For those of you interested in the Plantinga vs. Dennett debate, a book that you may be interested in is Knowledge of God by Alvin Plantinga and Michael Tooley, which came out late 2008. I haven’t read all of it yet, but so far it seems like a must-have for anyone interested in Reformed Epistemology / apologetics. I’d imagine that it contains much of the same argumentation that Plantinga presented at the Dennett debate.
The back cover reads: “Is belief in God justified? That’s the fundamental question at the heart of this volume of the Great Debates in Philosophy series. Alvin Plantinga and Michael Tooley each tackle the matter with distinctive arguments from opposing perspectives. The book opens with an explanation of the philosopher’s viewpoints, followed by a lively and engaging conversation in which each directly responds to the other’s arguments.”
April 1, 2009 at 1:22 am
Looks like a cool read. I wonder if we will ever see a quote like, “Is disbelieving God’s existence justified?” on the back of a book of philosophy?
Having only read some of Plantinga’s essays, I am curious how he develops his arguments and especially how he attacks the opposition. I think I’ll be asking my library to add this one to their philosophy collection. Thanks for the info Ian!
April 1, 2009 at 4:01 am
As I recall there wasn’t much epistemology going on in the book, though there was a fair amount of philosophy of mind. We read the book last summer on PB so you should be able to find plenty of comments on the book there.
April 7, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Thanks for the tip, Matthew.
May 21, 2009 at 11:23 am
Please find a complete different perspective of God and Reality altogether via the set of essays on this website.
http://www.adidam.org/teaching/aletheon/truth-god.aspx
Plus a related reference on Sacred Art
http://www.adidabiennale.org/curation/index.htm
Both of the above tell us that it is indeed time to reform all of our inherited ideas on quite literally everything.
May 22, 2009 at 7:01 pm
What also excites about this book is there is apparently an exchange on the Ontological argument which I am very curious to read.