Darwin's doubt or Plantinga's conviction? Some failures in Plantinga's attempt to debunk naturalistic evolution

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION
L. H. Marques Segundo
{"title":"Darwin's doubt or Plantinga's conviction? Some failures in Plantinga's attempt to debunk naturalistic evolution","authors":"L. H. Marques Segundo","doi":"10.1017/s0034412523000562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Darwin's Doubt (DD) – a thesis according to which the probability of the human cognitive mechanism's reliability given non-guided evolution is low – is central to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism and his suggestion that the adoption of guided evolution thesis is preferable from a theory choice point of view. In this article I'll argue that there are three fundamental failures in Plantinga's argument. First, I argue that Plantinga's argument for DD is question-begging. Second, I point out that this very same argument is not in accordance with the way the evolutionary scientists usually reason. And finally I argue that the replacement of non-guided by guided evolution violates some reasonable belief-revision procedures in the history of science.","PeriodicalId":45888,"journal":{"name":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RELIGIOUS STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1095","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412523000562","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Darwin's Doubt (DD) – a thesis according to which the probability of the human cognitive mechanism's reliability given non-guided evolution is low – is central to Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism and his suggestion that the adoption of guided evolution thesis is preferable from a theory choice point of view. In this article I'll argue that there are three fundamental failures in Plantinga's argument. First, I argue that Plantinga's argument for DD is question-begging. Second, I point out that this very same argument is not in accordance with the way the evolutionary scientists usually reason. And finally I argue that the replacement of non-guided by guided evolution violates some reasonable belief-revision procedures in the history of science.
是达尔文的怀疑还是普兰廷加的确信?普兰廷加试图揭穿自然进化论的一些失败
达尔文的怀疑(DD)——一种认为人类认知机制在非引导进化下的可靠性可能性很低的理论——是Plantinga的《反对自然主义的进化论证》的核心,他认为从理论选择的角度来看,采用引导进化理论更可取。在本文中,我将论证普兰廷加的论证有三个根本的错误。首先,我认为Plantinga关于DD的论证是在回避问题。第二,我要指出的是,这一论点并不符合进化科学家通常的推理方式。最后,我认为用引导进化取代非引导进化违反了科学史上一些合理的信念修正程序。
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
RELIGIOUS STUDIES
RELIGIOUS STUDIES RELIGION-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Religious Studies is an international journal devoted to the problems of the philosophy of religion as they arise out of classical and contemporary discussions and from varied religious traditions. More than 25 articles are published each year, and the journal also contains an extensive book review section.
×
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