202 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
Graham Oppy [194]Graham Robert Oppy [9]
See also:
Profile: Graham Oppy (Monash University)
  1. Michael Almeida & Graham Oppy (2005). Reply to Trakakis and Nagasawa. Ars Disputandi 5:5-11.
    Nick Trakakis and Yujin Nagasawa criticise the argument in Almeida and Oppy . According to Trakakis and Nagasawa, we are mistaken in our claim that the sceptical theist response to evidential arguments from evil is unacceptable because it would undermine ordinary moral reasoning. In their view, there is no good reason to think that sceptical theism leads to an objectionable form of moral scepticism. We disagree. In this paper, we explain why we think that the argument of Nagasawa and Trakakis (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  2. Graham Oppy (2002). More Than a Flesh Wound. Ars Disputandi 2.
    In ‘The Kalam Cosmological Argument Neither Bloodied nor Bowed’ , David Oderberg provides four main criticisms of the line of argument which I developed in ‘Time, Successive Addition, and Kalam Cosmological Arguments’ . I argue here that none of these lines of criticism succeeds. Further I re-emphasise the point that those who maintain that the temporal series of past events is formed by ‘successive addition’ are indeed thereby committed to a highly contentious strict finitist metaphysics.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  34
    Graham Robert Oppy (2006). Arguing About Gods. Cambridge University Press.
    Graham Oppy examines contemporary arguments for and against the existence of God. He shows that none of these arguments are persuasive enough to change the minds of those participants on the question of the existence of God. His conclusion is supported by detailed analyses of contemporary arguments, as well as by the development of a theory about the purpose of arguments, and the criteria that should be used in judging whether or not an argument is successful. Oppy discusses the work (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   19 citations  
  4.  79
    Graham Robert Oppy (2006). Philosophical Perspectives on Infinity. Cambridge University Press.
    Exploring philosophical questions about infinity, Graham Oppy examines how the infinite lurks everywhere, both in science and in our ordinary thoughts about the world. He also analyzes the many puzzles and paradoxes that follow in the train of the infinite, addressing such simple notions as counting, adding, and maximizing present serious difficulties. Other topics examined include the nature of space and time, infinities in physical science, infinities in theories of probability and decision, the nature of part/whole relations, mathematical theories of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  5.  13
    Graham Oppy (2014). Describing Gods: An Investigation of Divine Attributes. Cambridge University Press.
    This book begins with a careful taxonomy of divine attributes. It continues with detailed examinations of: divine infinity; divine simplicity; divine perfection; divine necessity; omnipotence; omniscience; divine goodness; divine beauty; divine fundamentality; divine will; divine freedom; etc.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6. Michael J. Almeida & Graham Oppy (2003). Sceptical Theism and Evidential Arguments From Evil. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (4):496 – 516.
    Sceptical theists--e.g., William Alston and Michael Bergmann--have claimed that considerations concerning human cognitive limitations are alone sufficient to undermine evidential arguments from evil. We argue that, if the considerations deployed by sceptical theists are sufficient to undermine evidential arguments from evil, then those considerations are also sufficient to undermine inferences that play a crucial role in ordinary moral reasoning. If cogent, our argument suffices to discredit sceptical theist responses to evidential arguments from evil.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  7. Graham Oppy (ed.) (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion. Routledge.
    Philosophy of religion has experienced a renaissance in recent times, paralleling the resurgence in public debate about the place and value of religion in contemporary Western societies . The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion is an outstanding reference source to the key topics, problems and debates in this exciting subject. Comprising over thirty chapters by a team of international contributors, the Handbook is divided into seven parts: theoretical orientations conceptions of divinity epistemology of religious belief metaphysics and religious (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  8.  9
    Graham Oppy (forthcoming). Ontological Arguments. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    General discussion of ontological arguments. Includes a brief historical overview, a taxonomy of different kinds of ontological arguments, a brief survey of objections to the different kinds of ontological arguments identified in the taxonomy, and more extended discussions of Anselm's ontological argument (Proslogion 2), Godel's ontological argument, and Plantinga's ontological argument.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  9.  53
    Graham Robert Oppy (1995). Ontological Arguments and Belief in God. Cambridge University Press.
    This book is a unique contribution to the philosophy of religion. It offers a comprehensive discussion of one of the most famous arguments for the existence of God: the ontological argument. The author provides and analyses a critical taxonomy of those versions of the argument that have been advanced in recent philosophical literature, as well as of those historically important versions found in the work of St Anselm, Descartes, Leibniz, Hegel and others. A central thesis of the book is that (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  10. Graham Oppy (2010). Epistemological Foundations for Koons' Cosmological Argument? European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 2 (1):107 - 125.
    Some people -- including the present author -- have proposed and defended alternative restricted causal principles that block Robert Koons’s ’new’ cosmological argument without undermining the intuition that causation is very close to ubiquitous. In "Epistemological Foundations for the Cosmological Argument", Koons argues that any restricted causal principles that are insufficient for the purposes of his cosmological argument cause epistemological collapse into general scepticism. In this paper I argue, against Koons, that there is no reason to suppose that my (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11. Graham Oppy (2009). Cosmological Arguments. Noûs 43 (1):31-48.
    This paper provides a taxonomy of cosmological arguments and givesgeneral reasons for thinking that arguments that belong to a given category do not succeed.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  12. Graham Oppy (2002). Arguing About The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Philo 5 (1):34-61.
    This paper begins with a fairly careful and detailed discussion of the conditions under which someone who presents an argument ought to be prepared to concede that the argument is unsuccessful. The conclusions reached in this discussion are then applied to William Lane Craig’s defense of what he calls “the kalam cosmological argument.” Perhaps unsurprisingly, the chief contention of the paper is that Craig ought to be prepared to concede that “the kalam cosmological argument” is not a successful argument. The (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Toby Handfield, Charles R. Twardy, Kevin B. Korb & Graham Oppy (2008). The Metaphysics of Causal Models: Where's the Biff? Erkenntnis 68 (2):149-68.
    This paper presents an attempt to integrate theories of causal processes—of the kind developed by Wesley Salmon and Phil Dowe—into a theory of causal models using Bayesian networks. We suggest that arcs in causal models must correspond to possible causal processes. Moreover, we suggest that when processes are rendered physically impossible by what occurs on distinct paths, the original model must be restricted by removing the relevant arc. These two techniques suffice to explain cases of late preëmption and other cases (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  14.  14
    Graham Oppy (2015). What Derivations Cannot Do. Religious Studies 51 (3):323-333.
    I argue that the only proper role for traditional arguments for and against the existence of God in philosophy of religion is in demonstrating that given worldviews -- theism, naturalism -- are inconsistent.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  29
    Graham Oppy (2015). “Uncaused Beginnings” Revisited. Faith and Philosophy 32 (2):205-210.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Graham Oppy (2010). Disagreement. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 68 (1):183-199.
    There has been a recent explosion of interest in the epistemology of disagreement. Much of the recent literature is concerned with a particular range of puzzle cases (discussed in the Cases section of my paper). Almost all of the papers that contribute to that recent literature make mention of questions about religious disagreement in ways that suggest that there are interesting connections between those puzzle cases and real life cases of religious disagreement. One important aim of my paper is to (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  17.  49
    Graham Oppy (2011). Perfection, Near-Perfection, Maximality, and Anselmian Theism. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (2):119-138.
    Anselmian theists claim (a) that there is a being than which none greater can be conceived; and (b) that it is knowable on purely—solely, entirely—a priori grounds that there is a being than which none greater can be conceived. In this paper, I argue that Anselmian Theism gains traction by conflating different interpretations of the key description ‘being than which no greater can be conceived’. In particular, I insist that it is very important to distinguish between ideal excellence and maximal (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  18. Graham Oppy (1991). Craig, Mackie, and the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Religious Studies 27 (2):189 - 197.
    In ‘Professor Mackie and the Kalam Cosmological Argument’ , 367–75), Professor William Lane Craig undertakes to demonstrate that J. L. Mackie's analysis of the kalam cosmological argument in The Miracle of Theism is ‘superficial’, and that Mackie ‘has failed to provide any compelling or even intuitively appealing objection against the argument’ . I disagree with Craig's judgement; for it seems to me that the considerations which Mackie advances do serve to refute the kalam cosmological argument. Consequently, the purpose of this (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  19.  23
    Graham Oppy (2014). Leftow on God and Necessity. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6 (3):5-16.
    This paper is a critical examination of some of the major themes of Brian Leftow's book *God and Necessity*.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Graham Oppy (1995). Reply to Professor Craig. Sophia 34 (2):15-29.
    I hold that the considerations adduced in kalam cosmological arguments do not embody reasons for reflective atheists and agnostics to embrace the conclusion of those arguments, viz. that the universe had a cause of its existence. I do not claim to be able to show that reflective theists could not reasonably believe that those arguments are sound; indeed, I am prepared to concede that it is epistemically possible that the arguments procede validly from true premises. However, I am prepared to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  21.  18
    Graham Robert Oppy (2013). The Best Argument Against God. Palgrave Macmillan.
    Preface -- Introduction -- Preliminary matters -- Some big ideas -- Minimal theism and naturalism -- Standard theism and naturalism -- Conclusion.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22. Graham Oppy (2001). Time, Successive Addition, and Kalam Cosmological Arguments. Philosophia Christi 3 (1):181-192.
    Craig (1981) presents and defends several different kalam cosmological arguments. The core of each of these arguments is the following ur argument.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  53
    Frank Jackson, Peter Menzies & Graham Oppy (1994). The Two Envelope 'Paradox'. Analysis 54 (1):43 - 45.
    This paper discusses the finite version of the two envelope paradox. (That is, we treat the paradox against the background assumption that there is only a finite amount of money in the world.).
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  24. 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.
    Kalam cosmological arguments have recently been the subject of criticisms, at least inter alia, by physicists---Paul Davies, Stephen Hawking---and philosophers of science---Adolf Grunbaum. In a series of recent articles, William Craig has attempted to show that these criticisms are “superficial, iII-conceived, and based on misunderstanding.” I argue that, while some of the discussion of Davies and Hawking is not philosophically sophisticated, the points raised by Davies, Hawking and Grunbaum do suffice to undermine the dialectical efficacy of kalam cosmological arguments.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Graham Oppy (1995). Inverse Operations with Transfinite Numbers and the Kalam Cosmological Argument (1995). International Philosophical Quarterly 35 (2):219-21.
    In "Reply To Smith: On The Finitude Of The Past" [1], Professor William Craig writes: I reiterate that Smith has yet to deal with my strongest arguments in favour of the impossibility of the existence of an actual infinite, those based on inverse operations performed with transfinite numbers. [2] I think that this claim is mistaken; for: (i) there is no problem about allowing the inverse operations in question--subtraction, division, extracting roots, etc.--into transfinite ordinal arithmetic[3]; and (ii) there is no (...)
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  20
    Graham Oppy & Mark Saward (2013). Molinism and Divine Prophecy of Free Actions. Religious Studies 50 (2):1-10.
    Among challenges to Molinism, the challenge posed by divine prophecy of human free action has received insufficient attention. We argue that this challenge is a significant addition to the array of challenges that confront Molinism.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  27.  25
    Graham Oppy (1997). The Philosophical Insignificance of Gödel's Slingshot. Mind 106 (421):121-141.
    Response to Stephen Neale's *The Philosophical Significance of Godel's slingshot*.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  28.  83
    Graham Oppy (2007). Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument (Again). Philo 10 (1):72-84.
    In “On Oppy’s Objections to the Modal Perfection Argument,” Philo 8, 2, 2005, 123–30, Robert Maydole argues that his modal perfection argument—set out in his “The Modal Perfection Argument for a Supreme Being,” Philo 6, 2, 2003, 299–313—“remains arguably sound” in the face of the criticisms that I made of this argument in my “Maydole’s 2QS5 Argument,” Philo 7, 2, 2004, 203–11. I reply that Maydole is wrong: his argument is fatally flawed, and his attempts to avoid the criticisms that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  29.  49
    Graham Oppy (2010). The Shape of Causal Reality: A Naturalistic Adaptation of O’Connor’s Cosmological Argument. Philosophia Christi 12 (2):281-288.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Graham Oppy (1996). Hume and the Argument for Biological Design. Biology and Philosophy 11 (4):519-534.
    There seems to be a widespread conviction — evidenced, for example, in the work of Mackie, Dawkins and Sober — that it is Darwinian rather than Humean considerations which deal the fatal logical blow to arguments for intelligent design. I argue that this conviction cannot be well-founded. If there are current logically decisive objections to design arguments, they must be Humean — for Darwinian considerations count not at all against design arguments based upon apparent cosmological fine-tuning. I argue, further, that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  31.  48
    Graham Oppy (2012). Science, Religion, and Infinity. In The Blackwell Companion to Science and Christianity. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 430-440.
    This chapter contains sections titled: * Brief History * How We Talk * Science and Infinity * Religion and Infinity * Concluding Remarks * Notes * References * Further Reading.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Graham Oppy (1997). On Some Alleged Consequences of 'The Hartle-Hawking Cosmology'. Sophia 36 (1):84-95.
  33. Graham Oppy (1997). On Some Alleged Consequences of 'the Hartle-Hawking Cosmology'. Sophia 36 (1):84-95.
    In [3], Quentin Smith claims that `the Hartle-Hawking cosmology' is inconsistent with classical theism in a way which redounds to the discredit of classical theism; and, moreover, that the truth of `the Hartle- Hawking cosmology' would undermine reasonsed belief in any other varieties of theism which hold that the universe is created.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  63
    Graham Oppy (2000). On ‘a New Cosmological Argument’. Religious Studies 36 (3):345-353.
    Richard Gale and Alexander Pruss contend that their ‘new cosmological argument’ is an improvement over familiar cosmological arguments because it relies upon a weaker version of the Principle of Sufficient Reason than that used in those more familiar arguments. However, I note that their ‘weaker’ version of the Principle of Sufficient Reason entails the ‘stronger’ version of that principle which is used in more familiar arguments, so that the alleged advantage of their proof turns out to be illusory. Moreover, I (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  35.  35
    John O'Leary-Hawthorne & Graham Oppy (1997). Minimalism and Truth. Noûs 31 (2):170-196.
  36.  86
    Michael Smith, Frank Jackson & Graham Oppy (1994). Minimalism and Truth Aptness. Mind 103 (411):287 - 302.
  37.  79
    Graham Oppy (2003). The Devilish Complexities of Divine Simplicity. Philo 6 (1):10-22.
    In On the Nature and Existence of God, Richard Gale follows majority opinion in giving very short shrift to the doctrine of divine simplicity: in his view, there is no coherent expressible doctrine of divine simplicity. Rising to the implicit challenge, I argue that---contrary to what is widely believed---there is a coherently expressible doctrine of divine simplicity, though it is rather different from the views that are typically expressed by defenders of this doctrine. At the very least, I think that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38.  65
    Graham Oppy (2005). Omnipotence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):58–84.
    Recently, many philosophers have supposed that the divine attribute of omnipotence is properly understood as some kind of maximal power. I argue that all of the best known attempts to analyse omnipotence in terms of maximal power are multiply flawed. Moreover, I argue that there are compelling reasons for supposing that, on orthodox theistic conceptions, maximal power is not one of the divine attributes.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  39.  30
    Graham Oppy (2004). Maydole's 2QS5 Argument. Philo 7 (2):203-211.
    This paper is a reply to Robert Maydole’s “The Modal Perfection Argument for the Existence of a Supreme Being,” published in Philo 6, 2, 2003. I argue that Maydole’s Modal Perfection Argument fails, and that there is no evident way in which it can be repaired.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  40.  39
    Graham Oppy (2011). O'Connor's Cosmological Argument. Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion: Vol. 3 3:166.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  82
    Graham Oppy (2004). Arguments From Moral Evil. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 56 (2/3):59 - 87.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  42.  38
    Graham Oppy (2007). More Than One Flaw: Reply to Millican. Sophia 46 (3):295-304.
    Millican (Mind 113(451):437–476, 2004) claims to have detected ‘the one fatal flaw in Anselm’s ontological argument.’ I argue that there is more than one important flaw in the position defended in Millican (Mind 113(451):437–476, 2004). First, Millican’s reconstruction of Anselm’s argument does serious violence to the original text. Second, Millican’s generalised objection fails to diagnose any flaw in a vast range of ontological arguments. Third, there are independent reasons for thinking that Millican’s generalised objection is unpersuasive.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  43.  64
    Graham Oppy (1996). Gödelian Ontological Arguments. Analysis 56 (4):226–230.
    There is now a considerable secondary literature on Godel's ontological arguments; in particular, interested readers should consult Sobel (1987), Anderson (1990) and Adams (1995). In this note, I wish to draw attention to an objection to these arguments which has hitherto gone unnoticed. This objection does not depend upon fine details of the formulation of the arguments; I arbitrarily choose to develop the objection in connection with the formulation provided by Anderson.
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  44.  12
    Graham Oppy (1998). Biblical Science? Philo 1 (2):68-78.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  5
    Graham Oppy (2012). Response to MaydoIe. In Miroslaw Szatkowski (ed.), Ontological Proofs Today. Ontos Verlag 50--487.
    Response to Maydole's criticism of my initial contribution to this volume.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  46.  93
    Graham Oppy, Review of Reason for the Hope Within. [REVIEW]
    Chapter 1: "Reason for Hope " by Michael J. Murray Chapter 2: "Theistic Arguments" by William C. Davis Chapter 3: "A Scientific Argument for the Existence of God: The Fine- Tuning Design Argument" by Robin Collins Chapter 4: "God, Evil and Suffering" by Daniel Howard Snyder Chapter 5: "Arguments for Atheism" by John O'Leary Hawthorne Chapter 6: "Faith and Reason" by Caleb Miller Chapter 7: "Religious Pluralism" by Timothy O'Connor Chapter 8: "Eastern Religions" by Robin Collins Chapter 9: "Divine Providence (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  19
    Graham Oppy (2004). Faulty Reasoning About Default Principles in Cosmological Arguments. Faith and Philosophy 21 (2):242-249.
    Robert Koons claims that my previous critique of his “new” cosmological argument is vitiated by confusion about the nature of defeasible argumentation.In response, I claim that Koons misrepresents—and perhaps misunderstands—the nature of my objections to his “new” cosmological argument. The main claims which I defend are: (1) that the move from a non-defeasible to a defeasible causal principle makes absolutely no difference to the success of the cosmological argument in which it is contained; and (2) that, since it is perfectly (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  48.  95
    Graham Oppy (2010). The Ontological Argument From Descartes to Hegel (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (2):pp. 243-245.
    Kevin Harrelson's book commences with the following words: This book provides a philosophical analysis of the several debates concerning the "ontological argument" from the middle of the seventeenth to the beginning of the nineteenth century. My aim in writing it was twofold. First, I wished to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of the history of these debates, which I perceived to be lacking in the scholarly literature. Second, I wanted also to pursue a more philosophically interesting question concerning the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  55
    Graham Oppy (1997). Countable Fusion Not yet Proven Guilty: It May Be the Whiteheadian Account of Space Whatdunnit. Analysis 57 (4):249–253.
    This paper is a response to a paper by Peter Forrest. (For bibliographical details, see this paper.).
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  14
    Graham Oppy & John O'Leary-Hawthorne (1997). Minimalism and Truth. Noûs 31 (2):170 - 196.
1 — 50 / 202