By Victor Reppert
During this e-book Victor Reppert champions C. S. Lewis. Darwinists try and use technological know-how to teach that our international and its population may be absolutely defined because the fabricated from a senseless, purposeless procedure of physics and chemistry. yet Lewis claimed in his argument from cause that if such materialism or naturalism have been actual then clinical reasoning itself couldn't be depended on. Victor Reppert believes that Lewis's arguments were too usually disregarded. In C. S. Lewis's harmful notion Reppert bargains cautious, capable improvement of Lewis's inspiration and demonstrates that the elemental thrust of Lewis's argument from cause can endure up lower than the burden of the main severe philosophical assaults.
Read or Download C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason PDF
Similar history & philosophy books
"The Nobel Prizes take pleasure in huge, immense status through the international. each year, technology is propelled into the limelight, and in October, while the prizes are introduced, and December, after they are provided at a rite in Stockholm, a selected few scientists gather megastar prestige and their technological know-how gets extensive assurance within the information media.
Each spring, summer season, and fall it descends on us, bringing rounds of sneezing, complications, and filled noses. It assaults via meals, animals, crops, and innumerable chemical mixtures. it truly is one of the commonest and almost certainly deadly afflictions identified. It has a different heritage as either a clinical and a cultural phenomenon.
In the back of the entire traditional issues, struggles, and information of your way of life, do you suspect there's a context in which it relatively issues what you opt to do? smooth technological know-how has printed insights concerning the universe that have been unimagined quite a few generations in the past. definitely a few of these insights are very important for knowing the final context that offers which means and value to our lives.
Lawsuits of ""The way forward for existence and the way forward for our Civilization"" symposium, held in Frankfurt, Germany in may well 2005.
- Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors
- Bioethics and Biosafety in Biotechnology
- Induction, Probability, and Confirmation
- Alternative Modernity: The Technical Turn in Philosophy and Social Theory
- The psychophysical ear : musical experiments, experimental sounds, 1840-1910
- Surrender and Catch: Experience and Inquiry Today
Additional info for C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason
They llIay be just as sure Ihat Ihere are beliefs and on Ihat account conclude thai any argumenl purporting 10 show Ihat Ihere can'l be beliefs in a malerialist universe must Imve something wrong with it. There is an important difference between the reductio ad absurdum argumenls that we find in Lewis and olhers on the one hand and the straw man fallacy on the other. If argumenls are provided for Ihe conclusion Ihal· a position has absurd consequences, this is not Ihe straw man fallacy. Only when the straw man is presenled without any argumenls showing why these conclusions follow from a position actually held does one commit the simII' man fallacy.
Thlls we have a good reason to reject materialism. ANSCO~IBE'S TETRACIWTO~IY The hulk of Anscombc's criticisms, howe"er, concern her conten· tion that the argnment from re"son, at least as presented in Lewis's lirst edition, fails to distinguish between ,,,,,ious types of"full" cxpla. nations. Anscomhe c1"imcd tlmt "full" explanations are explana. tions that completely satis~' an inquirer's curiosity, so there can he different "full" exphmations depending on wl",t the inquirer wanls to know. Anscombe distinguishes four types of explanations: "'For a detailed tliSC lIssioll or Ihe Skcphc:1i Tineal- Best Explanation dlslinclioll, ~c Reppert.
OooI1O\nlcn/h lllll>. Russell. "Vulue or Free Thought," p. 94. 33 Christianity because Ihey were supporled by ralional arguments, but in fact Ihese rational argumenls are rationalizalions for beliefs chosen for preinlellectual reasons. On Ihis account, we should perhaps not be 100 surprised by the decidedly Freudian perspective we find in some wellknown accounts of Lewis's life, notably A. N. ' But nonbelievers are not the only people who make strong rationalist claims on behalf of their own beliefs and explain Iheir 01'1'0nenls' beliefs in terms of cognitive pathology.
C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason by Victor Reppert