|
Books > Humanities > Religion & beliefs > Aspects of religions (non-Christian) > Theology
|
Buy Now
Pascal's Wager - Pragmatic Arguments and Belief in God (Hardcover, New)
Loot Price: R2,833
Discovery Miles 28 330
|
|
|
Pascal's Wager - Pragmatic Arguments and Belief in God (Hardcover, New)
Expected to ship within 10 - 15 working days
|
What if there is no strong evidence that God exists? Is belief in
God when faced with a lack of evidence illegitimate and improper?
Evidentialism answers yes. According to Evidentialism, it is
impermissible to believe any proposition lacking adequate evidence.
And if any thesis enjoys the status of a dogma among philosophers,
it is Evidentialism. Presenting a direct challenge to Evidentialism
are pragmatic arguments for theism, which are designed to support
belief in the absence of adequate evidence. Pascal's Wager is the
most prominent theistic pragmatic argument, and issues in
epistemology, the ethics of belief, and decision theory, as well as
philosophical theology, all intersect at the Wager. Other prominent
theistic pragmatic arguments include William James's celebrated
essay, 'The Will to Believe'; a posthumously published and largely
ignored pragmatic argument authored by J.S. Mill, supporting the
propriety of hoping that quasi-theism is true; the
eighteenth-century Scottish essayist James Beattie's argument that
the consoling benefit of theistic belief is so great that theistic
belief is permissible even when one thinks that the existence of
God is less likely than not; and an argument championed by the
nineteenth-century French philosopher Jules Lachelier, which based
its case for theistic belief on the empirical benefits of believing
as a theist, even if theism was very probably false. In Pascal's
Wager: Pragmatic Arguments and Belief in God, Jeff Jordan explores
various theistic pragmatic arguments, and the objections employed
against them. Jordan presents a new version of the Wager, what he
calls the 'Jamesian Wager', and argues that the Jamesian Wager
survives the objections hurled against theistic pragmatic arguments
and provides strong support for theistic belief. In addition to
arguing for a sound version of the Wager, Jordan also argues that
there is a version of Evidentialism compatible with a principled
use of pragmatic arguments, and that the Argument from Divine
Silence fails. Objections found in Voltaire, Hume, and Nietzsche
against the Wager are scrutinized, as are objections issued by
Richard Swinburne, Richard Gale, and other contemporary
philosophers. The ethics of belief, the many-gods objection, the
problem of infinite utilities, and the propriety of a hope based
acceptance are also examined.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
|
You might also like..
|
Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
