Graduate studies at Western
Cambridge University Press (2006)
|Abstract||The Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) says that all contingent facts must have explanation. In this volume, the first on the topic in the English language in nearly half a century, Alexander Pruss examines the substantive philosophical issues raised by the Principle Reason. Discussing various forms of the PSR and selected historical episodes, from Parmenides, Leibnez, and Hume, Pruss defends the claim that every true contingent proposition must have an explanation against major objections, including Hume's imaginability argument and Peter van Inwagen's argument that the PSR entails modal fatalism. Pruss also provides a number of positive arguments for the PSR, based on considerations as different as the metaphysics of existence, counterfactuals and modality, negative explanations, and the everyday applicability of the PSR. Moreover, Pruss shows how the PSR would advance the discussion in a number of disparate fields, including meta-ethics and the philosophy of mathematics.|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$32.97 used (71% off) $37.57 new (7% off) $38.45 direct from Amazon (9% off) Amazon page|
|Call number||BD591.P78 2006|
|ISBN(s)||0521184398 052185959X 9780521859592|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Graham Oppy (2000). On ‘a New Cosmological Argument’. Religious Studies 36 (3):345-353.
Ghislain Guigon (2011). Merely Possible Explanation. Religious Studies 47 (3):359-370.
Alexander Pruss, Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit: Arguments New and Old for the Principle of Sufficient Reason Alexander R. Pruss November 1, 2002 1. Introduction. [REVIEW]
Michael Della Rocca (2010). PSR. Philosophers' Imprint 10 (07).
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.
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.
Richard M. Gale & Alexander R. Pruss (2002). A Response to Oppy, and to Davey and Clifton. Religious Studies 38 (1):89-99.
Alexander R. Pruss (2004). A Restricted Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 40 (2):165-179.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads80 ( #12,021 of 739,053 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,053 )
How can I increase my downloads?