Skip to main content

Announcement: Symposium on Philipse's God in the Age of Science: A Critique of Religious Reason

WHEN: Friday June 21, 10am-4pm
COST: $30 per person, includes morning and afternoon coffee - attendees to cater for their own lunch.

DETAILS:
As a prelude to the 2013 Australasian Philosophy of Religion Association Conference 'Religion and Science, Theism and Atheism' APRA will be hosting a Symposium with Professor Herman Philipse (University of Utrecht, NL) focused on his recent book "God in the Age of Science: A Critique of Religious Reason" Oxford University Press, 2012.

Philipse's book, aimed at a scholarly philosophical audience, offers one of the most significant critiques of metaphysical theology to be published in recent years and stands as a challenging criticism to some of the most influential contemporary theistic philosophy (paying particular attention to the work of Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne). 

The three major sections of Philipse's book will be addressed and critically engaged by Bishop, Oppy and Quadrio with a response from Professor Philipse to each presentation.

ABOUT HERMAN PHILIPSE:
Herman Philipse (D Phil (Leiden) 1983) took up a Distinguished Professorship in philosophy at the University of Utrecht, The Netherlands, in September 2003. He was previously Professor of Philosophy at the University of Leiden (1985-2003), Assistant Professor in Philosophy at that university (1978-85), and Research Assistant at the Husserl Archives, University of Louvain, Belgium (1977-78). He has been chairman (’decaan’) of the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Leiden several times.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Epicurean Cosmological Arguments for Matter's Necessity

One can find, through the writings of Lucretius, a powerful yet simple Epicurean argument for matter's (factual or metaphysical) necessity. In simplest terms, the argument is that since matter exists, and since nothing can come from nothing, matter is eternal and uncreated, and is therefore at least a factually necessary being. 
A stronger version of Epicurus' core argument can be developed by adding an appeal to something in the neighborhood of origin essentialism. The basic line of reasoning here is that being uncreated is an essential property of matter, and thus that the matter at the actual world is essentially uncreated.
Yet stronger versions of the argument could go on from there by appealing to the principle of sufficient reason to argue that whatever plays the role of being eternal and essentially uncreated does not vary from world to world, and thus that matter is a metaphysically necessary being.
It seems to me that this broadly Epicurean line of reasoning is a co…

CfP: Inquiry: New Work on the Existence of God

NEW WORK ON THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
In recent years, methods and concepts in logic, metaphysics and epistemology have become more and more sophisticated. For example, much new, subtle and interesting work has been done on modality, grounding, explanation and infinity, in both logic, metaphysics as well as epistemology. The three classical arguments for the existence of God – ontological arguments, cosmological arguments and fine-tuning arguments – all turn on issues of modality, grounding, explanation and infinity. In light of recent work, these arguments can - and to some extent have - become more sophisticated as well. Inquiry hereby calls for new and original papers in the intersection of recent work in logic, metaphysics and epistemology and the three main types of arguments for the existence of God. 


The deadline is 31 January 2017. Direct queries to einar.d.bohn at uia.no.

Andrew Moon's New Paper on Recent Work in Reformed Epistemology...

...in the latest issue of Philosophy Compass. Here's the abstract:
Reformed epistemology, roughly, is the thesis that religious belief can be rational without argument. After providing some background, I present Plantinga's defense of reformed epistemology and its influence on religious debunking arguments. I then discuss three objections to Plantinga's arguments that arise from the following topics: skeptical theism, cognitive science of religion, and basicality. I then show how reformed epistemology has recently been undergirded by a number of epistemological theories, including phenomenal conservatism and virtue epistemology. I end by noting that a good objection to reformed epistemology must criticize either a substantive epistemological theory or the application of that theory to religious belief; I also show that the famous Great Pumpkin Objection is an example of the former. And if a copy should make its way to my inbox...

UPDATE: Thanks!