期刊文献+

保证知识论与基督教信念 被引量:1

Warrant and Christian Belief
下载PDF
导出
摘要 Alvin Plantinga后期建立了保证的知识论,并在此架构下对有神信念辩护。他主要是回应启蒙运动以来的对有神信念知识上批判。Plantinga认为这些启蒙批判事先预设了有神信念为假,因此不是知识上有效的反驳。有些批评认为Plantinga的论证结构有问题。本文介绍这些批评,指出Planinga的论证有两个背景,分别是保证的知识结构和改革宗的预设护教学。补充完整背景后,Plantinga的论证策略不仅可以理解,也可以回应批评。尽管Plantinga的论证可成立,但他对启蒙批判的理解有误。本文指出,启蒙批判的本体立场乃是自然主义,并介绍反自然主义的论证,结论是有神信念比之自然主义有知识上的优势。 In Warranted Christian Belief (WCB), Alvin Plantinga responses to the de jure objections to the Christian belief. The de jure objections question the epistemic legitimacy of Christian belief. They charge that Christian belief, whether true or not, is epistemic defected, such as not justified, not rational or not warranted. Plantinga contends that de jure objections in fact presuppose the falsehood of Christian belief, and hence are not successful objections to the Christian belief's epistemic status. Critics question the candidacy of this reasoning, and argue that de jure objections are not necessary to presuppose the falsehood of the Christian belief. This paper investigates the structure of warrant epistemology, and concludes that the four elements that can contribute to the unwarranted Christian belief are all related to its falsehood. In this sense Plantinga can charge de jure as presupposing the falsehood of Christian belief. This paper points out that WCB has another background, the presuppositionalism apologetics in the Christian Reformed tradition. In this presuppositional trajectory, Plantinga argues not only that de jure objections presuppose the falsehood of Christian belief, but also his main thesis as "if Christian belief is true, then it is warranted". Though Plantinga's argument is sound, his interpretation to the de jure objections seems wrong, and this paper suggests a possible way out for the de jure objections. This paper argues that de jure objections are ontologically committed to naturalism, and introduces the argument against naturalism. This paper concludes that the Christian belief has a comparative epistemic advantage over naturalism, and in this sense it can be said the defense for the Christian belief is successful.
作者 禤庆文
出处 《逻辑学研究》 2010年第2期87-101,共15页 Studies in Logic
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1C.Anthony Anderson.“Lewis‘ anti-naturalism argument”. http://www.philosophy. ucsb.edu/faculty/anderson/lewisanti.html .
  • 2David Hume.Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion,PartⅤ[].Philosophy of Religion.1999
  • 3Plato.Republic[].Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy.2005
  • 4.Alvin Plantinga[]..1985
  • 5Cornelius van Til.Why I Believe in God[]..2007
  • 6Douglas Walton.Informal Logic:A Pragmatic Approach[]..2008
  • 7Tyler Wunder."Review of warranted Christian belief"[].Philo.2002
  • 8Linda Zagzebski."The Inescapability of Gettier problems"[].Philosophical Quaterly.1994
  • 9Gettier Edmund L.Is justified true belief knowledge?[].Analysis.1963
  • 10Lovell CAK.Production Frontiers and Productive Efficiency[].The Measurement of Productive Efficiency: Techniques and Applications.1993

同被引文献16

引证文献1

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部