Faith and Philosophy 22 (2):211-234 (2005)
|Abstract||William Rowe’s a posteriori arguments for the non-existence of God are well-known. Rather less attention has been given, however, to Rowe’s intriguing a priori argument for atheism. In this paper, I examine the three published responses to Rowe’s a priori argument (due to Bruce Langtry, William Morris, and Daniel and Frances Howard-Snyder, respectively). I conclude that none is decisive, but I show that Rowe’s argument nevertheless requires more defence than he provides.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Richard Carrier (2007). Fatal Flaws in Michael Almeida's Alleged 'Defeat' of Rowe's New Evidential Argument From Evil. Philo 10 (1):85-90.
Brian Leftow (2005). No Best World: Moral Luck. Religious Studies 41 (2):165-181.
William J. Wainwright (2005). Rowe on God's Freedom and God's Grace. Philo 8 (1):12-22.
William Hasker (2005). Can God Be Free?: Rowe's Dilemma for Theology. Religious Studies 41 (4):453-462.
James Beilby (1996). Does the Empirical Problem of Evil Prove That Theism Is Improbable? Religious Studies 32 (3):315 - 323.
Richard Otte (2002). Rowe's Probabilistic Argument From Evil. Faith and Philosophy 19 (2):147-171.
Georges Dicker (1988). A Refutation of Rowe's Critique of Anselm's Ontological Argument. Faith and Philosophy 5 (2):193-202.
Nick Trakakis (2006). Rowe's New Evidential Argument From Evil: Problems and Prospects. Sophia 45 (1).
Added to index2009-11-19
Total downloads58 ( #16,880 of 549,119 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,390 of 549,119 )
How can I increase my downloads?