Metaphysica 10 (1):97-108 (2009)
|Abstract||I argue that there are Leibnizian-style cosmological arguments for the existence of God which start from very mild premises which affirm the mere possibility of a principle of sufficient reason. The utilization of such premises gives a great deal of plausibility to such types of argumentation. I spend the majority of the paper defending three major objections to such mild premises viz., a reductio argument from Peter van Inwagen and William Rowe, which proffers and defends the idea that a necessary proposition cannot explain a contingent one. I, then, turn to an amelioration of the Rowe/van Inwagen argument which attempts to appeal to an entailment relation between explanans and explanandum that is fettered out in terms of relevance logic. Subsequent to dispelling with that worry, I tackle objections to the utilization of weak principles of sufficient reason that depend essentially upon agglomerative accounts of explanation|
|Keywords||Explanation Entailment Cosmological Arguments Principle of Sufficient Reason|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Marcy P. Lascano (2011). Emilie du Châtelet on the Existence and Nature of God: An Examination of Her Arguments in Light of Their Sources. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (4):741 - 758.
Patrick Francken & Heimir Geirsson (1999). Regresses, Sufficient Reasons, and Cosmological Arguments. Journal of Philosophical Research 24:285-304.
Alexander Pruss (1999). A New Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 35 (4):461 - 476.
Elmar J. Kremer (1997). The Cosmological Argument Without the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Faith and Philosophy 14 (1):62-70.
Ghislain Guigon (2011). Merely Possible Explanation. Religious Studies 47 (3):359-370.
Anthony Brueckner (2001). Van Inwagen on the Cosmological Argument. Philosophical Papers 30 (1):31-40.
Graham Oppy (2000). On ‘a New Cosmological Argument’. Religious Studies 36 (3):345-353.
Alexander R. Pruss (2004). A Restricted Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 40 (2):165-179.
Richard M. Gale & Alexander R. Pruss (2002). A Response to Oppy, and to Davey and Clifton. Religious Studies 38 (1):89-99.
Added to index2009-12-02
Total downloads161 ( #2,863 of 722,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,273 of 722,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?