Naturalism, Hope, and Alethic Rationality

Philo 9 (1):5-11 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In my “Plantinga Untouched,” I argued that James Beilby’s recent objection to Plantinga’s EAAN was unsuccessful. Beilby has sincereplied that a naturalist can grant the Inscrutability Thesis and yet be alethically rational in hoping for a high P(R/N and future developments of E) and, therefore, needn’t accept the alethic defeater for R. I argue that this is impossible, since a naturalist cannot consistently grant that thesis and meet Beilby’s own criteria for alethic hope. Consequently, Plantinga is (still) right in maintaining that the naturalist who grants that P(R/N&E) is low or inscrutable has a defeater for R

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,247

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
17 (#634,014)

6 months
2 (#276,145)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mike Thune
Joliet Junior College

Citations of this work

Anti-Naturalistic Arguments From Reason.Graham Oppy - 2022 - Roczniki Filozoficzne 70 (1):15-35.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references