Faith and Philosophy 5 (1):25-39 (1988)
|Abstract||This paper compares the views and arguments of Alvin Plantinga and Søren Kierkegaard on the question of belief in God. Kierkegaard’s view of belief in God (which must be sharply distinguished from faith in the Absolute Paradox) is shown to be surprisinglysimilar to Plantinga’s claim that belief in God can be properly basic. Two of Plantinga’s arguments for taking belief in God as properly basic are shown to have analogues in Kierkegaard.Plantinga claims that though properly basic beliefs are not based on evidence they are nevertheless grounded. In the latter part of the paper I show how the Kierkegaardian notion of inwardness or subjectivity must be an essential element in any plausible account of the ground of such belief in God|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jeremy Randel Koons (2011). Plantinga on Properly Basic Belief in God: Lessons From the Epistemology of Perception. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (245):839-850.
Richard Swinburne (2001). Plantinga on Warrant. Religious Studies 37 (2):203-214.
Alvin Plantinga (1981). Is Belief in God Properly Basic? Noûs 15 (1):41-51.
Alvin Plantinga (2008). Knowledge of God. Blackwell Pub..
Margherita di Stasio (2006). On Plantinga's Idea of Warrant in Epistemology and in Philosophy of Religion. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 6 (2):307-325.
Sarah Bachelard (2009). 'Foolishness to Greeks': Plantinga and the Epistemology of Christian Belief. Sophia 48 (2):105-118.
Michael Czapkay Sudduth (1999). Can Religious Unbelief Be Proper Function Rational? Faith and Philosophy 16 (3):297-314.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads11 ( #107,331 of 722,765 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,765 )
How can I increase my downloads?