By Kai Nielsen
Read Online or Download Contemporary Critiques of Religion PDF
Best religion & spirituality books
Transparent, concise, and persuasive, Atheist Universe information precisely why God is not sensible to give an explanation for the universe and life's variety, association, and wonder. the writer completely rebuts each argument that says to ''prove'' God's lifestyles вЂ” arguments according to good judgment, logic, philosophy, ethics, historical past and technological know-how.
Publication by means of Atkin, Muriel
While faith used to be expelled from the general public house in the course of Communist instances and have become a mystery kind of “inner emigration”, it entered the empty public area back in Post-Communist instances. Public curiosity in spiritual matters and the general public status of faith have dramatically elevated. The e-book “Under development.
Common Mysteries is an engaging, and in such a lot methods, a different booklet. It presents the solutions to many interesting questions on the beginning and the character of the universe, in addition to the aim of people. it's an excellent learn for contemplative minds looking to comprehend the medical foundation of spirituality in a finished and concise approach.
- Mind Only: A Philosophical and Doctrinal Analysis of the Vijnanavada (Monograph of the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy)
- The Argument from Design
- Ajs Review, Fall 1989, No 2
- Buddha Nature: A Festschrift in Honor of Minoru Kiyota
Additional resources for Contemporary Critiques of Religion
Even if we only take it -as indeed it should be taken - as a criterion of factual significance, as a litmus-paper test for determining which of the various statements we make have factual significance and which factual-appearing statements are without such significance, we still have to ask about the status of the principle itself: 'A sentence is used to make a factual statement only if the 40 statement it makes is at least in principle confirmable or infirmable'. Is that statement itself verifiable (confirmable or infirmable)?
With the statements of logic and mathematics we have non-empirical statements but we still have a determinate method for establishing the truth-value of these statements. Why could not something 26 similar hold for religious propositions? If it did, we would have solved our perplexity about their meaning by showing that, after all, they do make a truth-claim, though not an empirical truth-claim, but still a kind of truth-claim that modern empiricists find legitimate. Braithwaite argues, as does Ayer, that if 'God exists' is logically necessary, it would follow that it makes 'no assertion of existence'.
If we use the method of challenge on the believer and ask him what would you take - if it were to occur - as a refutation or as a disconfirmation of your claim, he cannot say what he would take as a disconfirmation. And many would even regard the question and B 25 the challenge as irrelevant. But this clearly shows that 'God' does not function like a theoretical concept in an explanatory hypothesis. Such religious propositions are not empirical hypotheses. Flew, I should add, goes on to make a more sweeping challenge, which would put in question the very assertive status of such God-talk.