God in the Age of Science?: A Critique of Religious Reason is a book by the Dutch philosopher Herman Philipse, written in English and published in the. Given, however, that we are living in the age of science, Philipse argues that the natural theologian is faced with a dilemma he calls “The. God in the Age of Science?: A Critique Of Religious Reason. by. Herman Philipse . Philipse tackles religion from an epistemilogical point of view whereas most.

Author: Mazuzshura Kikazahn
Country: Cape Verde
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Career
Published (Last): 23 January 2004
Pages: 90
PDF File Size: 11.37 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.96 Mb
ISBN: 866-3-89226-511-4
Downloads: 84351
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kaziktilar

Herman Philipse argues that the most promising for believers who want to be justified in accepting their creed in our tthe age is the Bayesian cumulative case strategy developed by Richard Swinburne, and goes on to present an in-depth analysis of this scirnce for theism. Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University’s proxy server Configure custom proxy use ln if your affiliation does not provide a proxy.

To summarize metaphorically, it is as if the last chance to secure a foundation for the throne of God is to rest on the shoulders of the Emeritus Nolloth Professor of the Philosophy of the Christian Religion at Oxford and, if he has failed, as Philipse argues he has, the game is pretty much all over for God.

The Jewish people knew this nearly two and a half millennia ago, which is why they used circumlocutions to refer to God and forbade the holiest name to be spoken, and also why Christian theology is based on the understanding that the only word adequate for God is God, the Word made flesh.

Stefan rated it it was amazing Jan 22, Choose your country or scienfe Close.

God in the Age of Science? – Wikipedia

Philipse acknowledges this point indirectly by citing Stephen Jay Gould to the effect that “‘almost every interesting event of life’s history’ is a matter of historical contingency,” a conclusion that, though contested, cannot easily be dismissed because lhilipse the difficulty of predicting what living things will evolve from particular initial conditionsfn.

Considering Philipse’s overall strategy, however, I have some serious concerns. By philipsw this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.


He has written numerous articles on modern philosophy and epistemology, and his most recent books are Atheistisch manifest Prometheus,; new edition Bert Bakker,Heidegger’s Philosophy of Being: This section offers critiques of cosmological arguments, arguments from sciene and an assortment of other arguments and their defenses, concluding with a chapter on religious experience that refutes the attempt to shift the burden of proof to the non-believer George rated it really liked it Mar 28, This category is further narrowed by the distinction between natural theology and revealed theology, where the focus was almost exclusively on natural theology.

He rejects the view that laws of nature are causes:.

Mark rated it really liked it Jul 20, Philipse argues that there is a conflict between Swinburne’s characterization of God as a bodiless person and the thesis that “God miniessentially is a personal ground of being” and, since Swinburne himself has to resort to analogy, “we should conclude that theists do not succeed in giving any meaning to the word ‘God'” Heavy reading from the first paragraph, but excellent.

Philipse has written many philosophical works in Dutch, including books on Husserl’s early philosophy of logic, the role of certainty in Descartes’ moral theory, and a widely read Atheist Manifesto A Herman Philipse born 13 May is a professor of philosophy at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.

Civil War American History: God Is Not Great God: It is unfortunate that critiques of jn utility of religion are taken as the reason for critiques on the truth Generally speaking, one can divide religious critique into two categories. This book is exhaustive in the author’s words in that it covers all the options phhilipse the best arguments for religious belief. Philipse tackles religion from an epistemilogical point of view whereas most of the ‘new atheists’ write from a non-philosophical pamphlet point of view, for example: The downside to this is the philosophical ‘deepness’ of the book.

Using philipae “strategy of subsidiary arguments,” Philipse concludes 1 that theism cannot be stated meaningfully; 2 that if theism were meaningful, it would have no predictive power concerning existing evidence, so that Bayesian arguments cannot get started; and 3 that if the Bayesian cumulative case strategy did work, one should conclude that atheism is more probable than theism. The Rationality of Natural Theology 6.



Third, this book is written, at least in part, “for colleagues and students in university departments of philosophy and theology,” xi with a stated aim of avoiding the accusation of chasing “paper tigers” by failing to engage phi,ipse sophisticated arguments for theism xii.

The end result predictably is that Swinburne’s approach simply doesn’t have the predictive power attributed to it. To examine Swinburne’s inductive argument, he sets aside his earlier criticisms before forcefully showing the problems with Swinburne’s approach.

Recommended by Richard Dawkins. Claims about God’s existence are a factual claims, or b non-factual claims. Ashraf rated it really liked it Apr 07, As either option is unpalatable, he argues that the best option for the theist is to accept a probabilistic account og scientific and scholarly methods as consisting in rules of inference to the best explanation, “which enable us to assess how probable a hypothesis is in the light of an evidence-set,” the approach he ascribes to Swinburne Raymond van Es ecience it it was amazing Jul 09, If it is a truth claim, they can either be warranted to endorse it without evidence, or not.

Rainer rated it it was ok Mar 13, Bernard Neary rated it really liked it Feb 21, At no point do we have any evidence that our brains possess a sensis divinituslet alone that it’s actually at work in religious experiences, that it’s faulty for most people, but less faulty for monotheists, and reliable when it comes to Christian beliefs.

God in the Age of Science? – Hardcover – Herman Philipse – Oxford University Press

Thr it is a truth claim, they can either be warranted to endorse it without evidence, or not. Jeff Line rated it it was amazing Apr 30, It’s a tough question to answer.

Indeed, Philipse is at his best, I think, when he challenges claims belonging to revealed theology that have been appropriated and presented as natural theology.