Response to Churchland
Philo 13 (2):201-207 (2010)
Abstract
Paul Churchland argues that Plantinga’s evolutionary argument against naturalism is unsuccessful and so we need not accept its conclusion. In this paper, we respond to Churchland’s argument. After we briefly recapitulate Plantinga’s argument and state Churchland’s argument, we offer three objections to Churchland’s argument: (1) its first premise has little to recommend it, (2) its second premise is false, and (3) its conclusion is consistent with, and indeed entails, the conclusion of Plantinga’s argumentAuthor's Profile
ISBN(s)
1098-3570
DOI
10.5840/philo20101326
Analytics
Added to PP
2012-09-18
Downloads
235 (#36,810)
6 months
15 (#59,221)
2012-09-18
Downloads
235 (#36,810)
6 months
15 (#59,221)
Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?