Naturalism Defeated?: Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism

by James K. Beilby (Editor)

Almost a decade ago, Alvin Plantinga articulated his bold and controversial evolutionary argument against naturalism. This intriguing line of argument raises issues of importance to epistemologists and to philosophers of mind, of religion, and of science. In this, the first book to address the ongoing debate, Plantinga presents his influential thesis and responds to critiques by distinguished philosophers from a variety of subfields. Plantinga's argument is aimed at metaphysical naturalism or roughly the view that no supernatural beings exist. Naturalism is typically conjoined with evolution as an explanation of the existence and diversity of life. Plantinga's claim is that one who holds to the truth of both naturalism and evolution is irrational in doing so. More specifically, because the probability that unguided evolution would have produced reliable cognitive faculties is either low or inscrutable, one who holds both naturalism and evolution acquires a "defeater" for every belief he/she holds, including the beliefs associated with naturalism and evolution. Following Plantinga's brief summary of his thesis are eleven original pieces by his critics. The book concludes with a new essay by Plantinga in which he defends and extends his view that metaphysical naturalism is self-defeating.

Genres: Philosophy, Metaphysics

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2002

About the author

James K. Beilby (PhD, Marquette University) is professor of systematic and philosophical theology at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Reviews

[Ege]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evoluti...?

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plantinga gave a devastating argument against the conjunction of naturalism and evolution to the effect that that belief supplies the reflective naturalist with a defeater for all his beliefs in his WPF book, and then expanded on it in his WCB book. He also wrote some papers that eventually made it to the web, or were picked up by various journals. So why is any intellectually honest person still a naturalist who believes in evolution? Well, some people actually didn't think Plantinga's argument cut it! Shocking, I know. So, they too wrote about it in books, and had papers published in various journals. In fact, not only did evolutionary naturalists critique the argument, but so did some theistic philosophers. Given all the potential here for serious philosophical debate, and finally a fair fight with 50 (or so) against the mind of Plantinga(!), a book had to be made with critiques and then responses to the critiques. Well, enter Naturalism Defeated: Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. If you like Plantinga's argument and you use it, you need this book so you can be aware of the critiques. If you dislike the argument, you need Plantinga's rebuttals to the critiques to show you that you're wrong! :-) At the end of the day, as you can probably tell, I side with Plantinga. As Plantinga says: "I should say up front, however, that EAAN seems to me to emerge unscathed--or if a bit scathed, then at least bloody but unbowed." Yes, that nicely sums up the book.

[Joshua Nomen-Mutatio]

Perhaps unsurprisingly I don't find Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN) any more compelling than his convoluted Free Will Defense. I've heard Jerry Fodor's response to the EAAN in this collection of essays is particularly good. I have some problems with a few of Fodor's positions on the mind and evolutionary psychology but I recently read an impressive critical review he wrote of a recent philosophical work called Supersizing The Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension .

[Josh Shelton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plantinga is absolutely brilliant. This particular argument is probably my favorite apologetic argument against naturalism. Chesterton hints at it in everlasting man. Lewis builds an awesome argument for it in miracles, and here plantinga, as in warranted Christian Belief, uses analytic philosophy and great degree of wit and makes it an air tight argument.