"A proper <em>de jure</em> objection to the epistemic rationality of re" by Todd R. Long
 

Abstract

I answer Alvin Plantinga’s challenge to provide a ‘proper’ de jure objection to religious belief. What I call the ‘sophisticates’ evidential objection’ (SEO) concludes that sophisticated Christians lack epistemic justification for believing central Christian propositions. The SEO utilizes a theory of epistemic justification in the spirit of the evidentialism of Richard Feldman and Earl Conee. I defend philosophical interest in the SEO (and its underlying evidentialism) against objections from Reformed epistemology, by addressing Plantinga’s criteria for a proper de jure objection, his anti-evidentialist arguments, and the relevance of ‘impulsional evidence’. I argue that no result from Plantinga-style Reformed epistemology precludes the reasons I offer in favour of giving the SEO its due philosophical attention.

Disciplines

Philosophy

Plum Print visual indicator of research metrics
PlumX Metrics
  • Citations
    • Citation Indexes: 6
  • Usage
    • Downloads: 828
    • Abstract Views: 55
  • Captures
    • Readers: 11
see details

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 

URL: https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/phil_fac/25