The Problem of Alternative Monotheisms: Another Serious Challenge to Theism

Raphael Lataster
{"title":"The Problem of Alternative Monotheisms: Another Serious Challenge to Theism","authors":"Raphael Lataster","doi":"10.24204/EJPR.V10I1.1801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theistic and analytic philosophers of religion typically privilege classical theism by ignoring or underestimating the great threat of alternative monotheisms. [1] In this article we discuss numerous god-models, such as those involving weak, stupid, evil, morally indifferent, and non-revelatory gods. We find that theistic philosophers have not successfully eliminated these and other possibilities, or argued for their relative improbability. In fact, based on current evidence – especially concerning the hiddenness of God and the gratuitous evils in the world – many of these hypotheses appear to be more probable than theism. Also considering the – arguably infinite – number of alternative monotheisms, the inescapable conclusion is that theism is a very improbable god-concept, even when it is assumed that one and only one transcendent god exists. [1] I take ‘theism’ to mean ‘classical theism’, which is but one of many possible monotheisms. Avoiding much of the discussion around classical theism, I wish to focus on the challenges in arguing for theism over monotheistic alternatives. I consider theism and alternative monotheisms as entailing the notion of divine transcendence.","PeriodicalId":428491,"journal":{"name":"European Journal for the Philosophy of Religion","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal for the Philosophy of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24204/EJPR.V10I1.1801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Theistic and analytic philosophers of religion typically privilege classical theism by ignoring or underestimating the great threat of alternative monotheisms. [1] In this article we discuss numerous god-models, such as those involving weak, stupid, evil, morally indifferent, and non-revelatory gods. We find that theistic philosophers have not successfully eliminated these and other possibilities, or argued for their relative improbability. In fact, based on current evidence – especially concerning the hiddenness of God and the gratuitous evils in the world – many of these hypotheses appear to be more probable than theism. Also considering the – arguably infinite – number of alternative monotheisms, the inescapable conclusion is that theism is a very improbable god-concept, even when it is assumed that one and only one transcendent god exists. [1] I take ‘theism’ to mean ‘classical theism’, which is but one of many possible monotheisms. Avoiding much of the discussion around classical theism, I wish to focus on the challenges in arguing for theism over monotheistic alternatives. I consider theism and alternative monotheisms as entailing the notion of divine transcendence.
另类一神论的问题:对有神论的另一个严峻挑战
宗教的有神论和分析哲学家通常通过忽视或低估替代一神论的巨大威胁而给予经典有神论特权。[1]在这篇文章中,我们讨论了许多神的模型,比如那些涉及软弱、愚蠢、邪恶、道德冷漠和非启示性的神。我们发现,有神论哲学家并没有成功地消除这些和其他可能性,也没有为它们的相对不可能性进行论证。事实上,根据目前的证据——特别是关于上帝的隐匿性和世界上无端的邪恶——这些假设中的许多似乎比有神论更有可能。同样考虑到——可以说是无限的——可选择的一神论的数量,不可避免的结论是,有神论是一个非常不可能的神的概念,即使假设存在一个且只有一个超越的神。[1]我认为“有神论”是指“古典有神论”,这只是许多可能的一神论之一。为了避免过多地讨论古典有神论,我希望把重点放在论证有神论与一神论之间的挑战上。我认为有神论和另类一神论包含了神性超越的概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信