有神论进化

Robert A. Larmer
{"title":"有神论进化","authors":"Robert A. Larmer","doi":"10.53763/fag.2021.18.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I explore scientific, philosophical, and theological concerns that arise from adopting theistic evolution understood as claiming that the origin and development of life can be entirely accounted for in terms of the operation of natural causes, without any need to posit direct divine intervention. I argue that theistic evolutionists’ commitment to methodological naturalism and their unjustified rejection of gap arguments suggests that their case is not nearly so strong as they suggest. I further argue that accepting theistic evolution most naturally leads to accepting a monistic physicalist account of the person that is at odds with theism’s understanding of human nature.","PeriodicalId":103828,"journal":{"name":"Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theistic Evolution\",\"authors\":\"Robert A. Larmer\",\"doi\":\"10.53763/fag.2021.18.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, I explore scientific, philosophical, and theological concerns that arise from adopting theistic evolution understood as claiming that the origin and development of life can be entirely accounted for in terms of the operation of natural causes, without any need to posit direct divine intervention. I argue that theistic evolutionists’ commitment to methodological naturalism and their unjustified rejection of gap arguments suggests that their case is not nearly so strong as they suggest. I further argue that accepting theistic evolution most naturally leads to accepting a monistic physicalist account of the person that is at odds with theism’s understanding of human nature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":103828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53763/fag.2021.18.8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53763/fag.2021.18.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在这篇论文中,我探讨了科学、哲学和神学方面的关注,这些关注来自于采用有神论进化论,即声称生命的起源和发展可以完全用自然原因的运作来解释,而不需要任何直接的神的干预。我认为,有神论进化论者对方法论自然主义的承诺,以及他们不合理地拒绝间隙论证,表明他们的论点并不像他们所暗示的那样有力。我进一步认为,接受有神论的进化论最自然地导致接受一元论的物理主义对人的描述,这与有神论对人性的理解是不一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Theistic Evolution
In this paper, I explore scientific, philosophical, and theological concerns that arise from adopting theistic evolution understood as claiming that the origin and development of life can be entirely accounted for in terms of the operation of natural causes, without any need to posit direct divine intervention. I argue that theistic evolutionists’ commitment to methodological naturalism and their unjustified rejection of gap arguments suggests that their case is not nearly so strong as they suggest. I further argue that accepting theistic evolution most naturally leads to accepting a monistic physicalist account of the person that is at odds with theism’s understanding of human nature.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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