The Modal-Epistemic Argument Defended: Reply to Wintein

Recently, Stefan Wintein published an article in which he presents four objections to my modal-epistemic argument for the existence of God. His first objection is an alleged counterexample to the argument’s first premise, and the second objection is an alleged counterexample to the argument’s second...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Rutten, Emanuel (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Publicado: 2022
En: Sophia
Año: 2022, Volumen: 61, Número: 4, Páginas: 775-793
Otras palabras clave:B Modal-epistemic argument
B Personal first cause
B God
B Wintein
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Descripción
Sumario:Recently, Stefan Wintein published an article in which he presents four objections to my modal-epistemic argument for the existence of God. His first objection is an alleged counterexample to the argument’s first premise, and the second objection is an alleged counterexample to the argument’s second premise. Wintein’s third objection attempts to show that the modal-epistemic argument is circular. Finally, the fourth objection is a parody objection. In this paper, I show that Wintein’s four objections all fail.
ISSN:1873-930X
Obras secundarias:Enthalten in: Sophia
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1007/s11841-022-00909-0