Why there is reason to remain sceptical of Durston's scepticism

Trakakis, Nick

doi:10.1017/s0034412505008140

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Without a doubt, the most serious and widespread criticism of skeptical theism is that it is somehow at odds with either moral deliberation (Fales 1992;Almeida andOppy 2003, 2004;Hasker 2004;Pereboom 2004Pereboom , 2005Piper 2007;Maitzen 2009) or moral knowledge (Wachterhauser 1985;Trakakis 2003;Jordan 2006;Schnall 2007). If we are never in a position to tell whether God has a reason for allowing a particular prima facie evil or not, then we are never in a position to tell whether we should allow a particular prima facie evil or not.…”

Section: Inconsistent With Moral Deliberation ⁄ Moral Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Skeptical Theism

McBrayer

2010

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most a posteriori arguments against the existence of God take the following form: If God exists, the world would not be like this (where ‘this’ picks out some feature of the world like the existence of evil, etc.) But the world is like this. Therefore, God does not exist. Skeptical theists are theists who are skeptical of our ability to make judgments of the sort expressed by premise (1). According to skeptical theism, if there were a God, it is likely that he would have reasons for acting that are beyond our ken, and thus we are not justified in making all‐things‐considered judgments about what the world would be like if there were a God. In particular, the fact that we don’t see a good reason for X does not justify the conclusion that there is no good reason for X.1 Thus, skeptical theism purports to undercut most a posteriori arguments against the existence of God. What follows is an account of the nature of skeptical theism, an application of skeptical theism to both the argument from evil and the argument from divine hiddenness, and a review of the cases for and against skeptical theism.

show abstract

Section: Inconsistent With Moral Deliberation ⁄ Moral Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Not all philosophers are convinced that the moral judgments made in the arguments for atheism are this complex (e.g. Trakakis 2003, 2006), but given the pro tanto case presented in examples like the foregoing, the burden of proof lies with the critic.…”

Section: The Case For Skeptical Theismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skeptical Theism

McBrayer

2010

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Why there is reason to remain sceptical of Durston's scepticism

Abstract: In this reply I argue that Durston's defence of his argument from the complexity of history ought to be unacceptable to the theist as it undermines not only common theistic attitudes towards God, such as gratitude and praise, but also the rationality of our ordinary moral practices.

Cited by 1 publication

References 2 publications

Skeptical Theism

Skeptical Theism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About