PDF | On May 1, , Maarten Boudry and others published Alvin Plantinga: Where the Conflict Really Lies. Science, Religion and. Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism by Alvin Plantinga. Jim Slagle. Burgemeestersstraat 16/, B‐ Leuven. Plantinga’s book is a semi-popular treatment of the conflicts, real or perceived, between science and religion, broadly construed. Because these disciplines are .

Author: Shakazshura Dailkis
Country: Uzbekistan
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Business
Published (Last): 19 February 2012
Pages: 222
PDF File Size: 13.94 Mb
ePub File Size: 12.33 Mb
ISBN: 962-3-30559-720-8
Downloads: 1438
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Yozshulmaran

Why, zlvin than for the mere whee of rebellion, would anyone want to believe that the entire living world has been produced by mindless natural selection? Plantinga is one of the greatest philosophers’ alive today. But laws are laws only if obeyed. We have to cease being docile by believing only what others want us to believe.

I can understand why the people that praise this book do so, since I’m sure if you think like him you found this more entertaining and plantigna hair-pulling, but I cannot for the life of me believe it could convince someone not already on his side. There are large swaths of discussions on advanced probability theory and similar topics. Plantinga makes a case that their arguments are not only inconclusive but that the supposed conflicts themselves are superficial, due planinga the methodological naturalism used by science.

Aug 30, John Quin rated it really liked it. My respect for Dan Dennett took a major dive when I heard the terms in which he praised the book. Open Preview See a Problem?

I know this to be true because I have seen allvin work of others plantingz least that part I understand and that interpretation appears to fit what I know of the universe.

He was an avid proponent of the theory of an expanding universe and argued long and hard with such luminaries as Einstein against the steady state universe. A related point concerns Plantinga’s rejection near the end of chapter conflicg of the claim that evolution makes the problem of evil worse.

Most believers, given the depth and significance of their belief in God, are not going to opt for science; their attitude towards science is likely to be or become one of suspicion and mistrust. More This book is a long-awaited major statement by a pre-eminent analytic philosopher, on one of our biggest debates—the compatibility of science and religion. At best it would show, given a couple of assumptions, that it is not astronomically improbable that the living world was produced by unguided evolution and hence without design.


Aug 11, Rick Mattson rated it really liked it. The book examines where this conflict is supposed to exist—evolution, evolutionary psychology, analysis of scripture, scientific study of religion—as well as claims by Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and Philip Kitcher that evolution and theistic belief cannot co-exist.

Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism

I didn’t read every word of this book, skipping in particular the tiny print sections and footnotes. That certainly leaves a lot of room for God’s involvement.

But what I want to argue is that the naturalist has a powerful reason against this initial assumption, and should give it up.

Quotes from Where the Conflic The conflict is about an ‘add-on’ to that theory about which no New Atheist ever gave a plausible argument. And, whatever his vices, that feeling is among Plantinga’s virtues. Before I start, I should confess a personal interest.

Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism by Alvin Plantinga

Scientists search only for natural causes of natural phenomena, and time and again natural causes have been found. He points out that design beliefs are often formed in the basic way instead of by inferring them from other beliefs. When I first started reading this book, I began reading the footnotes because they sometimes had useful information, but the result of having so many long footnotes is that the reader’s focus and grasp of the subject matter is ruined.

Classical, Early, and Medieval Poetry and Poets: Which parts make for the hardest or most interesting reading probably depends on the reader’s background familiarity with the topic.


Why not make heaven? These sorts of basic failures of scientific understanding undermine him throughout the llies, as anyone with a scientific background should be able to pick out the misrepresentations easily.

He argues that there truly is a conflict, but it is between science and naturalism. If we believe in causality, we must believe that the Kingdom of God is available to us, whenever we choose to welcome it in.

Plantinga actually concludes that one cannot coherently believe both in ev Plantinga, unfashionably, argues the case for the real conflict being not between science and theism but between science and naturalism.

Sep 18, Rick Sam rated it liked it Shelves: So many, in fact, that I had to stop reading them so that I could understand the points the author tries to make.


In the second part of the book Plantinga looks at two areas where there appears to be a superficial conflict: Sometimes I found this a bit monotonous but I guess years of being a philosopher at the highest level has trained him to always present a watertight case. Nevertheless, both believers and skeptics of religion should, in my opinion, familiarize themselves with Plantinga, whom Nagel calls a “philosophically subtle and scientifically informed theist.

The book argues that we might think about arguments in science and religion in a new way—as different forms of discourse that try to persuade people to look at questions from a perspective such that they can see that something is true. Given the target audience, it is perhaps not surprising that the book does not always dig deeply or broadly enough to fully satisfy specialists in philosophy of religion; but unlike the majority of books on science and religion, it is never philosophically superficial.

Whether or not this argument is outweighed or offset or undermined by the fact that the ability to discover causes of any kind requires a match between our cognitive faculties and the world is an interesting question I won’t explore here.

On this definition too, it is possible for all mutations to be random even if God regularly and miraculously causes beneficial mutations for the purpose of bringing into existence creatures of the kinds he intends. If, on the other hand, ontological naturalism is true, then the success of methodological naturalism can be explained at least in part by the fact that there are no supernatural causes of natural phenomena. Search my Subject Specializations: Christianity Today Book Award Subscriber Login Email Address.

Science, Religion, and Naturalism p. Plantinga draws the provocative conclusion that theism, not naturalism, deserves to be called the “scientific worldview. Then in part p,antinga he discusses areas where alfin is concord between science and faith, making the claim that is extended in part four, that belief in science has much more justification for theism then naturalism.

Moreover, if what happens at the macroscopic level supervenes on what happens at the quantum level, then any macroscopic laws must also be compatible with direct divine action.