7 found
Order:
See also
Alvin Plantinga
University of Notre Dame
  1. Against materialism.Alvin Plantinga - 2006 - Faith and Philosophy 23 (1):3-32.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  2. Essays in the metaphysics of modality.Alvin Plantinga & Matthew Davidson - 2003 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Matthew Davidson.
    Perhaps no one has done more in the last 30 years to advance thinking in the metaphysics of modality than has Alvin Plantinga. Collected here are some of his most important essays on this influential subject. Dating back from the late 1960's to the present, they chronicle the development of Plantinga's thoughts about some of the most fundamental issues in metaphysics: what is the nature of abstract objects like possible worlds, properties, propositions, and such phenomena? Are there possible but non-actual (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  3. Proper functionalism.Kenneth Boyce & Alvin Plantinga - 2012 - In Andrew Cullison (ed.), The Continuum Companion to Epistemology. Continuum. pp. 124.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  4. Truth, Omniscience, and Cantorian Arguments: An Exchange.Alvin Plantinga & Patrick Grim - 1993 - Philosophical Studies 71 (3):267-306.
    An exchange between Patrick Grim and Alvin Plantinga regarding Cantorian arguments against the possibility of an omniscient being.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  5. Reply.Alvin Plantinga - 2002 - Analytic Philosophy 43 (2):124-135.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. Précis of Where the Conflict Really Lies.Alvin Plantinga - 2013 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 5 (3):1.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Response to Churchland.Aaron Segal & Alvin Plantinga - 2010 - Philo 13 (2):201-207.
    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 argument.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation