God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason is a book by the Dutch philosopher Herman Philipse, written in English and published in the. Given, however, that we are living in the age of science, Philipse argues that the natural theologian is faced with a dilemma he calls “The. God in the Age of Science?: A Critique Of Religious Reason. by. Herman Philipse . Philipse tackles religion from an epistemilogical point of view whereas most.
|Published (Last):||20 September 2010|
|PDF File Size:||8.75 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.86 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Stefan rated it it was amazing Jan 22, Considering Philipse’s overall strategy, however, I have some serious concerns. It furthers the Philopse objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Given, however, that we are living in the age of science, Philipse argues that the natural theologian is faced with a dilemma he calls ” The Tension ” Dawkins’ God Delusion, Hitchens’ God is not great.
The problem is that a focus on undercutting proofs for a specific theism under the banner of traditional terminology risks confusing readers, undermining the stated aim of building a case for universal atheism and obliterating a target that many other theists would take issue with anyway.
It’s a tough question to answer.
Steve Dustcircle marked it as to-read Oct 05, Probably the best ones on the xcience, and certainly the most expensive: Bernard Neary rated it really liked it Feb 21, God in the Age of Science?: Each of these options has been defended by prominent analytic philosophers of religion.
It’s not that God is a nonsense notion, it’s that atheists have some psychological hatred of theism as it is practised that leads to the denial of God altogether. While these two categories have some overlap, it’s worth remembering that truth and utility aren’t the same thing. Each of these options has been defended by prominent analytic philosophers of religion.
God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason
To examine Swinburne’s inductive argument, he sets aside his earlier criticisms before forcefully showing the problems with Swinburne’s approach. Clement Dore – – Religious Studies 18 4: Michael Ashton rated it it was amazing Dec 02, While Plantinga has weaved an elaborate logical defence, of ad hoc claims, bare assertions, defeater-deflectors and defeater-defeaters, one might be curious as to what purpose Platinga’s argument would achieve. Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
Niels Schimmel rated it really liked it Dec 08, Mar 26, Ester marked philipee as to-read Shelves: Finally, should religious belief require evidential support, then ought that support be assessed by the same criteria that we use in evaluating evidence in science, or not?
Philipse argues that his general conclusion is warranted, however, since “natural or rational theology is indispensable for the conscientious religious believer” 4 and the natural theology developed by Swinburne is, he claims, “the ‘toughest case’ for the critical philosopher of religion” Churchill, “Flew, Wisdom, and Polanyi: Books about atheism Religion and science.
Such phenomena include the cause of the Big Bang, the fundamental laws of nature being what they are and the fact that the universe appears ‘fine-tuned’ While highly critical of the transcendental idealist tradition of Kant and Husserl for its allegedly incoherent notion of conceptual schemes, Philipse argues that scientistic philosophies that attempt to reduce consciousness to purely physical descriptions such as those of Quine and Churchland fall victim to a similar inconsistency: Herman Philipse born 13 May is a professor of philosophy at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. He starts by asking:. The Priority of Natural Theology 2.
It takes a lot of complexity to have finite persons with finite knowledge, but an gae person with infinite knowledge is simple?! The first is to attack religion as a political institution, whereby the social effects of religion are examined and subject to scrutiny.
God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason – Oxford Scholarship
The deeper issue, however, is that although Philipse is emphatic phiipse what kinds of things cannot be causes, his positive account is ambiguous. God in the Age of Science? Visions of Religion Stephen S. Yujin Nagasawa – – Philosophy Compass 6 8: Retrieved from ” https: In doing so he presents a very strong case for atheism.
God in the Age of Science?: A Critique Of Religious Reason by Herman Philipse
The Rationality agf Natural Theology 6. Request removal from index. Jon Myerov rated it really liked it Nov 24, Jan 19, Dennis rated it it was amazing Shelves: Christian rated it it was amazing Sep 05, Nevertheless, it should also be pointed out that many theists would actually agree with Philipse’s criticisms.
The main strategies may be presented as conforming to the end nodes of a decision tree for a believer. Ashraf rated it really liked it Apr 07, Languages Nederlands Edit links. Some of the errors are quite technical, such as whether some of Swinburne’s arguments are successful C-inductive arguments, but there’s a lot of food phikipse thought at each stage.
Based on his critiques of the last two cases “God is supernatural ” and “God’s existence is within reach of natural theology ” he concludes that: Swinburne’s approach is correct, but unfortunately God is not up to the task of gof a proper scientific theory. Cultural influences make it hard for many philosophers today to draw this distinction clearly, which is one philipe I judge it is normally better practice to go to classical sources, such as Plato gof Aristotle, if one wants genuinely to establish what might be known about God or the gods on the basis of natural reason alone.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University’s proxy server Configure custom proxy use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy. The arguments themselves cover a wide range of philosophical topics, covering not only philosophy of religion, but questions of language, epistemology, mathematics, and meaning. Vidur Kapur marked it as to-read Nov 17,