Naturalism: A Critical Analysis (Routledge Studies in Twentieth Century Philosophy) [Hardcover]

William Craig (Editor), J.P. Moreland (Editor)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0415235243 | ISBN-13: 978-0415235242 | Publication Date: October 17, 2000

Naturalism provides a rigorous analysis and critique of the major varieties of contemporary philosophical naturalism. The authors advocate the thesis that contemporary naturalism should be abandoned, in light of the serious objections raised against it. Contributors draw on a wide range of topics including: epistemology, the philosophy of science, the philosophy of mind and agency, and natural theology.

Editorial Reviews

Review

'This book provides a good introduction to work by some contemporary American theistic philosophers of religion. Moreover, it gives clear expression to the recent resurgence in polemical Christian philosophy of religion in American academic philosophy' -  Australian Journal of Philosophy

About the Author

William Lane Craig is Research Professor of Philosophy and J.P. Moreland is Professor of Philosophy, both at Biola University, La Mirado, California.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 304 pages
• Publisher: Routledge (October 17, 2000)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0415235243
• ISBN-13: 978-0415235242
• Product Dimensions: 9.5 x 6.4 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,600,892 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

81 of 91 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Perhaps the most profound book of philosophy in a generation, January 8, 2001

By 

Vince Page (Brookshire, TX USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Naturalism: A Critical Analysis (Routledge Studies in Twentieth Century Philosophy) (Hardcover)

This is a college-level philosophy text in which the words naturalism, etiology, epistemology, ontology and so forth are used without definition, but it is perhaps the most profound book of philosophy in a generation.

The preface would have been better if it had defined such terms for the uninitiated, but reading the text with a dictionary will solve most of these problems. I personally felt that Chapter 2 was writtem in much more of an introductory style than Chapter 1 and should have preceded it for that reason. For these reasons alone, the book gets four stars instead of five. The book itself it excellent.

The book contains 10 chapters, each written by a different author, as follows:

1 - Farewell to philosophical naturalism - Paul Moser & Dave Yandell

2 - Knowledge and Naturalism - Dallas Willard

3 - The incompatibility of naturalism and scientific realism - Robert Koons

4 - Naturalism and the ontological status of properties - J.P. Moreland

5 - Naturalism and material objects - Michael Rea

6 - Naturalism and the mind - Charles Taliaferro

7 - Naturalism and libertarian agency - Stewart Goetz

8 - Naturalism and morality - John Hare

9 - Naturalism and cosmology - William Lane Craig

10- Naturalism and design - William Dembski

In subjecting naturalism -- the rejection of all things supernatural -- to a critical analysis, the authors expose in convincing fashion the complex incompleteness of our current naturalistic thought processes. William Lane Craig's chapter on Naturalism and Cosmology is particularly excellent in this regard and should not be missed by any serious student of physics.

It does not take long while reading this book to realize that the authors may well be erecting a new philosphical structure for the 21st century. They show repeatedly that we ignore some types of information when the information doesn't fit the standard naturalistic model. They emphasize that we cannot hope to achieve our full potential as a species unless we can overcome these self-imposed bounds.

6 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars An Impressive Volume With Critical Essays on Naturalism From a Diverse Field of Scholars, June 21, 2006

By 

Discovery Reviewer (Seattle, WA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Naturalism: A Critical Analysis (Routledge Studies in Twentieth Century Philosophy) (Hardcover)

This impressive volume contains critical essays on naturalism from the perspectives of theology, ethics, cosmology, ontology, and epistemology. Various Discovery Fellows make contributions including Robert C. Koons, J.P. Moreland, William Lane Craig, and William Dembski.

Koons begins by noting that there is a simple correlation between existence and the requirement of some non-natural first cause. He observes an irony that science thinks it requires naturalism, when our very ability to practice science, due to the orderly, reliable, and predictable behavior of the universe implies a non-natural intelligent cause. Scientific dependence upon naturalism is self-refuting.

Moreland's quotes Plato to reveal that there really is nothing new under the sun: scholars have been debating naturalism for millennia, and naturalists have been ever pugnacious in their insistence that mutual co-existence is not an option. Moreland recounts that the great philosopher wrote in Sophist:

"They [naturalists] define reality as the same thing as body, and as soon as one of the opposite party asserts that anything without a body is real, they are utterly contemptuous and will not listen to another word. ... On this issue an interminable battle is always going on between the two camps."

Yet the battle may eventually be over if the cosmological data presented by William Lane Craig has anything to do with it. Craig recounts the history of cosmology from when where scholars celebrated an eternal universe with no beginning or end, to one where the universe either has a "supernatural cause" or "one must say that the universe simply sprang into being out of nothing" (Big Bang cosmology mandates an expanding universe that is finite in both space and time.). Craig recounts the words of one team of scientists: "The problem of the origin [of the universe] involves a certain metaphysical aspect which may be either appealing or revolting."

William Dembski closes the volume by arguing that naturalism is no more supported by the scientific data in biology than it is supported in cosmology. Irreducible complexity in nature disallows the possibility that life arose via naturalistic mechanisms. It also signifies an intelligent cause that scientists cannot deny any longer.

18 of 83 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars staw men, August 26, 2003

By 

K. Curtin (Hamden, CT USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Naturalism: A Critical Analysis (Routledge Studies in Twentieth Century Philosophy) (Hardcover)

Anyone can knock down straw men and these guys do it with enthusiasm.

If we believe there is only matter we are told we have no basis for maorality. That simply is not true. We have evolved to have certain social qualities and the ability to think abstractly and these are the basis of morality. This argument seems to presuppose that for morality to matter we have to have chosen it out of thin air via free will. If it has a more solid basis it is not really morality. We care about what we care about even if the basis is physical.

Free will posses a greater problem. But through the history of modren western thought free will has been slowly chipped away at. We now recognize that people can have organic physical problems that impair "free will" and their ability to judge moral actions and that we can have childhood experiences that greatly influence our actions and we all accept this. It seems we assign to free will only what we cannot explain in our choices of behavior. Christians have an even bigger problem with free will that they always manage to sweep under the rug. God, they say, gave us free will. Well, what a dumb move. It is like giving the assylum keys to the lunatics: utterly irresponsible. If God gave us free will he is responsible for the consequences and for the evil we do as a result. AFter all, giving us free will was HIS choice and we are all responsible for our choices. So, unless we hold God to a lesser standard he is responsible for the wrong we do and the pain we inflict as a result of his foolish choice to let us do it. The usual answer is that we cannot comprehend his plan. But surely we can comprehend that he gave us the ability to do harm to eachother and is therefore responsible for that choice. This is incocnsistent with all-knowing, all-good, all-loving etc.

For those who want to see just how organic and physically based we really are please read Oliver Sachs "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat". You will see how brain damage can lead to all sorts of bizarre cognition and behavior (this also includes changes in moral nehavior and judgment). If physical problems can so greatly disturb the way we believe, behave, and function maybe, just maybe that is because the whole thing is physically based!!!! It isn't wild and it isn't disturbing to think this. Really it is just common sense.