David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philo 12 (2):200-216 (2009)
Hypotheses about the shape of causal reality admit of both theistic and non-theistic interpretations. I argue that, on the simplest hypotheses about the causal shape of reality—infinite regress, contingent initial boundary, necessary initial boundary—there is good reason to suppose that non-theism is always either preferable to, or at least the equal of, theism, at least insofar as we restrict our attention merely to the domain of explanation of existence. Moreover, I suggest that it is perfectly proper for naturalists to be undecided between these simple hypotheses about the causal shape of reality: contrary to the proponents of cosmological arguments, there are no decisive objections to any of these simple hypotheses. (I argue this case in detail in connection with objections offered by William Lane Craig; however, I believe that the case holds quite generally.).
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
William Lane Craig (2006). J. Howard Sobel on the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36 (4):565-84.
Graham Oppy (2002). Arguing About The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Philo 5 (1):34-61.
William Lane Craig (2011). Graham Oppy on the Kalam Cosmological Argument. International Philosophical Quarterly 51 (3):303-330.
William Lane Craig (2010). Reflections On “Uncaused Beginnings”. Faith and Philosophy 27 (1):72-78.
Graham Oppy (1995). Professor William Craig's Criticisms of Critiques of Kalam Cosmological Arguments By Paul Davies, Stephen Hawking, and Adolf Grunbaum. Faith and Philosophy 12 (2):237-250.
William Lane Craig (1997). In Defense of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Faith and Philosophy 14 (2):236-247.
Graham Oppy (2001). Time, Successive Addition, and Kalam Cosmological Arguments. Philosophia Christi 3 (1):181-192.
William Lane Craig (1999). A Swift and Simple Refutation of the Kalam Cosmological Argument? Religious Studies 35 (1):57-72.
Felipe Leon (2011). Moreland on the Impossibility of Traversing the Infinite: A Critique. Philo 14 (1):32-42.
Quentin Smith (1998). Why Stephen Hawking's Cosmology Precludes a Creator. Philo 1 (1):75-93.
Arnold T. Guminski (2002). The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Philo 5 (2):196-215.
William Lane Craig & Quentin Smith (1993). Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology. Oxford University Press.
Graham Oppy (1991). Craig, Mackie, and the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 27 (2):189 - 197.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads69 ( #63,594 of 1,911,368 )
Recent downloads (6 months)11 ( #53,919 of 1,911,368 )
How can I increase my downloads?