The Dispute between McMullin and Plantinga over Evolution

American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 86 (2):343-354 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The discussion between Ernan McMullin and Alvin Plantinga concerning evolution and religion, which first appeared in Christian Scholar’s Review in September 1991, is an enlightening airing of many of the issues that arise with regard to this complex, controversial topic. Overall, Plantinga favors a confrontational view of the relationship between religion and evolution, while McMullin favors a dialogue model. The two thinkers disagree about the evidence for evolution, about what Plantinga calls “theistic science,” about methodological naturalism, and about biblical interpretation. McMullin accepts a mainstream view in several important respects, holding that: (i) evolution is true; (ii) Genesis is not to be read literally; (iii) science should be separated from theology; (iv) we should accept “methodological naturalism”; and (v) we should reject “creation science.” Plantinga disagrees with all of these claims. This article explores the differences between the two thinkers by means of an exposition of the main points, and offers a few important critical observations on key questions.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,752

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Plantinga’s Defense of Special Creation.Ernan McMullin - 1991 - Christian Scholar's Review 21 (1):55-70.
What’s wrong with the evolutionary argument against naturalism?Geoff Childers - 2011 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (3):193-204.
Plantinga on warrant.Richard Swinburne - 2001 - Religious Studies 37 (2):203-214.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-26

Downloads
37 (#429,504)

6 months
1 (#1,464,097)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brendan Sweetman
Rockhurst University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references