What do philosophers think of Alvin Plantinga’s reformed epistemology? In this companion volume to Warrant: The Current Debate, Alvin Plantinga develops an original approach to the question of epistemic warrant; that is what turns true belief into knowledge. He argues that what is crucial to warrant is the proper functioning of one’s cognitive faculties in the right kind of cognitive environment. Although this book is in some sense a sequel to its companion volume, the arguments do not presuppose those of the first book and it stands alone as a stimulating cont… more about book…
What do philosophers think of Alvin Plantinga’s reformed epistemology?(r/philosophy)
That there is no reason to suppose we are being irrational by believing it without trying to ground it in some other belief; we are rationally entitled to take it as the foundation of our reasoning and arguments. Alvin Plantinga is known for arguing that theism is such a belief, but I think he’s exaggerating when he says his epistemology means that it’s rational to believe in God “without any evidence or argument at all”, since a properly basic belief is still rooted in experience on his view. For a fuller picture, see Plantinga’s Warrant and Proper Function, among his many other works on the subject.
Warrant and Proper Function
366
What do philosophers think of Alvin Plantinga’s reformed epistemology?
In this companion volume to Warrant: The Current Debate, Alvin Plantinga develops an original approach to the question of epistemic warrant; that is what turns true belief into knowledge. He argues that what is crucial to warrant is the proper functioning of one’s cognitive faculties in the right kind of cognitive environment. Although this book is in some sense a sequel to its companion volume, the arguments do not presuppose those of the first book and it stands alone as a stimulating cont… more about book…
More about the book on Amazon
Most upvoted comment
Top rated philosophy books on Reddit rank no. 19
That there is no reason to suppose we are being irrational by believing it without trying to ground it in some other belief; we are rationally entitled to take it as the foundation of our reasoning and arguments. Alvin Plantinga is known for arguing that theism is such a belief, but I think he’s exaggerating when he says his epistemology means that it’s rational to believe in God “without any evidence or argument at all”, since a properly basic belief is still rooted in experience on his view. For a fuller picture, see Plantinga’s Warrant and Proper Function, among his many other works on the subject.
Permalink
Additional Information
askphilosophy,philosophy
6
36
$40.45
Paperback
ABIS_BOOK
Alvin Plantinga
1
Oxford University Press
Warrant and Proper Function
What do philosophers think of Alvin Plantinga’s reformed epistemology?
0
/r/philosophy/comments/300ptt/can_atheism_be_properly_basic/
More about the book on Amazon