Faith and Philosophy 25 (3):290 - 299 (2008)

Authors
John Turri
University of Waterloo
Abstract
This paper clarifies and evaluates a premise of William Alston’s argument in Perceiving God. The premise in question: if it is practically rational to engage in a doxastic practice, then it is epistemically rational to suppose that said practice is reliable. I first provide the background needed to understand how this premise fits into Alston’s main argument. I then present Alston’s main argument, and proceed to clarify, criticize, modify, and ultimately reject Alston’s argument for the premise in question. Without this premise, Alston’s main argument fails.
Keywords Mystical perception  William Alston  Moore's Paradox
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0739-7046
DOI 10.5840/faithphil200825328
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

There is Immediate Justification.James Pryor - 2005 - In Matthias Steup & Ernest Sosa (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Epistemology. Blackwell. pp. 181--202.
Conclusion.[author unknown] - 1926 - Archives de Philosophie 4 (3):112.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Belief, Credence, and Faith.Elizabeth Jackson - 2019 - Religious Studies 55 (2):153-168.
Belief and Credence: A Defense of Dualism.Elizabeth Jackson - 2019 - Dissertation, University of Notre Dame

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-08-01

Total views
234 ( #39,993 of 2,433,534 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
48 ( #15,949 of 2,433,534 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes