James Kraft has a fascinating new paper out in the online philosophy of religion journal, Ars Disputandi. He brings the currently-hot topics of epistemological contextualism and the epistemology of disagreement to bear on the problem of reasonable religious disagreement. I can see these two epistemological topics (epistemological contextualism and the epistemology of disagreement) becoming "hot" applications in philosophy of religion. Indeed, I just read that Dean Zimmerman recently organized a conference on the epistemology of disagreement and religious epistemology. And of course we've already seen Richard Feldman's recent contribution on this score.
Update: Here's another paper from Kraft on the same topic.
Quick Links
- Book
- 200 (or so) Arguments for Atheism
- Index: Assessing Theism
- Why Mainstream Scholars Think Jesus Was A Failed Apocalyptic Prophet
- What's Wrong With Plantinga's Proper Functionalism?
- Draper's Critique of Behe's Design Argument
- The Failure of Plantinga's Free Will Defense
- 100 Arguments for God Answered
- Thomistic Arguments for God Answered
- On a Common Apologetic Strategy
- On Caring About and Pursuing Truth
- A Priori Naturalism, A Priori Inerrantism, and the Bible
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A Quick Objection to the Modal Ontological Argument
(From an old Facebook post of mine back in 2018) Assume Platonism about properties, propositions, and possible worlds. Such is the natural b...
No comments:
Post a Comment