Naturalism Defeated?: Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism [Paperback]

James K. Beilby (Editor)

Product Details

• Paperback: 320 pages
• Publisher: Cornell University Press (May 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0801487633
• ISBN-13: 978-0801487637
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,037,674 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

41 of 43 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A Bit Narrow in Scope but Well Done, January 23, 2006

By 

Reader From Aurora - See all my reviews

This review is from: Naturalism Defeated?: Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (Paperback)

Edited by James Beilby Naturalism Defeated is a collection of essays responding to Alvin Plantinga's thesis that human rationality is unlikely in a purely naturalistic view of evolution, or in other words, if human cognitive faculties developed in an entirely undetermined manner it is unlikely that reason would be reasonable. This argument has been put forth by Plantinga previously in Warrant and Proper Function. I offer the following thoughts for potential readers.

The discussion is structured in a common format for these types of book-length philosophical examinations. Initially, Plantinga provides an overview of his argument. This is followed by a collection of essays discussing and criticizing his thesis. These comments are then followed by Plantinga response to the various contributors. Often in this style of discussion the principle author is allowed to interact individually with each critic. In the present volume, given the number of contributors, a single comprehensive response at the end appears to be the best approach to minimize redundancy.

Plantinga continues to set the stage for much of the discussion within the philosophy of religion and is arguably one the most capable contemporary philosophical thinkers. His handling of the naturalistic evolution - rationality question is characteristically powerful, clear and clever. Given its sweeping repercussions the perceived success or failure of the various commentators will in significant part be determined by the readers' worldview. For instance some atheists may find Plantinga's contention unpalatable irrespective of its logical and intellectual rigor. Whereas, certain theists may be presupposed to gloss over challenges to Plantinga's proposition. From my perspective despite some overlap amongst the different contributors the essays were generally solid (with perhaps the exception of those by Fodor and Fales). The efforts by Alston and Talbot were particularly note worthy.

Although many interesting definitional and semantic issues were discussed, two particularly interesting points were raised by several of Plantinga's critics. First, that the development of reason is as implausible under a theistic construct as it is in an atheist model, and second, the self evident nature of rationality bodes well for its truth value. The first point which attempts to turn the tables on theists - while an interesting rhetorical move - appears to be still born. Complicated Bayesian probability calculations are not required for most people to recognize that rationality is indeed considerably more likely under a theistic view than a purely NE approach. I agree with the latter point (and I sense Plantinga would also) that reason seems to be an almost unassailable brute fact. As noted by Alston, however, this only serves to shift the argument to an equally daunting question for the supporter of naturalistic evolution. That is, is naturalistic evolution probable given its apparent incompatibility with a brute fact such as human reason?

Overall the book is an outstanding work. Comments from a broader range of philosophical positions might have added even more value. Prior exposure to philosophical thought and this argument in particular may make the discussion more fruitful and interesting to the reader.

47 of 56 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Naturally Irrational, December 23, 2002

By 

calcidius (Canada) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Naturalism Defeated?: Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (Paperback)

Naturalists are usually seen as paragons of rationality while theists are thought to be at the edge of crazy. Alvin Plantinga's argument challenged this identification questioning even the possibility of holding to Naturalism and trusting the cognitive faculties. This book begins with challenges to the evolutionary argument against naturalism and ends with a response to the challenges by Alvin Plantinga.

The eleven critical essays here are divided into four sections each one dealing with a separate set of objections to the evolutionary argument against naturalism. The argument itself is briefly presented in the beginning and then re-presented even more briefly by each of 'Beilby's cohorts'. There is some repetition in the book, which is not so bad when you're looking for clarification on the most contentious points under discussion.

The main areas of criticism in the book are from Science (Evolution), Skepticism, Conditional Probabilities/Confirmation Theory and the Nature of Epistemic Defeat.

Prior to reading this book I had thought Plantinga's argument was very strong -- so I was basically looking for objections that I was unaware of and answers to those objections; I found a lot of both. If you already agree with Plantinga you will probably find clarification and strengthening of the argument; if you don't already agree, well, then, I don't know what you'll find maybe shock/horror? Actually, most of the book is critical and provides ammunition for dissenters. But, in the end I think the worst that could be said about the argument is that it was 'bloodied but unbowed' (Plantinga).

I found William Alston's comments very helpful -- they suggest a different way of formulating the argument -- something like a Reductio ad Absurdum I think.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Why Philosophy is important, October 27, 2011

By 

TruthBehold - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Naturalism Defeated?: Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (Paperback)

So many Scientists now a days, and so much positivism and bad philosophy to go along with it.

So much Lack of philosophical thinking, to go along with materialism. As Bad philosophy = Bad scientific interpretation

So much emphasis on the verification principle, which begs the question how can one use the verification principle on the verification principle?

Well the new age scientists who are naturalists seem to come in with a biased naturalistic mindset of "The Supernatural cannot exist, because the supernatural can't exist" circular reasoning. So now it's time for the real "free-thinkers" to bail us out.

Evolutionary Naturalism asserts brain adaptation for "Survival" not "truth" so this really opens the doors to anyone who has an open-mind.

How can we trust our cognitive faculties? What's the secret the ingredient that gives us a sure way of trusting our reason, when reasoning came from reasonless matter?

Plantinga lays down a beauty and puts forth a great argument against Evolutionary Naturalism