Access denied: a reply to Rickabaugh and McAllister


Authors
John W. Rosenbaum
Baylor University
Abstract
In their recent paper, Brandon Rickabaugh and Derek McAllister object to Paul Moser’s rejection of natural theology on the grounds that Moser is committed to a principle, Seek, which commits Moser to another principle, Access. Access in turn can be rationally motivated for at least some nonbelievers only by the arguments of natural theology. So Moser is in fact committed to the epistemic usefulness of natural theology. In this paper, we show that Seek by itself does not commit one to Access, and that even if Moser is committed to Access, he is not thereby committed to the epistemic usefulness of natural theology for all nonbelievers. While we find this argument offered by Rickabaugh and McAllister lacking, we do not deny their conclusion that natural theology is epistemically useful to all nonbelievers.
Keywords natural theology  divine hiddenness  revelation  filial knowledge  moser
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11153-017-9631-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,350
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Divine Hiddenness: New Essays.Nick Trakakis - 2002 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 54 (1):53-55.
Natural Theology and the Evidence for God.Paul Moser - 2012 - Philosophia Christi 14 (2):305-311.
Divine Hiding.Paul K. Moser - 2001 - Philosophia Christi 3 (1):91-108.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hiddenness, Evidence, and Idolatry.E. J. Coffman - 2011 - In Raymond VanArragon & Kelly James Clark (eds.), Evidence and Religious Belief. Oxford University Press.
Reflection and Self‐Trust.Aaron Bronfman - 2015 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 4 (2):75-82.
Protestant Perspectives on Natural Theology.Russell Re Manning - 2013 - In J. H. Brooke, F. Watts & R. R. Manning (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology. Oxford Up.
Revisiting the ‘Reformed Objection’ to Natural Theology.Michael Sudduth - 2009 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 1 (2):37-62.
Natural Theology and Literature.Guy Bennett-Hunter - 2013 - In Russell Re Manning John Hedley Brooke & Fraser Watts (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology. Oxford University Press.
The Fragility of Robust Realism: A Reply to Dreyfus and Spinosa.Jeff Malpas - 1999 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 42 (1):89 – 101.
Natural Theology and the Eastern Orthodox Tradition.Christopher C. Knight - 2013 - In J. H. Brooke, F. Watts & R. R. Manning (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology. Oxford Up. pp. 213.
Islamic Perspectives on Natural Theology.Robert G. Morrison - 2013 - In J. H. Brooke, F. Watts & R. R. Manning (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology. Oxford Up. pp. 151.
Descartes and Voetius on the Innate Knowledge of God and the Limits of Natural Theology.Mihai-Dragoș Vădana - 2017 - Annals of the University of Bucharest - Philosophy Series 65 (2).

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-05-22

Total views
22 ( #430,446 of 2,291,132 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #578,506 of 2,291,132 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature