By Robin Le Poidevin
In Arguing for Atheism , Robin Le Poidevin addresses the query of no matter if theism - the view that there's a own, transcendent writer of the universe - solves the private mysteries of lifestyles. Philosophical defences of theism have frequently been according to the concept it explains issues which atheistic techniques can't: for instance, why the universe exists, and the way there may be goal ethical values. the most rivalry of Arguing for Atheism is that the opposite is correct: that during truth theism fails to give an explanation for many stuff it claims to. Such an interpretation has been argued for lately by means of 'radical theologians'; Arguing for Atheism is as a result, a philosophical contribution to at least one of the most important spiritual problems with our instances. Designed as a textual content for collage classes within the philosophy of faith and metaphysics, this book's obtainable type and various causes of vital philosophical ideas and positions also will make it appealing to the final reader.
Read Online or Download Arguing for Atheism: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion PDF
Similar religious history books
In recent times, such a lot educational reviews of the books of Kings have focused on how they have been written. such a lot students examine the best way the nature of Solomon is depicted in I Kings 1-11. a few see Solomon as being portrayed favourably firstly yet negatively via the top of the outlet element of Kings.
The Christian suggestion of heaven flourished for nearly millennia, however it has misplaced a lot of its energy within the final hundred years. certainly this present day even theologians are likely to stay away from the subject. yet heaven has continuously been a important guideline of the Christian religion, writes Jeffrey Burton Russell. If there is not any heaven, no resurrection of the lifeless, the total Christian tale is not sensible.
This booklet is a research of the town and concrete lifestyles in Roman Palestine through the Talmudic interval, 100-400 B. C. instead of concentrate on a particular urban, Daniel Sperber synthesizes what's identified approximately urban lifestyles in Talmudic Palestine to create a paradigmatic hypothetical Palestinian urban. Drawing on quite a few literary files for his details, he describes the constitution and use of many actual elements of the town, reminiscent of its markets, pubs, streets, bathhouses, roads, partitions, bogs, and water provide.
Approximately forty% of all americans haven't any reference to geared up faith. but a lot of those humans, even if they could by no means step inside of a home of worship, stay profoundly non secular lives. yet what's the nature and price of unchurched spirituality in the US? Is it a contemporary phenomenon, a brand new Age fad that might quickly fade, or a long-standing and crucial element of the yank adventure?
- A Fire in the Bones
- Bede: A Biblical Miscellany
- The Short Chronicle: A Poor Clare's Account of the Reformation of Geneva (The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe)
- Jewish Leadership in Roman Palestine from 70 C.E. to 135 C.E.
- Places of Faith: A Road Trip across America's Religious Landscape
- Fundamental Concepts in Max Weber’s Sociology of Religion
Extra resources for Arguing for Atheism: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion
So, if A exists in one world, and B exists in another, we have to determine whether A is greater in the world in which A exists than B in the world in which B exists. Thus we could say that Zeus is greater than Charlie Chaplin—even though Charlie Chaplin actually existed whereas Zeus did not—if, in the worlds in which Zeus exists, he is more powerful, more knowledgeable, etc. than Chaplin is in the worlds in which he exists. Now we have defined God as ‘That which is greater than any other object in any possible world’, and what this means is that God is more powerful, more knowledgeable, etc.
Either will do for our purposes, but for simplicity I shall use ‘analytic’ to mean ‘has a self-contradictory negation’. So, to return to our premise, can it plausibly be regarded as analytically true? No. Someone who sincerely asserted that there were, or might be, some things which began to exist and yet were not caused would not obviously be contradicting themselves. It is true that we might be highly puzzled by the thought of something’s coming into existence without a cause, since there would apparently be no explanation of why it came into existence when it did, nor indeed of why it came into existence at all.
A simple analogy for this view of the universe is provided by the surface of the earth: if you set out from some point on the equator, remain on the equator, and do not go through the same place more than once, your journey will only be finitely long; not because you will eventually reach a barrier through which you cannot pass, but because you will end up at your starting point. It is tempting to be misled by this analogy with the earth’s surface and suppose that the situation represented by Fig.