Norman Malcolm e Alvin Plantinga: duas versões analíticas do argumento do Proslogion de Santo Anselmo

O propósito deste trabalho é mostrar alguns aspectos que caracterizam a leitura que os filósofos analíticos dos anos 60/70, do século passado, fizeram do argumento do Proslogion de Santo Anselmo trazendo, deste modo, uma nova luz a esta problemática. Tiveram também o mérito de inscrever a questão da existência de Deus no âmago da filosofia analítica até aí dominada pelo ateísmo. Na Introdução salientamos as objecções analíticas mais frequentes feitas ao argumento – (i) a existência não é um predicado (ii) o conceito de Deus é incoerente (iii) a existência não é perfeição. Anscombe – uma excepção no contexto analítico – defendeu e demonstrou a tese de que o argumento não é ontológico. Malcom descobriu dois argumentos no Proslogion: um no Capítulo II que considerou inválido, outro no capítulo III que considerou válido e interpretou como modal. Plantinga foi um dos primeiros críticos desta prova modal porque o autor confundia entre necessidade de dicto e necessidade de re. Plantinga pensou que os dois argumentos se implicavam e\ou complementavam e desenvolveu uma teoria do realismo modal através da qual explica a natureza e a necessidade divinas em termos de mundos possíveis. Baseado neste conceito reelaborou uma nova prova modal que considerou “victoriosa” mas que veio mais tarde a ser refutada por Mackie, Tooley e David (entre outros) e acusada de circularidade. Plantinga não aceitou que a sua prova fosse reconhecida como falaciosa e Oppy também não aceitou a mesma reclamação expressa por Fergie. Contudo, Plantinga refez a sua prova e condensou-a numa única premissa: “a máxima grandeza é possivelmente instanciada”. Mais do que uma prova da existência de Deus trata-se de uma defesa da aceitação do teísmo, uma justificação da racionalidade da fé. E a possibilidade de existência de um ser metafisicamente necessário impõe-nos uma reflexão profunda donde se podem extrair todas as potencialidades cognoscitivas do labor do filósofo.

Closing Pandora's box: a defence of Alvin Plantinga's epistemology of religious belief

I argue (1) that Alvin Plantinga’s theory of warrant is plausible and (2) that, contrary to the Pandora’s Box objection, there are certain serious world religions that cannot successfully use Plantinga’s epistemology to demonstrate that their beliefs could be warranted in the same way that Christian belief can be warranted. In arguing for (1), I deploy Ernest Sosa’s Swampman case to show that Plantinga’s proper function condition is a necessary condition for warrant. I then engage three objections to Plantinga’s theory of warrant, each of which attempts to demonstrate that his conditions for warrant are neither necessary nor sufficient. Having defended the plausibility of Plantinga’s theory of warrant, I present and expand his key arguments to the effect that naturalism cannot make use of it. These arguments provide the conceptual tools that are needed to argue for (2): that there are certain world religions that cannot legitimately use Plantinga’s theory of warrant to demonstrate that their beliefs could be warranted in the same way that Christian belief can be warranted.

Meta-philosophy of religion : the analytic-continental divide in philosophy of religion

How is the philosophical study of religion best pursued? Responses to this meta-philosophical question tend to recapitulate the analytic-Continental divide in philosophy in general. My aim is to examine the nature of this divide, particularly as it has manifested itself in the philosophy of religion. I begin with a comparison of the stylistic differences in the language of the two traditions, taking the work of Alvin Plantinga and John Caputo as exemplars of the analytic and Continental schools respectively. In order to account for these stylistic divergences, however, it is necessary to delve further into meta-philosophy. I go on to show how each philosophical school models itself on different theoretical practices, the analytic school mimicking the scientific style of inquiry, while in Continental philosophy it is the arts and humanities rather than the sciences that provide the model for philosophical discourse. By situating themselves in such different genres,  analytic and Continental philosophers have developed contrasting, if not mutually exclusive, methods for pursuing the philosophy of religion.

Reformed Epistemology, Clairvoyance, and the Role of Evidence

Reformed epidemiologists like Alvin Plantinga and William Alston are well known for their view that one can rationally believe that God exists without believing on the basis of any evidence - scientific, philosophical, or otherwise. I defend reformed epistemology from objections (including one having to do with clairvoyance), and I develop a view about the role that evidence should play in the rationality of theistic belief.

Riflessioni critiche sulla lezione di Maria Leonor Xavier, “A questão do argumento anselmiano”

Estas reflexões críticas prezam o trabalho histórico-filosófico desenvolvido na lição da Xavier, sobre a questão do argumento de Anselmo. Todavia, algumas objecções podem ser levantadas a respeito do primeiro e do terceiro artigos. Quanto ao primeiro artigo, é contestável a interpretação da Xavier, no que concerne à relação entre existência real e existência pensada. Por outro lado, a sua perspectiva sobre a relação entre essência e existência em Anselmo pode ser aproximada do pensamento de Alvin Plantinga sobre os universais e as entidades abstractas. O segundo artigo não é criticado. Em contrapartida, o terceiro artigo é o mais contestado. A construção de um argumento a favor da existência de um mal insuperável não é autorizada pelo argumento de Anselmo. O mal não pode ser um maior insuperável; pode ser apenas um menor inultrapassável.

A critical study of John Hick's religious pluralism

This study examines the pluralistic hypothesis advanced by the late Professor John Hick viz. that all religious faiths provide equally salvific pathways to God, irrespective of their theological and doctrinal differences. The central focus of the study is a critical examination of (a) the epistemology of religious experience as advanced by Professor Hick, (b) the ontological status of the being he understands to be God, and further asks (c) to what extent can the pluralistic view of religious experience be harmonised with the experience with which the Christian life is understood to begin viz. regeneration. Tracing the theological journey of Professor Hick from fundamentalist Christian to religious pluralist, the study notes the reasons given for Hick’s gradual disengagement from the Christian faith. In addition to his belief that the pre-scientific worldview of the Bible was obsolete and passé, Hick took the view that modern biblical scholarship could not accommodate traditionally held Christian beliefs. He conceded that the Incarnation, if true, would be decisive evidence for the uniqueness of Christianity, but rejected the same on the grounds of logical incoherence. This study affirms the view that the doctrine of the Incarnation occupies a place of crucial importance within world religion, but rejects the claim of incoherence. Professor Hick believed that God’s Spirit was at work in all religions, producing a common religious experience, or spiritual awakening to God. The soteriological dimension of this spiritual awakening, he suggests, finds expression as the worshipper turns away from self-centredness to the giving of themselves to God and others. At the level of epistemology he further argued that religious experience itself provided the rational basis for belief in God. The study supports the assertion by Professor Hick that religious experience itself ought to be trusted as a source of knowledge and this on the principle of credulity, which states that a person’s claim to perceive or experience something is prima facie justified, unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary. Hick’s argument has been extensively developed and defended by philosophers such as Alvin Plantinga and William Alston. This confirms the importance of Hick’s contribution to the philosophy of religion, and further establishes his reputation within the field as an original thinker. It is recognised in this thesis, however, that in affirming only the rationality of belief, but not the obligation to believe, Professor Hick’s epistemology is not fully consistent with a Christian theology of revelation. Christian theology views the created order as pre-interpreted and unambiguous in its testimony to God’s existence. To disbelieve in God’s existence is to violate one’s epistemic duty by suppressing the truth. Professor Hick’s critical realist principle, which he regards as the key to understanding what is happening in the different forms of religious experience, is examined within this thesis. According to the critical realist principle, there are realities external to us, yet we are never aware of them as they are in themselves, but only as they appear to us within our particular cognitive machinery and conceptual resources. All awareness of God is interpreted through the lens of pre-existing, culturally relative religious forms, which in turn explains the differing theologies within the world of religion. The critical realist principle views God as unknowable, in the sense that his inner nature is beyond the reach of human conceptual categories and linguistic systems. Professor Hick thus endorses and develops the view of God as ineffable, but employs the term transcategorial when speaking of God’s ineffability. The study takes the view that the notion of transcategoriality as developed by Professor Hick appears to deny any ontological status to God, effectively arguing him out of existence. Furthermore, in attributing the notion of transcategoriality to God, Professor Hick would appear to render incoherent his own fundamental assertion that we can know nothing of God that is either true or false. The claim that the experience of regeneration with which the Christian life begins can be classed as a mere species of the genus common throughout all faiths, is rejected within this thesis. Instead it is argued that Christian regeneration is a distinctive experience that cannot be reduced to a salvific experience, defined merely as an awareness of, or awakening to, God, followed by a turning away from self to others. Professor Hick argued against any notion that the Christian community was the social grouping through which God’s Spirit was working in an exclusively redemptive manner. He supported his view by drawing attention to (a) the presence, at times, of comparable or higher levels of morality in world religion, when contrasted with that evidenced by the followers of Christ, and (b) the presence, at times, of demonstrably lower levels of morality in the followers of Christ, when contrasted with the lives of other religious devotees. These observations are fully supported, but the conclusion reached is rejected, on the grounds that according to Christian theology the saving work of God’s Spirit is evidenced in a life that is changing from what it was before. Christian theology does not suggest or demand that such lives at every stage be demonstrably superior, when contrasted with other virtuous or morally upright members of society. The study concludes by paying tribute to the contribution Professor Hick has made to the field of the epistemology of religious experience.

Kierkegaard e Plantinga : a subjetividade e a crença em Deus

O objetivo do presente trabalho é apresentar a discussão da temática da subjetividade como um importante fator para a afirmação da crença religiosa, tanto na obra de Kierkegaard como na obra de Plantinga. A despeito de algumas diferenças conceituais, avaliamos que ambos os autores não se interessam por provar a existência de Deus, mas antes se concentram na experiência como um fator central. Além disso, em ambos os autores, e na tradição cristã em geral, a subjetividade é fundamental para a afirmação da crença. Em Kierkegaard, tal conceito se encontra com a afirmação da fé enquanto absurdo. Em Plantinga, a afirmação da “basicalidade da crença” abre espaço para a relação de experiência e amplia o debate sobre a crença, reafirmando a sua posição crítica aos fundamentos da modernidade. Desse modo, a partir de alguns recortes específicos, busca-se o estabelecimento de um diálogo que consegue apontar, mesmo com diferenças essenciais entre os dois autores, notadamente na questão do absurdo e na ênfase maior de Kierkegaard sobre a fé como algo apaixonado, um fecundo debate. _______________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT

Semiotics, Presence and the Sublime in the Work of Alvin Lucier

Alvin Lucier, in his uncompromising exploration into the artistic potential of acoustic phenomena, has developed a body of work that remains highly original and hugely influential across many disciplines. His seminal works such as I am sitting in a room and Music for Solo Performer foreshadowed ways of approaching sound that are in common use among electro-acoustic composers, installation artists, as well as in commercial products. Lucier, despite his far reaching influence, is and has always been a composer, and his explorations of acoustics have been singularly focused on the development of a rich body of music. In this article, I investigate Lucier’s unique approach and attitude towards acoustics and aspire to enumerate important aesthetic developments he has made in creating music through the exploration of acoustic phenomena. In particular, this article seeks to investigate the role of semiotics in Lucier’s work, commenting on the pre-linguistic nature of Lucier’s approach to acoustic phenomenon. Here as well, an exploration of Lucier’s musical materials takes place, focusing on his instrumental compositions, specifically Diamonds for One, Two or Three Orchestras, where instruments are used as catalysts to generate in real-time acoustic phenomenon which interact to produce a rich yet intimate world of sound. Finally, Lucier’s approach to semiotics and real-time generation of music is viewed through a sublime aesthetic provoking questions regarding issues of presence and the now.

Receipt from Alvin W. Day, Buffalo, New York for mantel and other fireplace parts

Receipt from Alvin W. Day, Buffalo, New York for mantel and other fireplace parts, Jan. 27, 1887.

Receipt from Alvin W. Day, Buffalo, New York

Receipt from Alvin W. Day, Buffalo, New York for mantle and fireplace parts, Mar. 8, 1887.

Receipt from Alvin W. Day, Buffalo, New York

Receipt from Alvin W. Day, Buffalo, New York for payment on account, March 18, 1887.