Response to Wunder: objective probability, non-contingent theism, and the EAAN
This article is a response to Tyler Wunder's ‘The modality of theism and probabilistic natural theology: a tension in Alvin Plantinga's philosophy’ (this journal). In his article, Wunder argues that if the proponent of the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN) holds theism to be...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Contributors: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
[2020]
|
| In: |
Religious studies
Year: 2020, Volume: 56, Issue: 2, Pages: 292-296 |
| RelBib Classification: | AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism FD Contextual theology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | This article is a response to Tyler Wunder's ‘The modality of theism and probabilistic natural theology: a tension in Alvin Plantinga's philosophy’ (this journal). In his article, Wunder argues that if the proponent of the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN) holds theism to be non-contingent and frames the argument in terms of objective probability, then the EAAN is either unsound or theism is necessarily false. I argue that a modest revision of the EAAN renders Wunder's objection irrelevant, and that this revision actually widens the scope of the argument. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-901X |
| Reference: | Kritik von "The modality of theism and probabilistic natural theology (2015)"
|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Religious studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0034412518000306 |