I reply to Carrier in detail in an article that I will be publishing for Inter-Varsity Press. I have a number of entries here dedicated to responding to him, in fact I think I have probably spent more time that I should have responding to this. But just for starters, yes, he claims that intentionality can be accounted for naturalistically while at the same time using ONE INTENTIONAL CONCEPT AFTER ANOTHER to explain intentionality.
The most valuable point he makes is that a complete defense of my type of argument should include an awareness of empirical research on brain science. On the other hand, his account of what naturalists have actually explained is vastly exaggerated. Of course brain science is going to find plenty of correlations between brain states and mental states, but it doesn't follow that science has provided intertheoretic reductions between the mind and the brain.
5 comments:
Dear Mister Reppert,
what's your opinion about this alleged rebuttal of your book?
www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/reppert.shtml
I reply to Carrier in detail in an article that I will be publishing for Inter-Varsity Press. I have a number of entries here dedicated to responding to him, in fact I think I have probably spent more time that I should have responding to this. But just for starters, yes, he claims that intentionality can be accounted for naturalistically while at the same time using ONE INTENTIONAL CONCEPT AFTER ANOTHER to explain intentionality.
The most valuable point he makes is that a complete defense of my type of argument should include an awareness of empirical research on brain science. On the other hand, his account of what naturalists have actually explained is vastly exaggerated. Of course brain science is going to find plenty of correlations between brain states and mental states, but it doesn't follow that science has provided intertheoretic reductions between the mind and the brain.
I know this is an AFR blog, but do you have any interest in arguments for homosexuality based on scripture?
What do you think of this argument? http://anglicanscotist.blogspot.com/
Anonymous,
Changing the emphasis to homosexuality.
Now that's a dangerous idea.
It's made by a PH.D. from within scripture. Surely you have some stock in the mater...
Post a Comment