| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Browse our Bookshelf Favorites store for big savings on popular fiction, nonfiction, children's books, and more. |
Frequently Bought Together
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
67 of 72 people found the following review helpful
By A Customer
Format:Paperback
Truly excellent. This work contains what is perhaps the best discussion of the cosmological argument in print. His treatments of the design argument and of the verificationist challenge to religious language are also first rate. While I find his conclusion--that belief in God is in the same epistemic boat as belief in other minds--less than convincing, his brillant discussion of the topic is still well worth reading. Plantinga isn't always easy to follow, but he repays careful study. Moreover, while he has written much since, this work is still an absolute must read for anyone seriously interested in the philosophy of religion.--Greg Klebanoff
28 of 28 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
Alvin Plantinga's "God and Other Minds" examines leading arguments for and against the existence of God. Plantinga is arguably the pre-eminent contemporary philosopher of religion. Originally published in the 1960s this edition was re-released in 1991with a new preface.
The first part of the book discusses the classic arguments for and against the existence of God: cosmological, ontological, teleological, existence of evil and divine hiddeness. Whereas the latter part of the text argues that belief in God is rational along the lines that belief in other minds is rational. I offer a few comments.
This is an important work in the philosophy of religion and Plantinga is an important thinker in this area. That said, however, I would not recommend this as an entry point into his work. This is one of his earliest works - he has written a tremendous amount of more concise and accessible material in the interim. For students of the philosophy of religion, however, this remains an essential read. This is classic Plantinga - some clear brilliance and exhaustive examination (at times bordering on the tedious). Readers not accustomed to rigorous philosophical analysis may find it a particularly tough slog at times.
Overall this is an important work by a leading philosopher. For those starting out in this area I might suggest something by Craig (theist) or Mackie (atheist) before engaging Plantinga.
The first part of the book discusses the classic arguments for and against the existence of God: cosmological, ontological, teleological, existence of evil and divine hiddeness. Whereas the latter part of the text argues that belief in God is rational along the lines that belief in other minds is rational. I offer a few comments.
This is an important work in the philosophy of religion and Plantinga is an important thinker in this area. That said, however, I would not recommend this as an entry point into his work. This is one of his earliest works - he has written a tremendous amount of more concise and accessible material in the interim. For students of the philosophy of religion, however, this remains an essential read. This is classic Plantinga - some clear brilliance and exhaustive examination (at times bordering on the tedious). Readers not accustomed to rigorous philosophical analysis may find it a particularly tough slog at times.
Overall this is an important work by a leading philosopher. For those starting out in this area I might suggest something by Craig (theist) or Mackie (atheist) before engaging Plantinga.
49 of 58 people found the following review helpful
By S. Guha
Format:Paperback
If this book has a real defect, it is simply the extraordinary level of logical rigor. Rigor past a certain point is rigor mortis. It may be the most exacting discussion of arguments from other minds and from design ever written, and shows in detail (and, to my mind, pretty conclusively) that the usual forms of these arguments do not work. Whoever calls it a "survey" is talking through his hat; it is one of the most original pieces of destructive philosophical criticism since Hume's dialogues on natural religion.
The fellow who calls it a survey tells us that, while reason is powerless to justify belief in other minds, it is false that this means belief in God is just as rational as belief in other minds, because "we are compelled by experience to believe" in other minds. This is a howlingly bad argument. First of all, it is not at all obvious that we are so compelled, since there have been solipsists, Absolute Idealists, monistic pantheists, and skeptics of several varieties. The most that is obvious is that we are compelled to *act as if* there are other minds in ordinary life (ordinary American life, as opposed, say, to an ascetic in a cave)--which is not clearly the same as believing in them. Second, and more importantly, a universal compulsion to believe is not a *reason* to believe, in the sense relevant to traditional epistemology. The mere fact, if it is a fact, that we are naturally inclined (even irresistibly) to believe something doesn't mean our belief is *true*, nor does it constitute any reason to think that it's true. So to point to such a compulsion, even if it exists, is to give no justification at all for the belief. Therefore, even if belief in God is *completely unjustified and irrational*, for all this argument shows, it is exactly as rational as belief in other minds.
And further, Plantinga is not *offering* a justification of "faith" or of theism, in the sense of giving any reasons for believing in God. He is offering an argument that theism is rational, not in the sense that there are reasons for believing it, but in the sense that it is not contrary to reason to believe it without *having* reasons in support of it. These two are not equivalent, unless you beg the question by assuming that nothing is reasonable to believe except what can be proved by reason.
That doesn't mean Plantinga is right. But it does mean that these self-important, puerile criticisms reflect poorly on the critic, not on Plantinga.
The fellow who calls it a survey tells us that, while reason is powerless to justify belief in other minds, it is false that this means belief in God is just as rational as belief in other minds, because "we are compelled by experience to believe" in other minds. This is a howlingly bad argument. First of all, it is not at all obvious that we are so compelled, since there have been solipsists, Absolute Idealists, monistic pantheists, and skeptics of several varieties. The most that is obvious is that we are compelled to *act as if* there are other minds in ordinary life (ordinary American life, as opposed, say, to an ascetic in a cave)--which is not clearly the same as believing in them. Second, and more importantly, a universal compulsion to believe is not a *reason* to believe, in the sense relevant to traditional epistemology. The mere fact, if it is a fact, that we are naturally inclined (even irresistibly) to believe something doesn't mean our belief is *true*, nor does it constitute any reason to think that it's true. So to point to such a compulsion, even if it exists, is to give no justification at all for the belief. Therefore, even if belief in God is *completely unjustified and irrational*, for all this argument shows, it is exactly as rational as belief in other minds.
And further, Plantinga is not *offering* a justification of "faith" or of theism, in the sense of giving any reasons for believing in God. He is offering an argument that theism is rational, not in the sense that there are reasons for believing it, but in the sense that it is not contrary to reason to believe it without *having* reasons in support of it. These two are not equivalent, unless you beg the question by assuming that nothing is reasonable to believe except what can be proved by reason.
That doesn't mean Plantinga is right. But it does mean that these self-important, puerile criticisms reflect poorly on the critic, not on Plantinga.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
AN INTRIGUING DEFENSE OF GOD BY AN EMINENT CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHER
Alvin Carl Plantinga (born 1932) is a Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at the University of Notre Dame, who formerly taught philosophy at Calvin College. Read more
Published 2 months ago by Steven H. Propp
5.0 out of 5 stars
God Is
Plantings book "God and Other Minds" is another excellent production by one of the best philosophers in the nation. Read more
Published 7 months ago by Charles E. Greer
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Book that gave the second wind to respecting theism
Powerful, and ahead of it's time, Alvin Plantinga is one of the "Elite" minds of modern apologetics. Read more
Published on April 4, 2011 by Cornell
5.0 out of 5 stars
God & Other Minds
Once again another classic by Alvin Plantinga. This book is extremely insightful, and his general thesis is very creative. Read more
Published on June 12, 2009 by Christopher Woznicki
5.0 out of 5 stars
Plantinga is a genius.
Plantinga is the greatest Christian philosopher of the 20th century, and probably one of the top Christian philosophers of all time given the originality and impact of his... Read more
Published on October 11, 2008 by Bobby Bambino
2.0 out of 5 stars
If P Implies Q
All throughout the Seventies and early Eighties, I lived in Detroit and worked as a school janitor. The reason I had originally come to Detroit in 1965 was to study graduate... Read more
Published on February 19, 2008 by Edwin Stuart
1.0 out of 5 stars
Wrong is wrong.
Wrong's wrong. All the sophisticated argumentation in the world won't change that. Doctrines and mere theism simply do not deserve the elevated status of axioms or a priori true... Read more
Published on August 20, 2007 by Gordian Knot
2.0 out of 5 stars
Well done survey, but not a rational justification of faith
The main premise of this book is that it is as rational to believe in God as to believe in the existence of other minds, this is false. Read more
Published on September 9, 2004 by socialecologist85
Citations (learn more)
This book cites 26
books:
See all 26 books this book cites
100
books
cite this book:
See all 100 books citing this book
- Philosophical Investigations (3rd Edition) by Ludwig Wittgenstein on 4 pages
- Language, Truth and Logic by Alfred J. Ayer on page 39, page 164, and page 165
- Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion: The Posthumous Essays of the Immortality of the Soul and of Suicide by David Hume on page 96, and page 152
- Philosophy of Mind by V. C. Chappell on page 193, and page 213
- International Library of Philosophy: Religion, Philosophy and Psychical Research: Selected Essays by C.D. Broad on page 39, and page 66
See all 26 books this book cites
- The Analytic Theist: An Alvin Plantinga Reader by Mr. James F. Sennett on 14 pages
- The Thomist Tradition (HANDBOOK OF CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION Volume 2) by Brian J. Shanley on 8 pages
- Philosophy of Religion: A Reader and Guide by William Lane Craig on 7 pages
- Philosophy of Religion: Selected Readings by William L. Rowe on 6 pages
- The Many Faces of Evil (Revised and Expanded Edition): Theological Systems and the Problems of Evil by John S. Feinberg on 5 pages
See all 100 books citing this book
Books on Related Topics
(learn more)
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
