Complete Works of Julian by Julian6/29/2023 ![]() The most frequent mistake, it seems to me, is the notion that Plantinga is arguing that our cognitive faculties *are* unreliable, which of course he isn't. While I haven't put the time into Plantinga's argument to determine if it's sound, I have put in enough time to know that most of its critics (I'm referring to the 'internet' critics here, not to the serious philosophical critics) don't understand it. Given Hitchens' general argumentation style and some of his "arguments" about God, I think Craig will demolish him. In other topic, William Lane Craig is going to debate "new atheist" Christopher Hitchens about the existence of God, April 4th, at Biola University. I want to know the best replies to his argument. I'm going to order the book "Narualism Defeated?" that is a critical examination of Plantinga's thesis by several philosophers. (Brian Leiter said that Plantinga's argument have been "decisively criticized", but given Leiter's bias, I think the reality is otherwise) ![]() ![]() Because, if it's, then it exposes belief in naturalism as actually inconsistent with belief in darwinian evolution. ![]() I'm not asking if, from a thomistic viewpoint, the Plantinga's argument is good or not (or necessary or not) my question is if his argument is, in your opinion, sound in a naturalist framework. Professor Feser, what do you think about Plantinga's argument against naturalism? Do you think that, in its terms, his argument stand to the critical scrutiny it has received? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |