Rationalist atheology
Atheology, accurately defined by Alvin Plantinga, offers reasons why god's existence is implausible. Skeptically reasoning that theological arguments for god fail to make their case is one way of leaving supernaturalism in an implausible condition. This 'rationalist' atheology appeals...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Springer Nature B. V
2015
|
In: |
International journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2015, Volume: 78, Issue: 3, Pages: 329-348 |
Further subjects: | B
Rationalism
B Theology B Atheism B Theodicy B Plantinga, Alvin B Sufficient Reason B Logic B Atheology |
Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 155934590X | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230125165553.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 170601s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11153-014-9498-6 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)155934590X | ||
035 | |a (DE-576)489345905 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)BSZ489345905 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
084 | |a 1 |a 0 |2 ssgn | ||
100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)1082508411 |0 (DE-627)84753569X |0 (DE-576)178755001 |4 aut |a Shook, John R. |d 1966- | |
109 | |a Shook, John R. 1966- |a Shook, John Robert 1966- | ||
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Rationalist atheology |c John Shook |
264 | 1 | |c 2015 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Atheology, accurately defined by Alvin Plantinga, offers reasons why god's existence is implausible. Skeptically reasoning that theological arguments for god fail to make their case is one way of leaving supernaturalism in an implausible condition. This 'rationalist' atheology appeals to logical standards to point out fallacies and other sorts of inferential gaps. Beyond that methodological marker, few shared tactics characterize atheists and agnostics stalking theological targets. If unbelief be grounded on reason, let atheology start from a theological stronghold: the principle of sufficient reason, a cornerstone of rationality. Seven rules, corollaries to that principle, are enough to show how theological arguments for god repeatedly contravene rationality by perpetuating mysteries, contradictions, begging of questions, pseudo-explanations, and the like. None of these complaints are new, nor has theology been unaware of them. Disorganized atheology has, so far, allowed theology to appear to answer them. Five major arguments for god are systematically analyzed and refuted using these seven rules of rationality, as a preliminary exercise illustrating this re-organized and re-focused rationalist atheology. | ||
601 | |a Atheologie | ||
650 | 4 | |a Atheism | |
650 | 4 | |a Atheology | |
650 | 4 | |a Logic | |
650 | 4 | |a Plantinga, Alvin | |
650 | 4 | |a Rationalism | |
650 | 4 | |a Sufficient Reason | |
650 | 4 | |a Theodicy | |
650 | 4 | |a Theology | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International journal for philosophy of religion |d Dordrecht : Springer Nature B.V, 1970 |g 78(2015), 3, Seite 329-348 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320442098 |w (DE-600)2005049-5 |w (DE-576)103746927 |x 1572-8684 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:78 |g year:2015 |g number:3 |g pages:329-348 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-014-9498-6 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |
951 | |a AR | ||
ELC | |a 1 | ||
ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
LOK | |0 001 2970840898 | ||
LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
LOK | |0 004 155934590X | ||
LOK | |0 005 20170601143736 | ||
LOK | |0 008 170601||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
REL | |a 1 | ||
SUB | |a REL |