans. 1998.This collection of essays and excerpts gives a comprehensive overview of Alvin Plantinga 's seminal work as a Christian philosopher of religion
-
87Internalism, Externalism, Defeaters and Arguments for Christian BeliefPhilosophia Christi 3 (2): 379-400. 2001.
-
8Dios y el mal: la defensa del teísmo frente al problema del mal según Alvin PlantingaEunsa Editorial Universidad Navarra S.A.. 1996.
-
39Warranted Christian Belief: The Aquinas/Calvin ModelIn G. Bruntrup & R. K. Tacelli (eds.), The Rationality of Theism, Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 125--143. 1999.
-
36On Rejecting the Theory of Common Ancestry: A Reply to HaskerPerspectives on Science and Christian Faith 44 258-63. 1992.
-
67Dawkins and The Alabama InsertThink 1 (2): 7-20. 2002.In issue one, Richard Dawkins attacked the Alabama State Board of Education for pasting into biology schoolbooks an insert that explained that the theory of evolution is an ‘unproven’ and ‘controversial’ theory that ‘some’ scientists accept. The insert also raised a number of important questions that the theory of evolution still struggles to answer. Here, philosopher Alvin Plantinga responds to Dawkins' criticisms of the insert
-
194ScienceFaith and Philosophy 13 (3): 368-394. 1996.This paper is a continuation of a discussion with Ernan McMullin; its topic is the question how theists (in particular, Christian theists) should think about modern science---the whole range of modern science, including economics, psychology, sociobiology and so on. Should they follow Augustine in thinking that many large scale scientific projects as well as intellectual projects generally are in the service of one or the other of the civitates? Or should they follow Duhem, who (at least in the …Read more
Notre Dame, Indiana, United States of America
Areas of Specialization
Epistemology |
Philosophy of Religion |
Areas of Interest
Philosophy of Religion |
17th/18th Century Philosophy |