Alvin Plantinga – författare

This is a reissue of a book which is an exploration and defence of the notion of modality 'de re', the idea that objects have both essential and accidental properties. It is one of the first full-length studies of the modalities to emerge from the debate to which Saul Kripke, David Lewis, Ruth Marcus and others have contributed.The argument is developed by means of the notion of possible worlds, and ranges over key problems including the nature of essence, trans-world identity, negative existential propositions, and the existence of unactual objects in other possible worlds. In the final chapters Professor Plantinga applies his logical theories to the clarification of two problems in the philosophy of religion - the Problem of Evil and the Ontological Argument.

This book is intended for professional philosophers as well as upper-level undergraduate and graduate students (courses in epistemology).

Professor Plantinga is known for distinguished work in the fields of epistemology and philosophy of religion. In this companion volume to Warrant: The Current Debate, Plantinga develops an original approach to the question of what justifies belief and makes it knowledge. He argues that what is crucial to turning true belief into knowledge is the "proper functioning" of one's cognitive faculties, and this clears the way for the proposal that a belief is warranted whenever it is the product of properly functioning cognitive processes. Although this is in some sense a sequel to the companion volume, the arguments in no way presuppose those of the first book and it can therefore stand alone.

Professor Plantinga is known for distinguished work in the fields of epistemology and philosophy of religion. In this companion volume to Warrant: The Current Debate, Plantinga develops an original approach to the question of what justifies belief and makes it knowledge. He argues that what is crucial to turning true belief into knowledge is the "proper functioning" of one's cognitive faculties, and this clears the way for the proposal that a belief is warranted whenever it is the product of properly functioning cognitive processes. Although this is in some sense a sequel to the companion volume, the arguments in no way presuppose those of the first book and it can therefore stand alone.

This volume collects the most important articles on the _ metaphysics of modality by noted philosopher Alvin _ Plantinga. The book chronicles Plantinga's thought from the late 1960's to the present. Platinga is here concerned with fundamental issues in mataphysics: what is the nature of _ abstract objects like possible worlds, properties, _ propositions, and such phenomena? Are there possible but _ non-actual objects? Can objects that do not exist exemplify properties? In this thorough and searching book, Plantinga addresses these and many other questions that continue to_ preoccupy philosophers in the field. This volume contains_ some of the best work in metaphysics from the past 30 years, and will remain a source of critical contention and keen interest among philosophers of metaphysics and philosophical logic for years to come.

This volume collects the most important articles on the metaphysics of modality by noted philosopher Alvin Plantinga. The book chronicles Plantinga's thought from the late 1960's to the present. Plantinga here is concerned with 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 objects? Can objects that do not exist exemplify properties? In this thorough and searching book, Plantinga addresses these and many other questions that continue to preoccupy philosophers in the field. This volume contains some of the best work in metaphysics from the past 30 years, and will remain a source of critical contention and keen interest among philosophers of metaphysics and philosophical logic for years to come.

This is the third volume in Alvin Plantinga's trilogy on the notion of warrant, which he defines as that which distinguishes knowledge from true belief. In this volume, Plantinga examines warrant's role in theistic belief, tackling the questions of whether it is rational, reasonable, justifiable, and warranted to accept Christian belief and whether there is something epistemically unacceptable in doing so. He contends that Christian beliefs are warranted to the extent that they are formed by properly functioning cognitive faculties, thus, insofar as they are warranted, Christian beliefs are knowledge if they are true.

This is the third volume in Alvin Plantinga's trilogy on the notion of warrant, which he defines as that which distinguishes knowledge from true belief. In this volume, Plantinga examines warrant's role in theistic belief, tackling the questions of whether it is rational, reasonable, justifiable, and warranted to accept Christian belief and whether there is something epistemically unacceptable in doing so. He contends that Christian beliefs are warranted to the extent that they are formed by properly functioning cognitive faculties, thus, insofar as they are warranted, Christian beliefs are knowledge if they are true.

One of today's most controversial and heated issues is whether or not the conflict between science and religion can be reconciled. In Science and Religion: Are They Compatible?, renowned philosophers Daniel C. Dennett and Alvin Plantinga expand upon the arguments that they presented in an exciting live debate held at the 2009 American Philosophical Association Central Division conference. An enlightening discussion that will motivate students to think critically, Science and Religion: Are They Compatible? opens with Plantinga's assertion that Christianity is compatible with evolutionary theory because Christians believe that God created the living world, and it is entirely possible that God did so by using a process of evolution. Dennett vigorously rejects this argument, provoking a reply from Plantinga, another response from Dennett, and final statements from both sides. As philosophers, the authors possess expert skills in critical analysis; their arguments provide a model of dialogue between those who strongly disagree. Ideal for courses in philosophy of religion, science and religion, and philosophy of science, Science and Religion is also captivating reading for general readers.

This book is a long-awaited major statement by a pre-eminent analytic philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, on one of our biggest debates -- the compatibility of science and religion. The last twenty years has seen a cottage industry of books on this divide, but with little consensus emerging. Plantinga, as a top philosopher but also a proponent of the rationality of religious belief, has a unique contribution to make. His theme in this short book is that the conflict between science and theistic religion is actually superficial, and that at a deeper level they are in concord. Plantinga examines where this conflict is supposed to exist -- evolution, evolutionary psychology, analysis of scripture, scientific study of religion -- as well as claims by Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and Philip Kitcher that evolution and theistic belief cannot co-exist. Plantinga makes a case that their arguments are not only inconclusive but that the supposed conflicts themselves are superficial, due to the methodological naturalism used by science. On the other hand, science can actually offer support to theistic doctrines, and Plantinga uses the notion of biological and cosmological "fine-tuning" in support of this idea. Plantinga argues that we might think about arguments in science and religion in a new way -- as different forms of discourse that try to persuade people to look at questions from a perspective such that they can see that something is true. In this way, there is a deep and massive consonance between theism and the scientific enterprise.

Arguments about the "evidences of Christianity" have consumed the talents of believers and agnostics. These arguments have tried to give—or to deny—Christian belief a "foundation." Belief is rational, the argument goes, only if it is logically derived from axiomatic truths or is otherwise supported by "enough evidence."Arguments for belief generally fail to sway the unconvinced. But is this because the evidence is flimsy and the arguments weak—or because they attempt to give the right answer to the wrong question? What, after all, would satisfy Russell's all for evidence?Faith and Rationality investigates the rich implications of what the authors call "Calvinistic" or "Reformed epistemology." This is the view of knowledge-enunciated by Calvin, further developed by Barth-that sees belief in God as its own foundation; in the authors' terms, is it properly "basic" in itself.

Arguments about the "evidences of Christianity" have consumed the talents of believers and agnostics. These arguments have tried to give—or to deny—Christian belief a "foundation." Belief is rational, the argument goes, only if it is logically derived from axiomatic truths or is otherwise supported by "enough evidence."Arguments for belief generally fail to sway the unconvinced. But is this because the evidence is flimsy and the arguments weak—or because they attempt to give the right answer to the wrong question? What, after all, would satisfy Russell's all for evidence?Faith and Rationality investigates the rich implications of what the authors call "Calvinistic" or "Reformed epistemology." This is the view of knowledge-enunciated by Calvin, further developed by Barth-that sees belief in God as its own foundation; in the authors' terms, is it properly "basic" in itself.

Is belief in God epistemically justified? That's the question at the heart of this volume in the Great Debates in Philosophy series, with Alvin Plantinga and Michael Tooley each addressing this fundamental question with distinctive arguments from opposing perspectives. The first half of the book contains each philosopher's explanation of his particular view; the second half allows them to directly respond to each other's arguments, in a lively and engaging conversationOffers the reader a one of a kind, interactive discussionForms part of the acclaimed Great Debates in Philosophy series

Is belief in God epistemically justified? That's the question at the heart of this volume in the Great Debates in Philosophy series, with Alvin Plantinga and Michael Tooley each addressing this fundamental question with distinctive arguments from opposing perspectives. The first half of the book contains each philosopher's explanation of his particular view; the second half allows them to directly respond to each other's arguments, in a lively and engaging conversationOffers the reader a one of a kind, interactive discussionForms part of the acclaimed Great Debates in Philosophy series