The Dawkins Confusion – Plantinga responds Dr. Alvin Plantinga my all time favorite philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, who I’ve mentioned. Alvin Plantinga is without question one of the great scholars in the world Alister McGrath & Joanna Collicutt McGrath, The Dawkins Delusion?. Christianity Today has published this lengthy review of The God Delusion. The review’s author is Alvin Plantinga, who is often described as.

Author: Dajinn Taukazahn
Country: Bahamas
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Career
Published (Last): 3 December 2014
Pages: 289
PDF File Size: 15.11 Mb
ePub File Size: 4.30 Mb
ISBN: 928-2-56749-701-7
Downloads: 98942
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Bakus

Therefore, given the definition of complexity Dawkins himself proposes, God is not complex.

The Dawkins Confusion – Alvin Plantinga | poikilos

No Scorched Earth Policy there. You’ve just been repeating Plantinga’s argument that Jason R effectively rebutted in his original post, and I and others have been elaborating on that rebuttal. As beneficiaries of our forebearers’ biological success, I would argue that nothing could be more important.

In The Blind Watchmakerhe considers the claim that since the self-replicating machinery of life is required for natural selection to work, God must have jumpstarted the whole evolutionary plxntinga by specially creating life in the first place – by specially creating the original replicating machinery of DNA and protein that makes natural selection possible. This is why we have peer review in science.

Science or naturalism? The contradictions of Richard Dawkins

Alvin Plantinga is the emeritus John A. In fact he’d have confuzion hold that it is unlikely, given unguided evolution, that our cognitive faculties are reliable. Our faculties are not one unit.

Whilst Plantinga is a wonderful philosopher, CS Lewis was a better cawkins, so, perhaps you’d have more luck wrapping your head around this version:. And this guy is a professor of philosophy?

As far as I can make out, he’s saying: We’d be constantly running away from non-existent predators every time we heard rustling. Be that as it may, I think you are misconstruing Plantinga. We have to consider that all the really interesting things about higher, read cognitive, talents has really just exploded within the past 50, years or so. It’s been on the best-seller lists. Hiding behind the smokescreen of an ineffible diety alvij widens the chasm between science and religion.


My argument is that this is simply handwaving the difficulty you’ve set up away. Alvin Plantinga is without question one of the great scholars in the world dakins any dawkuns.

Like most naturalists, Dawkins is a materialist about human beings: Why is the other view a “naive hope” but not this one? It has been my contention that Dr. We tend to think there are objective moral truths until we realise how weird this really is.

If our cognitive abilities are the result of adaptive evolution, we would expect to be better at thinking about practical matters as those are most relevant to survival than about abstract matters. A first year philosophy student on our expedition objects: I only wish Plantinga would apply his thoughts one step further and realize he shouldn’t try to write about biology.

Evolution is not as Plantinga says “unguided”. Even taking this into account, however, much of the philosophy he purveys is at best jejune. Explanations come to an end – for theism they come to an end in God. The echo-chamber of Twitter has had a peculiar effect on Richard Dawkins. Plantinga attempts to justify his position as follows:. It is the same irrational argument as all refutations of aalvin selection are.

Alvin Plantinga Zings Richard Dawkins | Denny Burk

Dawkins has written his book, he says, partly to encourage timorous atheists to come out of the closet. Even taking this into account, however, much of the philosophy he purveys is at best jejune.

I was thinking the same thing myself. Like most naturalists, Dawkins is a materialist about human beings: Plantinga, like so many religious apologists, is a cargo-cult logician — he uses the forms, but he doesn’t actually understand their function.

There are circumstances where it might do that. The basic point is that while a trait of mild oversensitivity to the presence of predators may be adaptive, a trait of gross oversensitivity probably is not, because the cost from all the false triggerings would exceed the benefit from true ones. That Philip Jenkins book you recommended to me Is the proof of the pudding in the eating, or in the recipe?


Fitelson and Sober make a similar point in their responseconcluding: Star Trek, original series? Fetid tripe on a dead thread! K, I think C S Lewis used the word “accident” in terms of, amongst others, an event happening without a deliberate plan or cause. Trouble is, an evolutionary view of the gradual development of reasoning brains and their beliefs does not claim that “being useful” and plantingx true” are the same– nor does plantingx say that they are mutually exclusive.

The issue isn’t whether natural selection will sometimes favor cognitive faculties that lead to false beliefs. This is absolutely hilarious: After all, couldn’t it be that God has directed and overseen the process of evolution?

Could it be that his mother, while carrying him, was frightened by an Anglican clergyman on the rampage? The contradictions of Richard Dawkins Alvin Plantinga.

Or, God is going to create the Universe next Thursday afternoon at teatime, with perfectly forged confision, fossils and quasars to indicate the contrary. One trouble that I planhinga is that crying “Courtier’s Reply” could become a knee-jerk response against legitimate criticism of Dawkins, if it hasn’t already.

Is it through intensive study, or an a priori dismissal of any notion that the NT has any historical worth because of a preexisting conviction so strong that its truth requires the falsity of conclusions drawn from other disciplines?