tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post705860300048237652..comments2024-03-28T11:15:16.747-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: C. S. Lewis on the "progress" of modern thoughtVictor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-5977507411579981932009-11-23T07:41:04.593-07:002009-11-23T07:41:04.593-07:00Alvin Plantinga on C.S. Lewis's argument in Mi...Alvin Plantinga on C.S. Lewis's argument in <i>Miracles</i>...<br /><br />JB: Yeah. Speaking of popular philosophy, had you read C.S. Lewis’ brief critique of Naturalism in his book Miracles? People have pointed out that it’s very similar to your argument against the theory.<br />AP: No, I hadn’t actually read his argument, and yes, people have pointed that out to me too. But it’s not quite all that similar. He’s talking about determinism there. And he says if<br />8<br />determinism is true, then I can’t be confident in any of my beliefs. Or, putting it my way, my believing determinism is true would be a defeater for the idea that my cognitive faculties are reliable. But I don’t think that’s right. Suppose I thought they were determined, but determined by God. In fact, I think they are to a large degree determined. Or at least, if not determined, there certainly is a lot of strong inclination to accept them. It would be really hard for me to not believe that there’s a book here or that I’m talking to a person. I don’t know if it’s quite determinism but it’s in the neighborhood. With respect to determinism, then, what matters is what you think the ultimate causes of your belief are. If the ultimate cause is a God who has designed us in a certain way to resemble Him, other things in having knowledge, that’s not a defeater at all. So I don’t think Lewis is quite right on that point. He’s right that Naturalism offers a defeater, but it’s not via determinism.<br /><br /><a href="http://sitemaker.umich.edu/meteorite/files/plantingainterview.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://sitemaker.umich.edu/meteorite/files/plantingainterview.pdf</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-84500532004820955452009-11-20T12:54:56.613-07:002009-11-20T12:54:56.613-07:00Lewis mentions Sartre in his essay De Futilitate, ...Lewis mentions Sartre in his essay De Futilitate, where he argues that Sartre is mistaken in supposing that there is something wrong with general moral rules because it the rules don't settle every case. I think what he has in mind is the case of the man who feels an obligation to take care of his mother, but also an obligation to France to join the Free French and resist Hitler.Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-88807919042483646452009-11-20T08:22:39.920-07:002009-11-20T08:22:39.920-07:00Rather Sartrean. Did lewis know Sartre?Rather Sartrean. Did lewis know Sartre?Gordon Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03223834584232283601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-88120487184014270782007-06-20T14:25:00.000-07:002007-06-20T14:25:00.000-07:00I don't understand the "sciento-phobia" charge bei...I don't understand the "sciento-phobia" charge being thrown around so much these days.<BR/><BR/>I agree, Christianity has nothing to fear from science, as all truth is God's truth.<BR/><BR/>But I tire of science doing metaphysics so poorly. It should stick to what it's good at.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-8915791623740600932007-06-20T05:51:00.000-07:002007-06-20T05:51:00.000-07:00Wow. How frighteningly true that is: "We, who have...Wow. How frighteningly true that is: "We, who have personified all other things, turn out to be ourselves mere personifications." It seems prophetic of Daniel Dennett's 'intentional stance' or his 'multiple drafts' model of consciousness. But I think there is a balance between being leery of 'hollow' materialism and rejecting good science which does sometimes challenge the 'manifest image'. If this world is God's good creation, Christians have nothing to fear of advances in scientific knowledge. Not that I think Lewis was guilty of sciento-phobia. Here it seems his criticisms are largely philosophical and do not hinge on rejecting this or that theory of science.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com