Divine Methodology: A Lawful Deflection of Kantian and Kantian-esque Defeaters

Immanuel Kant argues that though Divine revelation is ontologically possible, given phenomenal level constraints on our cognitive faculties, it isn’t epistemically possible for us to know or to recognize Divine revelation on the noumenal level of reality. We call this Kant’s Epistemological Objectio...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs: McNabb, Tyler Dalton ca. 20./21. Jh. (Auteur) ; Baldwin, Erik (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: De Gruyter 2017
Dans: Open theology
Année: 2017, Volume: 3, Numéro: 1, Pages: 293-304
Sujets non-standardisés:B Diller
B Multiple Extension
B Calvin
B Barth
B Stephen Law
B Plantinga
B Reformed Epistemology
Accès en ligne: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Résumé:Immanuel Kant argues that though Divine revelation is ontologically possible, given phenomenal level constraints on our cognitive faculties, it isn’t epistemically possible for us to know or to recognize Divine revelation on the noumenal level of reality. We call this Kant’s Epistemological Objection Against Divine Revelation (EOADR). Contra Kant, in this paper, we argue that the EOADR doesn’t undermine the Reformed tradition’s view of Divine revelation because it has resources that make knowledge of Divine revelation intelligible. The primary way of establishing our argument is by articulating and furthering Alvin Plantinga’s religious epistemology. After doing this, we tackle two objections to our approach that are in the family of Kant‘s objection, namely Stephen Law‘s X-Argument Against Religious Belief and Erik Baldwin‘s Multiple Viable Extensions Objection. Similar to Kant‘s argument, these arguments attempt to show, that the Reformed epistemologist is in danger of acquiring an undercutting defeater for trusting her religious belief. We respond to each in turn.
ISSN:2300-6579
Contient:Enthalten in: Open theology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1515/opth-2017-0023