David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Religious Studies 40 (2):165-179 (2004)
The Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) says that, necessarily, every contingently true proposition has an explanation. The PSR is the most controversial premise in the cosmological argument for the existence of God. It is likely that one reason why a number of philosophers reject the PSR is that they think there are conceptual counter-examples to it. For instance, they may think, with Peter van Inwagen, that the conjunction of all contingent propositions cannot have an explanation, or they may believe that quantum mechanical phenomena cannot be explained. It may, however, be that these philosophers would be open to accepting a restricted version of the PSR as long as it was not ad hoc. I present a natural restricted version of the PSR that avoids all conceptual counter-examples, and yet that is strong enough to ground a cosmological argument. The restricted PSR says that all explainable true propositions have explanations. (Published Online April 21 2004).
|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
Joshua Rasmussen (2010). From States of Affairs to a Necessary Being. Philosophical Studies 148 (2):183 - 200.
Joshua Rasmussen (2010). Cosmological Arguments From Contingency. Philosophy Compass 5 (9):806-819.
N. M. L. Nathan (2010). Exclusion and Sufficient Reason. Philosophy 85 (3):391-397.
Similar books and articles
Brandon C. Look (2011). Grounding the Principle of Sufficient Reason: Leibnizian Rationalism Versus the Humean Challenge. In Carlos Fraenkel, Dario Perinetti & Justin Smith (eds.), The Rationalists: Between Tradition and Revolution. Springer. 201--219.
Graham Oppy (2000). On ‘a New Cosmological Argument’. Religious Studies 36 (3):345-353.
Anthony Brueckner (2001). Van Inwagen on the Cosmological Argument. Philosophical Papers 30 (1):31-40.
Michael Della Rocca (2010). PSR. Philosophers' Imprint 10 (07).
Mark T. Nelson (1996). The Principle of Sufficient Reason: A Moral Argument. Religious Studies 32 (1):15-26.
Kevin Davey & Rob Clifton (2001). Insufficient Reason in the ‘New Cosmological Argument’. Religious Studies 37 (4):485-490.
David Alexander (2008). The Recent Revival of Cosmological Arguments. Philosophy Compass 3 (3):541–550.
Alexander R. Pruss (2006). The Principle of Sufficient Reason: A Reassessment. Cambridge University Press.
Richard M. Gale & Alexander R. Pruss (2002). A Response to Oppy, and to Davey and Clifton. Religious Studies 38 (1):89-99.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads116 ( #10,613 of 1,413,407 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #51,624 of 1,413,407 )
How can I increase my downloads?