This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
35 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Keith Augustine (2001). A Defense of Naturalism. Dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park
    The first part of this essay discusses what naturalism in the philosophy of religion should entail for one's ontology, considers various proposed criteria for categorizing something as natural, uses an analysis of these proposed criteria to develop theoretical criteria for both the natural and nonnatural, and develops a set of criteria for identifying a potentially supernatural event in practice. The second part of the essay presents a persuasive empirical case for naturalism based on the lack of uncontroversial evidence for any (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Christian Buth, Nonexistence of Gods: An Inductive Proof.
    I prove the nonexistence of gods. The proof is based on three axioms: Ockham’s razor (OR), religiosity is endogenous in humans, and, there are no miracles. The OR is formulated operationally, to remove improper postulates, such that it yields not only a plausible argument but truth. The validity of the second and the third axiom is established empirically by inductive reasoning relying on a thorough analysis of the psychiatric literature and skeptical publications. With these axioms I prove that gods are (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Christian Buth, Nonexistence of Gods: A Deductive Proof.
    I prove the nonexistence of gods. The properties of imaginary gods are laid out in a series of theorems that are only based on first principles, most notably the axiom Ockham’s razor; the theorems remain true for the case that there are no gods. Central is the result that gods are arbitrary, i.e., random without any further regularity; this implies that the temporal dependence of the probability to find a miracle is described by a Poisson process and spatially by an (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. S. R. L. Clark (2005). Review: Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? The Relationship Between Science and Religion. [REVIEW] Mind 114 (455):773-777.
  5. Edgar Dahl (2009). Imagine No Religion. In Russell Blackford & Udo Schüklenk (eds.), 50 Voices of Disbelief: Why We Are Atheists. Wiley-Blackwell 252-258.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Edgar Dahl (2008). Das Elend der Theologie. [REVIEW] Aufklärung Und Kritik 2:246-248.
  7. Edgar Dahl (2007). Der Gotteswahn. [REVIEW] Spektrum der Wissenschaft:118-120.
  8. Edgar Dahl (2007). Die Zukunft einer Illusion. Aufklärung Und Kritik 2:61-63.
  9. Edgar Dahl (ed.) (2005). Brauchen Wir Gott? Moderne Texte Zur Religionskritik. Hirzel.
  10. Edgar Dahl (ed.) (1995). Die Lehre des Unheils: Fundamentalkritik Am Christentum. Goldmann.
  11. Gregory W. Dawes (2007). Can a Darwinian Be a Christian? Religion Compass 1 (6):711-24.
    A number of recent historians claim to have defeated what they call the ‘conflict thesis’, the idea that there exists some inevitable conflict between Darwinism and Christianity. This is often thought to be part of a broader ‘warfare thesis’, which posits an inevitable conflict between science and religion. But, all they have defeated is one, relatively uninteresting form of this thesis. There remain other forms of the conflict theses that remain entirely plausible, even in light of the historical record.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  12. Trent Dougherty & Logan Paul Gage (2015). New Atheist Approaches to Religion. In Graham Oppy (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion. Routledge 51-62.
    In this article, we examine in detail the New Atheists' most serious argument for the conclusion that God does not exist, namely, Richard Dawkins's Ultimate 747 Gambit. Dawkins relies upon a strong explanatory principle involving simplicity. We systematically inspect the various kinds of simplicity that Dawkins may invoke. Finding his crucial premises false on any common conception of simplicity, we conclude that Dawkins has not given good reason to think God does not exist.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Bryan Frances (forthcoming). The Atheistic Argument From Outrageousness. Think.
    When pressed, many atheists offer three reasons why they reject theism: there is strong evidence against theism, there is no strong evidence for theism, and theism is so outrageous that it needs a great deal of support in order for us to believe it in a reasonable manner. I examine the third reason, arguing that it fails.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Daniel Howard-Snyder (2015). The Evolutionary Argument for Atheism. In John-Christopher Keller (ed.), Being, Freedom, and Method: Themes from van Inwagen. Oxford University Press
    This essay assesses Paul Draper's argument from evolution to atheism.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Ian James Kidd (forthcoming). Phenomenology, Naturalism, and Religious Experience. In Alasdair Coles & Fraser Watts (eds.), Religion and Neurology. Cambridge University Press
    Contemporary philosophical debates about the competing merits of neurological and phenomenological approaches to understanding both psychiatric illness and religious experience—and, indeed, the relationship, if any, between psychiatric illness and religious experience. In this chapter, I propose that both psychiatric illness and religious experiences - at least in some of their diverse forms - are best understood phenomenologically in terms of radical changes in a person's 'existential feelings', in the sense articulated by Matthew Ratcliffe. If so, explanatory priority should be assigned (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. H. J. Koskinen, R. Vilkko & S. Philström (eds.) (2006). Science - A Challenge to Philosophy? Peter Lang.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Tomasz Kubalica (2007). \"Ważność\" a naturalizm. Antypsychologizm Wilhelma Windelbanda. Idea 19 (19).
  18. Duncan Macintosh (1994). Could God Have Made the Big Bang? (On Theistic Counterfactuals). Dialogue 33 (01):3-20.
    Quentin Smith argues that if God exists, He had a duty to ensure life's existence; and He couldn't rationally have done so and made a big bang unless a counter-factual like "If God had made a big bang, there would have been life," was true pre-creation. But such counter-factuals are not true pre-creation. I argue that God could have made a big bang without irrationality; and that He could have ensured life without making big bangs non-random. Further, a proper understanding (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Michael D. Magee, The Natural History of Secular Christianity.
    Human beings are social animals, not solitary ones. Morality is an instinct we have because it helps us socialize, live together harmoniously. This paper reviews how the evolution of morality and other mental functions associated with our survival and sociality gave rise to cultural behavior among the small groups of humans during the Palaeolithic period when the tribe was personified as a supernatural identity and guardian, a totem, an ancestor and ultimately a god. Loyalty to the tribe required loyalty to (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Michael Martin (ed.) (2007). The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    In this volume, eighteen of the world's leading scholars present original essays on various aspects of atheism: its history, both ancient and modern, defense ...
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  21. Moti Mizrahi (2014). The Problem of Natural Inequality: A New Problem of Evil. Philosophia 42 (1):127-136.
    In this paper, I argue that there is a kind of evil, namely, the unequal distribution of natural endowments, or natural inequality, which presents theists with a new evidential problem of evil. The problem of natural inequality is a new evidential problem of evil not only because, to the best of my knowledge, it has not yet been discussed in the literature, but also because available theodicies, such the free will defense and the soul-making defense, are not adequate responses in (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. G. Oppy (2001). Naturalism: A Critical Analysis. [REVIEW] Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (4):576 – 577.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Graham Oppy (2013). Arguments for Atheism. In Stephen Bullivant & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Atheism. Oxford University Press 53.
    This paper consider three families of arguments for atheism. First, there are direct arguments for atheism: arguments that theism is meaningless, or incoherent, or logically inconsistent, or impossible, or inconsistent with known fact, of improbable given known fact, or morally repugnant, or the like. Second, there are indirect arguments for atheism: direct arguments for something that entails atheism. Third, there are comparative arguments for atheism: e.g., arguments for the view that (atheistic) naturalism is more theoretically virtuous than theism.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Graham Oppy (2012). God. In Neil Manson & Robert Barnard (eds.), Continuum Companion to Metaphysics. 246-68.
    This paper argues that considerations about causal origins of the universe do not favour theism over naturalism. Indeed, if the only data that is relevant to the choice between theism and naturalism is data about causal origins, then it turns out that considerations about causal origins favour naturalism over theism.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Graham Oppy (2004). Arguments From Moral Evil. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 56 (2/3):59 - 87.
    In this paper, I argue that -- contrary to widely received opinion -- logical arguments from evil are well and truly alive and kicking.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  26. Graham Oppy (2000). Evil Beyond the Burden of Belief. [REVIEW] Philo 3 (2):104-107.
  27. Reed Richter, American Science and its Anti-Evolutionist Critics: It's the Evidence Stupid.
    This is an unpublished talk written for a meeting of French philosophers. The paper describes the evolution versus creationism/intelligent design controversy in the U.S. A number of philosophers and scientists try to resolve this issue by sharply distinguishing the realm of science versus any talk of the supernatural. These pro-evolutionists often appeal to science's essential commitment to "methodological naturalism," the view that scientific methodology is essentially committed to naturalism and cannot meaningfully entertain hypotheses concerning the supernatural. I criticize methodological naturalism, (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Reed Richter (2002). What Science Can and Cannot Say: The Problems with Methodological Naturalism. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 22 (Jan-Apr 2002):18-22.
    This paper rejects a view of science called "methodological naturalism." -/- According to many defenders of mainstream science and Darwinian evolution, anti-evolution critics--creationists and intelligent design proponents--are conceptually and epistemologically confusing science and religion, a supernatural view of world. These defenders of evolution contend that doing science requires adhering to a methodology that is strictly and essentially naturalistic: science is essentially committed to "methodological naturalism" and assumes that all the phenomena it investigates are entirely natural and consistent with the laws (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29. Brooke Alan Trisel (2012). Intended and Unintended Life. Philosophical Forum 43 (4):395-403.
    Some people feel threatened by the thought that life might have arisen by chance. What is it about “chance” that some people find so threatening? If life originated by chance, this suggests that life was unintended and that it was not inevitable. It is ironic that people care about whether life in general was intended, but may not have ever wondered whether their own existence was intended by their parents. If it does not matter to us whether one's own existence (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Gabriel Vacariu, (2015) "God Cannot Even Exist!".
    We have to change our oldest paradigm of thinking about the existence of the “world” and God. In my books and articles, I have showed that the “world”/”universe” does not exist but “epistemologically different worlds” (EDWs) exist/are. Within the EDWs, God cannot exist because of this reason: God cannot exist in all EDWs since one EW does not exist for all EDWs. God cannot be present in all EDWs, therefore, God cannot even exist.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Hans Van Eyghen (forthcoming). Two Types of Explaining Away Arguments in Cognitive Science of Religion. Zygon.
    This paper discusses explaining away arguments in the cognitive science of religion. I distinguish two rather different ways of explaining away religion, one where religion is shown to be incompatible with scientific findings (EA1) and one where supernatural entities are rendered superfluous by scientific explanations (EA2). After discussing possible objections to both varieties, I argue that the latter way offers better prospects for successfully explaining away religion but that some caveats must be made. In a second step, I spell out (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Hans Van Eyghen (forthcoming). Two Types of Explaining Away Arguments in Cognitive Science of Religion. Zygon.
    This paper discusses explaining away arguments in the cognitive science of religion. I distinguish two rather different ways of explaining away religion, one where religion is shown to be incompatible with scientific findings (EA1) and one where supernatural entities are rendered superfluous by scientific explanations (EA2). After discussing possible objections to both varieties, I argue that the latter way offers better prospects for successfully explaining away religion but that some caveats must be made. In a second step, I spell out (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Daniel von Wachter (2006). Why the Argument From Causal Closure Against the Existence of Immaterial Things is Bad. In H. J. Koskinen, R. Vilkko & S. Philström (eds.), Science - A Challenge to Philosophy? Peter Lang
    Some argue for materialism claiming that a physical event cannot have a non-physical cause, or by claiming the 'Principle of Causal Closure' to be true. This I call a 'Sweeping Naturalistic Argument'. This article argues against this. It describes what it would be for a material event to have an immaterial cause.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Andrea M. Weisberger (2007). The Argument From Evil. In Michael Martin (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Atheism. Cambridge
    Where was God? Where was the intelligent designer of the universe when 1.5 million children were turned into smoke by zealous Nazis? Where was the all powerful, all knowing, wholly good being whose very essence is radically opposed to evil, while millions of children were starved to death by Stalin, had their limbs chopped off with machetes in Rwanda, were turned into amputees by the diamond trade in Sierra Leone, and worked to death, even now, by the child slave trade (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. John S. Wilkins (2015). Gods Above: Naturalizing Religion in Terms of Our Shared Ape Social Dominance Behavior. Sophia 54 (1):77-92.
    To naturalize religion, we must identify what religion is, and what aspects of it we are trying to explain. In this paper, religious social institutional behavior is the explanatory target, and an explanatory hypothesis based on shared primate social dominance psychology is given. The argument is that various religious features, including the high status afforded the religious, and the high status afforded to deities, are an expression of this social dominance psychology in a context for which it did not evolve: (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography