The Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism: Context, Exposition, and Repercussions
Ebook
Ebooks are designed for reading and have few connections to your library.
Overview
Contemporary discussions in metaphysics, epistemology and philosophy of mind are dominated by the presupposition of naturalism. Arguing against this established convention, Jim Slagle offers a thorough defence of Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism (EAAN) and in doing so, reveals how it shows that evolution and naturalism are incompatible.
Charting the development of Plantinga’s argument, Slagle asserts that the probability of our cognitive faculties reliably producing true beliefs is low if ontological naturalism is true, and therefore all other beliefs produced by these faculties, including naturalism itself, are self-defeating. He critiques other well-known epistemological approaches, including those of Descartes and Quine, and deftly counters the many objections against the EAAN to conclude that metaphysical naturalism should be rejected on the grounds of self-defeat. By situating Plantinga’s argument within a wider context and showing that science and evolution cannot entail naturalism, Slagle renders this most common metaphysical view irrational. As such, the book advocates an important reconsideration of contemporary thought at the intersection of philosophy, science and religion.
Provides a rigorous defence of Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism in order to show that evolution and naturalism are incompatible.
The first book-length defence of the Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism (EAAN)
Offers compelling critiques of other epistemological frameworks, including those of Descartes and Quine
Puts forward the argument that naturalism is not rational, which has important ramifications across philosophy, science and religion
Introduction
1. The Cartesian Dream
2. Quinean Tonic
3. Naturalized Epistemology Reformed
4. Terms of Engagement
5. The Evolution of the Evolutionary Argument
6. Elimination Game
7. The Probability Thesis
8. The Defeater Thesis
9. The End of the Argument
10. Analogies, Coherence and Evolution
11. Expanding the Target
12. Loose Ends
Bibliography
Index
This is the most powerful defense to date of Alvin Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. Slagle deftly shows that our modern belief in naturalism conflicts with belief content, truth-value, and relevance thus rendering our cognitive processes unreliable. We can rationally accept evolution only by rejecting naturalism. A hugely important study.
In this book, Slagle offers a careful and well thought out reconstruction and defense of Plantinga’s proper function epistemology and, especially, his Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). He defends various versions of the EAAN against a broad array of objections, including mine. In doing so, he makes the most thorough defense of Plantinga’s EAAN that I know of. I highly recommend this book to anyone seriously interested in Plantinga’s EAAN.
Like Anselm’s ontological argument, McTaggart’s argument for the unreality of time and many other celebrated philosophical arguments, Plantinga’s Evolutionary Arguments Against Naturalism is as intriguing as it is controversial. Jim Slagle shows why. But he is not an innocent by-stander. He ably discusses many objections that have been brought against it. In defence of it. A must-read for everyone who is seriously interested in philosophical naturalism.
- Title: The Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism: Context, Exposition, and Repercussions
- Author: Jim Slagle
- Series: Bloomsbury Studies in Philosophy of Religion
- Publisher: Bloomsbury Academic
- Print Publication Date: 2021
- Logos Release Date: 2024
- Pages: 272
- Language: English
- Resources: 1
- Format: Digital › Ebook
- ISBNs: 9781350173132, 9781350246232, 1350246239, 1350173134
- Resource ID: LLS:9781350173132
- Resource Type: Monograph
- Metadata Last Updated: 2025-04-22T10:39:46Z
Jim Slagle is Adjunct Assistant Professor of Philosophy the University of Portland, USA.