DOCSLIB.ORG

Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems Of Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy JOEL FEINBERG Late of University of Arizona RUSS SHAFER-LANDAU University of Wisconsin JOEL FEINBERG (1926-2004): IN MEMORIAM vii PREFACE viii PART ONE Reason and Religious Belief 1 THE EXISTENCE AND NATURE OF GOD 6 ANSELM OF CANTERBURY: The Ontological Argument, from Proslogion 6 GAUNILO OF MARMOUTIERS: On Behalf of the Fool 7 WILLIAM L. ROWE: The Ontological Argument 11 SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS: The Five Ways, from Summa Theologica 21 SAMUEL CLARKE: A Modern Formulation of the Cosmological Argument 22 WILLIAM L. ROWE: The Cosmological Argument 23 WILLIAM PALEY: The Argument from Design 32 DAVID HUME: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion 38 THE PROBLEM OF EVIL 72 FYODOR DOSTOEVSKY: Rebellion 72 J. L. MACKIE: Evil and Omnipotence 78 GEORGE SCHLESINGER: The Problem of Evil and the Problem of Suffering 86 RICHARD SWINBURNE: Why God Allows Evil 89 B. C. JOHNSON: God and the Problem of Evil 97 REASON AND FAITH 101 W. K. CLIFFORD: The Ethics of Belief 101 WILLIAM JAMES: The Will to Believe 106 KELLY JAMES CLARK: Without Evidence or Argument 114 BLAISE PASCAL: The Wager 119 SIMON BLACKBURN: Miracles and Testimony 122 PART TWO Human Knowledge: Its Grounds and Limits 129 SKEPTICISM 137 JOHN POLLOCK: A Brain in a Vat 137 PETER UNGER: An Argument for Skepticism 139 RODERICK M. CHISHOLM: The Problem of the Criterion 150 OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE EXTERNAL WORLD 157 BERTRAND RUSSELL: Appearance and Reality and the Existence of Matter RENE DESCARTES: Meditations on First Philosophy 164 JOHN LOCKE: The Causal Theory of Perception 197 GEORGE BERKELEY: Of the Principles of Human Knowledge 205 THOMAS REID: Of the Existence of a Material World 213 G. E. MOORE: Proof of an External World 216 THE METHODS OF SCIENCE 219 DAVID HUME: An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding 219 WESLEY C. SALMON: An Encounter with David Hume 245 KARL POPPER: Science: Conjectures and Refutations 264 PHILIP KITCHER: Believing Where We Cannot Prove 268 PART THREE Mind and Its Place in Nature 279 BRIE GERTLER: In Defense of Mind-Body Dualism 285 FRANK JACKSON: The Qualia Problem 297 PETER CARRUTHERS: The Mind Is the Brain 301 PAUL M. CHURCH LAND: Behaviorism, Materialism and Functionalism 309 CAN NON-HUMANS THINK? 321 ALAN TURING: Computing Machinery and Intelligence 321 JOHN R. SEARLE: Minds, Brains, and Programs 330 WILLIAM G. LYCAN: Robots and Minds 342 PETER CARRUTHERS: Brute Experience 348 JOHN SEARLE: Animal Minds 356 PERSONAL IDENTITY AND THE SURVIVAL OF DEATH 365 JOHN LOCKE: The Prince and the Cobbler 365 THOMAS REID: Of Mr. Locke's Account of Our Personal Identity 368 DAVID HUME: The Self 371 DEREK PARFIT: Divided Minds and the Nature of Persons 373 DANIEL C. DENNETT: Where Am I? 378 JOHN PERRY: A Dialogue on Personal Identity and Immortality 387 PART FOUR Determinism, Free Will, and Responsibility 407 COMPATIBILISM: THE CASE FOR DETERMINISM AND ITS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE MOST IMPORTANT SENSE OF FREE WILL 414 A. J. AYER: Freedom and Necessity 414 WALTER T. STACE: The Problem of Free Will 419 JOHN MARTIN FISCHER: My Compatibilism 425 LIBERTARIANISM: THE CASE FOR FREE WILL AND ITS INCOMPATIBILITY WITH DETERMINISM 438 RODERICK M. CHISHOLM: Human Freedom and the Self 438 ROBERT KANE: Free Will: Ancient Dispute, New Themes 445 HARD DETERMINISM: THE CASE FOR DETERMINISM AND ITS INCOMPATIBILITY WITH ANY IMPORTANT SENSE OF FREE WILL 458 PAUL HOLBACH: The Illusion of Free Will 458 DERK PEREBOOM: Why We Have No Free Will and Can Live Without It 464 FREEDOM AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY 478 JAMES RACHELS: The Debate over Free Will 478 HARRY FRANKFURT: Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility 486 THOMAS NAGEL: Moral Luck 493 SUSAN WOLF: Sanity and the Metaphysics of Responsibility 501 PART FIVE Morality and Its Critics 513 CHALLENGES TO MORALITY 520 JOEL FEINBERG: Psychological Egoism 520 JAMES RACHELS: Ethical Egoism 532 PLATO: The Immoralist's Challenge 540 FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE: Master and Slave Morality 547 PROPOSED STANDARDS OF RIGHT CONDUCT 555 RUSS SHAFER-LANDAU: Ethical Subjectivism 555 MARY MIDGLEY: Trying Out One's New Sword 567 ARISTOTLE: The Nature of Virtue, from Nicomachean Ethics 570 THOMAS HOBBES: Leviathan 586 JOHN RAWLS: Justice as Fairness 600 PHILIP L. QUINN: God and Morality 610 IMMANUEL KANT: The Good Will & The Categorical Imperative 625 JOHN STUART MILL: Utilitarianism 640 W. D. ROSS: What Makes Right Acts Right? 653 ETHICAL PROBLEMS 661 PLATO: Crito 661 MARTHA NUSSBAUM: Judging Other Cultures: The Case of Genital Mutilation 668 PETER SINGER: Famine, Affluence, and Morality 678 ONORA O'NEILL: Kantian Approaches to Some Famine Problems 686 JOHN HARRIS: The Survival Lottery 692 JAMES RACHELS: Active and Passive Euthanasia 697 PETER SINGER: All Animals Are GLOSSARY 714 JOEL FEINBERG (1926-2004) was a brilliant philosopher, certainly one of the most important social and political philosophers of the last half century. He was also a very kind, humble man. And he was an extremely conscientious teacher. The great care and preparation that he devoted to his teaching is evident here, in the plan and format of Reason and Responsibility. Joel developed the first edition of this textbook about forty years ago, dissatisfied with existing options, and intent on providing coverage of those areas of philosophy that struck him as deeply important and deserving of every student's careful study. Most of you reading this will know Joel Feinberg only as the editor of a book you've been assigned to read. If you have a chance, you ought to seek out one of the many exciting works that Joel penned during his prolific career. He was a philosophical writer of rare talent. He wrote about things that matter, and did so in a way that everyone could understand. He was clear, he was elegant, always ready with the telling example, the well-chosen reference to literature or history, dropped into place with a light touch. Open any one of his many books and read at random-you can't help but be impressed by the humanism, the clarity, the originality and, certainly, the wisdom of the views that receive expression there. Joel was also a man of great common sense and discernment. One of the most desirable things in life is to have a person of integrity and genuinely sound judgment to rely on for advice, companionship, and, if one is especially fortunate, for friendship. I was lucky enough to study with Joel for five years, to write a dissertation under his direction, and later to work with him as a collaborator on this book over the past decade. His suggestions during our collaboration, both about substantive matters of content and about the more mundane, practical matters of the publishing world, epitomized his practical wisdom. He was a man whose judgment you could trust. Joel was curious, interested in the whole range of human experience, attentive to relevant detail, appreciative of salient distinctions, a lover of taxonomies and, at the same time, able to resist the pressure that such taxonomies impose-pressure to falsify the phenomena and straitjacket it into categories that generate misunderstanding. It is a very rare talent, to be so analytically minded and yet so broad in one's outlook, to appreciate system and yet to be sensitive to the fine detail that must constrain its development. Joel possessed such talent, to a degree that was almost unrivalled. There were very few in his league. Joel died after a long struggle with Parkinson's disease and its complications. He left us a great and valuable legacy, both personal and professional. It was a true honor to have known him, to have learned from him, and to have counted him a friend. THE CONVICTION UNDERLYING this volume is that introducing the college student to philosophy by means of a few representative problems examined in great detail is far preferable to offering a "little bit of everything," with each "branch" of philosophy, each major "ism," and each major historical period represented with scrupulous impartiality, even though the articles may have little relevance to one another. Accordingly, articles have been selected from both classical and contemporary sources on such topics as religion, mind, personal identity, death, freedom, responsibility, duty, justice, and selfishness. The problems that concern philosophers under these headings are not mere idle riddles, but rather questions of vital interest to any reflective person. Each set of problems is plumbed in considerable depth in essays expressing different, often opposing, views. The hope is that exposure to this argumentative give-and-take will encourage students to take part in the process themselves, and through this practice to develop their powers of philosophical reasoning. This thirteenth edition of Reason and Responsibility has been strengthened by the addition of thirteen new selections. The policy of securing the very best available English translations for foreign works has been retained. We have tried to strike a good balance between classic works and relatively new material on these subjects of enduring philosophical interest. I encourage readers to have a look at our website, located at www.thomsonedu. com/philosophy/feinberg. Once there, you will see a substantial introduction, study questions, and relevant philosophical internet links associated with each of the 77 selections included in this latest edition. Research assistants Alan Rubel and David Killoren have prepared these materials under my supervision. I would like to thank Wadsworth for absorbing the costs associated with this project. I am proud of the site and think that it will be a terrific aid to student learning. The following major parts of this work have been updated and expanded. Part 1, "Reason and Religious Belief," reinstates, by popular demand, J. L. Mackie's nowclassic argument from evil, one that seeks to show that the presence of avoidable suffering demonstrates that a perfect God does not exist.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK George Santayana (1863-1952)
    Georg Hegel (1770-1831) ................................ 30 Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) ................. 32 Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach (1804-1872) ...... 32 John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) .......................... 33 Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) ..................... 33 Karl Marx (1818-1883).................................... 34 Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) ................ 35 Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914).............. 35 William James (1842-1910) ............................ 36 The Modern World 1900-1950 ............................. 36 Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) .................... 37 Ahad Ha'am (1856-1927) ............................... 38 Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) ............. 38 Edmund Husserl (1859–1938) ....................... 39 Henri Bergson (1859-1941) ............................ 39 Contents John Dewey (1859–1952) ............................... 39 Introduction....................................................... 1 THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK George Santayana (1863-1952) ..................... 40 The Ancient World 700 BCE-250 CE..................... 3 Miguel de Unamuno (1864-1936) ................... 40 Introduction Thales of Miletus (c.624-546 BCE)................... 3 William Du Bois (1868-1963) .......................... 41 Laozi (c.6th century BCE) ................................. 4 Philosophy is not just the preserve of brilliant Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) ........................ 41 Pythagoras (c.570-495 BCE) ............................ 4 but eccentric thinkers that it is popularly Max Scheler
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy Sunday, July 8, 2018 12:01 PM
    Philosophy Sunday, July 8, 2018 12:01 PM Western Pre-Socratics Fanon Heraclitus- Greek 535-475 Bayle Panta rhei Marshall Mcluhan • "Everything flows" Roman Jakobson • "No man ever steps in the same river twice" Saussure • Doctrine of flux Butler Logos Harris • "Reason" or "Argument" • "All entities come to be in accordance with the Logos" Dike eris • "Strife is justice" • Oppositional process of dissolving and generating known as strife "The Obscure" and "The Weeping Philosopher" "The path up and down are one and the same" • Theory about unity of opposites • Bow and lyre Native of Ephesus "Follow the common" "Character is fate" "Lighting steers the universe" Neitzshce said he was "eternally right" for "declaring that Being was an empty illusion" and embracing "becoming" Subject of Heideggar and Eugen Fink's lecture Fire was the origin of everything Influenced the Stoics Protagoras- Greek 490-420 BCE Most influential of the Sophists • Derided by Plato and Socrates for being mere rhetoricians "Man is the measure of all things" • Found many things to be unknowable • What is true for one person is not for another Could "make the worse case better" • Focused on persuasiveness of an argument Names a Socratic dialogue about whether virtue can be taught Pythagoras of Samos- Greek 570-495 BCE Metempsychosis • "Transmigration of souls" • Every soul is immortal and upon death enters a new body Pythagorean Theorem Pythagorean Tuning • System of musical tuning where frequency rations are on intervals based on ration 3:2 • "Pure" perfect fifth • Inspired
    [Show full text]
  • On Certainty (Uber Gewissheit) Ed
    Ludwig Wittgenstein On Certainty (Uber Gewissheit) ed. G.E.M.Anscombe and G.H.von Wright Translated by Denis Paul and G.E.M.Anscombe Basil Blackwell, Oxford 1969-1975 Preface What we publish here belongs to the last year and a half of Wittgenstein's life. In the middle of 1949 he visited the United States at the invitation of Norman Malcolm, staying at Malcolm's house in Ithaca. Malcolm acted as a goad to his interest in Moore's 'defence of common sense', that is to say his claim to know a number of propositions for sure, such as "Here is one hand, and here is another", and "The earth existed for a long time before my birth", and "I have never been far from the earth's surface". The first of these comes in Moore's 'Proof of the External World'. The two others are in his 'Defence of Common Sense'; Wittgenstein had long been interested in these and had said to Moore that this was his best article. Moore had agreed. This book contains the whole of what Wittgenstein wrote on this topic from that time until his death. It is all first-draft material, which he did not live to excerpt and polish. The material falls into four parts; we have shown the divisions at #65, #192, #299. What we believe to be the first part was written on twenty loose sheets of lined foolscap, undated. These Wittgenstein left in his room in G.E.M.Anscombe's house in Oxford, where he lived (apart from a visit to Norway in the autumn) from April 1950 to February 1951.
    [Show full text]
  • Contextualist Responses to Skepticism
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Philosophy Theses Department of Philosophy 6-27-2007 Contextualist Responses to Skepticism Luanne Gutherie Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Gutherie, Luanne, "Contextualist Responses to Skepticism." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2007. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses/22 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONTEXTUALIST RESPONSES TO SKEPTICISM by LUANNE GUTHERIE Under the Direction of Stephen Jacobson ABSTRACT External world skeptics argue that we have no knowledge of the external world. Contextualist theories of knowledge attempt to address the skeptical problem by maintaining that arguments for skepticism are effective only in certain contexts in which the standards for knowledge are so high that we cannot reach them. In ordinary contexts, however, the standards for knowledge fall back down to reachable levels and we again are able to have knowledge of the external world. In order to address the objection that contextualists confuse the standards for knowledge with the standards for warranted assertion, Keith DeRose appeals to the knowledge account of warranted assertion to argue that if one is warranted in asserting p, one also knows p. A skeptic, however, can maintain a context-invariant view of the knowledge account of assertion, in which case such an account would not provide my help to contextualism.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Philosophy
    St. Jerome’s University in the University of Waterloo Department of Philosophy Syllabus Fall Term 2019 Course: PHIL 230J – GOD AND PHILOSOPHY: Section 001 Instructor: Professor Nikolaj Zunic Class Times: 10:00 am – 11:20 am on Mondays and Wednesdays Class Location: SJ1 3016 Office: SH 2003 [Sweeney Hall on the St. Jerome’s Campus] Phone: (519) 884-8111 ext. 28229 E-mail: [email protected] Office Hours: Mondays and Wednesdays: 9:30 am – 10:00 am and 2:30 pm – 3:30 pm; and by appointment: please e-mail the professor. Required Text Brian Davies, Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology, Oxford University Press, 2000. [ISBN 978-0-19-875194-6] Course Description Does God exist? Can God’s existence be proven? What is God’s essence? What is the human being’s relationship to God? What is faith? Is it possible to know God? Is God-talk meaningful and coherent? Does God have a rightful place in philosophical discourse? These are some of the many questions and problems that will be investigated in PHIL 230J: GOD AND PHILOSOPHY this term. As the title of the course suggests, we will be exploring the relationship between God “and” philosophy, generally speaking, not simply a philosophical concept of God. The emphasis should be placed on the conjunction which signifies a relation. To be sure, the reality of God is much greater than what is conceived within the parameters of philosophy alone. Blaise Pascal famously distinguished between the “God of the prophets” and the “God of the philosophers”. Bearing this in mind, we will endeavour to investigate the full reality of God, rather than merely what philosophers consider God to be.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    1 Getting Started Preliminaries COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL The Christian Theology Reader, Fifth Edition. Edited by Alister E. McGrath. Editorial material and organization © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. INTRODUCTION What is theology? The word has been used by Christians since the third century to mean “talk about God.” “Christian theology” thus means something like “talking about God in a Christian way,” recognizing that the word “god” means quite different things to different religious traditions. Christians think about their faith; “theology” is the term used for both this process of reflection and its outcome. To study theology is thus to think systematically about the fundamental ideas of Christianity. It is intellectual reflection on the act, content, and implications of the Christian faith. Starting to study Christian theology involves exploring a whole range of issues. Some of these focus on the identity and characteristics of theology itself. For example, what is theology? And how did it develop? How does it relate to other areas of life, such as philosophy or culture? How does our way of talking about God relate to our everyday language? To what extent – and in what ways – can the existence of God be proved? The present chapter provides readings which explore these and related issues, some in depth. One of the most important debates in Christian theology concerns the relationship between faith and reason. Tradi- tionally, Christian theology has seen reason as operating in a subservient role to revelation. Thomas Aquinas argued that supernatural truths need to be revealed to us. Human reason, on its own, cannot hope to gain access to divine mysteries.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ontological Proof: Kant’S Objections, Plantinga’S Reply
    KSO 2012: 122 The Ontological Proof: Kant’s Objections, Plantinga’s Reply Gregory Robson, Duke University I. Introduction hroughout Immanuel Kant’s era, philosophers richly debated René Descartes’s seventeenth-century reform- ulation of the ontological argument that Anselm origin- T 1 nally advanced in the eleventh century. In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant’s seminal analysis of the capacity and limits of reason and the implications of each for the claims of meta- physics, Kant offers a direct response to Descartes’s ontological proof, considering it against the backdrop of his own, broader line of argument in CPR. The result is perhaps the most des- tructive critique of the ontological argument ever produced.2 The aims of this essay are, first, to present Kant’s criticism of the ontological argument (or better, arguments3—herein I use 1 I am grateful to Gary Banham, Andrew Janiak, and two anonymous reviewers at Kant Studies Online for their feedback on earlier versions of this paper. 2 Alvin Plantinga has called Kant’s argument according to which existence is not a real property of things “[t]he most famous and important objection to the onto- logical argument” (Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil, 92). And, according to Kevin Harrelson, Kant’s rejection of the ontological argument on epistemic grounds constitutes “the most thorough criticism of that argument in the modern period” (Harrelson, The Ontological Argument from Descartes to Hegel, 167). 3 Of course, there is not just one ontological argument—some authors have even themselves offered several ontological arguments. Anselm himself, argues Nor- man Malcolm, put forward two distinct ontological arguments.
    [Show full text]
  • Anselm of Canterbury and the Development of Theological Thought, C
    Durham E-Theses Anselm of Canterbury and the Development of Theological Thought, c. 1070-1141 DUNTHORNE, JUDITH,RACHEL How to cite: DUNTHORNE, JUDITH,RACHEL (2012) Anselm of Canterbury and the Development of Theological Thought, c. 1070-1141, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/6360/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Anselm of Canterbury and the Development of Theological Thought, c. 1070-1141 Judith R. Dunthorne Abstract This thesis explores the role of Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) in the development of theological thought in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries. It aims to demonstrate that Anselm’s thought had a greater impact on the early development of scholastic theology than is often recognized, particularly in the areas of the doctrine of the incarnation and redemption, but also in his discussion of freedom and sin.
    [Show full text]
  • Contextualism in Context: Interview with Michael Williams
    AVANT , Vol. XI, No. 2 ISSN: 2082-6710 avant.edu.pl/en DOI: 10.26913/avant.2020.02.03 Contextualism in Context: Interview with Michael Williams Luca Corti University of Porto MLAG – Mind, Language, and Action Group (Institute of Philosophy, U.Porto) luca.corti @ hotmail.de Diana Couto University of Barcelona BIAP/LOGOS Research Group in Analytic Philosophy MLAG – Mind, Language, and Action Group (Institute of Philosophy, U.Porto) dpcouto @ ub.edu Received 4 October 2019; accepted 5 October 2019; published 10 January 2020 "Contextualism" is usually taken as the name for a very general view that can be found in different areas: from semantics to epistemology, from philosophy of language to philosophy of action. According to contextualism the role of context is necessary for an utterance, knowledge claim or action to have meaning or be intelligible. In philosophy of language, the idea is that what an utterance expresses depends on the context, which therefore has a role in determining its truth-conditions. One of the most renowned “radical contextualists”, Charles Travis writes: “words may have any of many semantics, compatibly with what they mean. Words in fact vary their semantics from one speaking of them to another” (2008, p. 123). Epistemic contextualism, on the other hand, is the view that certain features of the context affect the standards that a subject S must meet in order for S' beliefs to count as knowledge (or, alternatively, for a sentence attributing knowledge to S to be true). Knowledge attributions are context-sensitive. Like the other forms of contextualism, epistemic contextualism comes in various flavors.
    [Show full text]
  • Wittgenstein's Refutation of Idealism
    1 Wittgenstein’s Refutation of Idealism Wittgenstein’s notes, collected as “On Certainty”, are a gold mine of ideas for philosophers concerned with knowledge and scepticism.1 But in my view, Wittgenstein’s approach to scepticism is still not well understood. Obviously, a short essay is no place for an exhaustive treatment of Wittgenstein’s anti-sceptical ideas. Instead, I shall present a reconstruction of a particular argument that I call “Wittgenstein’s Refutation of Idealism”. This argument is developed in the first sixty-five sections of “On Certainty”, although there is a later passage (90) that must also be considered. To appreciate this argument, it is essential to be clear about its target. It is evident that Wittgenstein’s thoughts on scepticism are prompted by Moore’s “Proof of an External World” and “Defence of Common Sense”. 2 But these well-known papers differ in an important way. In his “Proof”, Moore’s topic is external world scepticism in its most general form: his aim is to prove, in defiance of the sceptic and idealist, that external objects, defined as “things to be met with in space”, really do exist. By contrast, in his “Defence”, Moore undertakes to defend a body of rather more specific beliefs: that the earth has existed for many years past, that he has never been far from its surface, and 1 Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty, edited by G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright, translated by Denis Paul and G.E.M. Anscombe (New York: J. and J. Harper 1969). References to this work are given in the text by numbered, displayed paragraphs or by parenthetical paragraph numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 APA Central Division Meeting Program
    The American Philosophical Association CENTRAL DIVISION ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH ANNUAL MEETING PROGRAM VIRTUAL MEETING FEBRUARY 22 – 27, 2021 Mention coupon code ZAPC21 and receive a 30% discount on all pb & a 50% discount on all hc only Offer good until 3/27/21 Order online: www.sunypress.edu Order by phone: 877.204.6073 or 703.661.1575 Critique in German American Endangered Philosophy Aesthetics Excellence From Kant Theory and Practice On the Political to Critical Theory Walter B. Gulick and Philosophy of Aristotle María del Rosario Acosta Gary Slater, editors Pierre Pellegrin López and J. Colin Translated by McQuillan, editors John Dewey’s Anthony Preus Later Logical Hegel on Tragedy Theory The Disintegration and Comedy James Scott Johnston of Community New Essays On Jorge Portilla’s Social Mark Alznauer, editor The Rorty- and Political Philosophy, Available May 2021 Habermas Debate With Translations of Toward Freedom Selected Essays NEW IN PAPER as Responsibility Carlos Alberto Sánchez Hyperthematics Marcin Kilanowski and Francisco Gallegos The Logic of Value Available May 2021 Marc M. Anderson Religion within Decolonizing the Limits Living Landscapes American of History Alone Meditations on the Philosophy Pragmatic Historicism Five Elements in Hindu, Corey McCall and and the Future Buddhist, and Jain Yogas Phillip McReynolds, of Theology Christopher Key Chapple editors Demian Wheeler The Primary Way Image and Contribution to the Philosophy of Yijing Argument in Correction of the Chung-ying Cheng Foreword by Plato’s Republic Public’s Judgments Robert Cummings Marina Berzins McCoy on the French Neville Revolution NEW IN PAPER J. G. Fichte Human Beings Metaphysics Editied, Translated and or Human of Goodness with an Introduction by Becomings? Harmony and Form, Jeffrey Church and A Conversation with Beauty and Art, Anna Marisa Schön Confucianism on the Obligation and Concept of Person Personhood, Flourishing Peter D.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Religion: the Nature and Existence of God
    Philosophy of Religion: The Nature and Existence of God This book contains short lectures on the readings of this section. Dr. Gina Calderone Table of contents • 1 The Existence of God • 2 Aquinas's Second Way o 2.1 The Structure of the Argument o 2.2 Support for the Premises o 2.3 Evaluating the Argument o 2.4 Can the Universe Be Infinitely Old? o 2.5 Can the Universe Pop Into Existence? o 2.6 Does the Cosmological Argument Beg the Question? • 3 Anselm's Ontological Argument o 3.1 Gaunilo's Refutation o 3.2 The Structure of the Arguments • 4 Paley's Teleological Argument o 4.1 The Structure of the Design Argument o 4.2 Hypothesis Testing o 4.3 Paley's Confirmation o 4.4 Did Living Organisms Evolve? o 4.5 Creationism o 4.6 Evolutionism and Creationism o 4.7 Evolution by Natural Selection o 4.8 Picture the Difference o 4.9 Comparing Hypotheses • 5 The Problem of Evil o 5.1 Mackie's Thesis 1 The Existence of God There are several "traditional" ways of arguing for the existence of God. Some of these arguments are supposed to be proofs--i.e., deductively valid arguments with obviously true premises. Aquinas offered several arguments of this sort, the most persuasive of which is known as the Cosmological Argument (see Aquinas's Second Way). Anselm offered a version of what is known as the Ontological Argument, in the form of a reductio ad absurdum. Gaunilo tried to show that Anselm's argument could be used to prove the existence of the most excellent island, which by hypothesis is an imaginary (i.e., non-existent) island.
    [Show full text]