Journal of Philosophical Investigations

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسنده

Emeritus Fellow, the Australian National University- Australia.

چکیده

This paper argues that it is not reasonable for a critical rationalist to be a religious believer in the Abrahamic tradition. The argument is distinctive, in that it takes seriously the critical rationalist view that we should abandon ‘justificationist’ argument. What this means, is that the structure of argument then becomes a matter of offering theories as resolutions of problems, and then judging how they fare in the face of ongoing critical appraisal. The paper surveys issues in several areas, including God and what is good; homosexuality; mysticism; and messianic ideas. It argues that, unless the believer engages in intellectual retreat (something that is unacceptable for the critical rationalist), the problem-situation facing the believer appears to be so daunting that it would be unreasonable for them to hope that they can overcome it.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Is it more reasonable for a critical rationalist to be non-religious?

نویسنده [English]

  • Jeremy Shearmur

Emeritus Fellow, the Australian National University- Australia.

چکیده [English]

This paper argues that it is not reasonable for a critical rationalist to be a religious believer in the Abrahamic tradition. The argument is distinctive, in that it takes seriously the critical rationalist view that we should abandon ‘justificationist’ argument. What this means, is that the structure of argument then becomes a matter of offering theories as resolutions of problems, and then judging how they fare in the face of ongoing critical appraisal. The paper surveys issues in several areas, including God and what is good; homosexuality; mysticism; and messianic ideas. It argues that, unless the believer engages in intellectual retreat (something that is unacceptable for the critical rationalist), the problem-situation facing the believer appears to be so daunting that it would be unreasonable for them to hope that they can overcome it.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Popper
  • critical rationalism
  • religion
  • fallibility
  • theism
  • objective value
  • suffering
  • homosexuality
  • mysticism
  • eschatology
Baird, R. M. & Rosenbaum, S. E. (eds) (1997). Same-Sex Marriage: The Moral and Legal Debate, Prometheus.
Barr, J. (1984). Escaping from Fundamentalism, SCM.
Barton, J. (2019). A History of the Bible, Allen Lane.
Fletcher, J. & Cronk, N. (2011). A Pocket Philosophical Dictionary, Voltaire, Oxford University Press, G. Kampis. L. Kwrs: and M. Sloltzner (eds.) (2002) Appraising Lakatos: Mathematics, Methodology and the Man, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Knox, R. (1949). The Creed in slow motion, Sheed & Ward.
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and Refutations, Cambridge University Press.
Lakatos, I. (1978). Mathematics, science and epistemology, Cambridge University Press.
Lewis’s, C. S. (1940). The Problem of Pain, Bles.
McNaughton, D. (1991). Moral Vision, Blackwell.
Popper, K. (1959). Logic of Scientific Discovery, section 29, Hutchinson.
Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge.
Robinson, N. (2003). Discovering the Qur’an, 2nd edition, SCM.
Shand, J. (2006). Central Works of Philosophy v4 Twentieth Century: Moore to Popper, Taylor & Francis.
Shearmur, J. (2010a). Why the “Hopeless War”: Approaching Intelligent Design, Sophia, 49(4), 475ff, https://philpapers.org/rec/SHEWTH
Shearmur, J. (2010b). Steve Fuller and Intelligent Design, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40(3), 433-445, https://philpapers.org/rec/SHESFA-3
Sullivan, A. (1995). Virtually Normal, Knopf.
Sullivan, A. (ed.) (1997). Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con, Vintage.
Tillyard, E. M. W. & Lewis, C. S. (1939). The Personal Heresy, Oxford University Press.
Vermes, G. (1998). Providential Accidents, SCM Press.
Vermes, G. (2012). Christian Beginnings, Allen Lane.
CAPTCHA Image