Sceptical Theism and the ‘Too-Much-Scepticism’ Objection

Michael Rea
{"title":"Sceptical Theism and the ‘Too-Much-Scepticism’ Objection","authors":"Michael Rea","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198866817.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most prominent objection against sceptical theism is that the sceptical theses typically adduced in support of it have ramifications that range far more widely than sceptical theists hope or should tolerate: they lead to scepticism about various aspects of commonsense morality, about divine honesty and goodness, about the evidential value of religious experience, and much else besides. This chapter responds to various different defences of this objection presented by Stephen Maitzen, David O’Connor, and Ian Wilks.","PeriodicalId":202769,"journal":{"name":"Essays in Analytic Theology","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Essays in Analytic Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198866817.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The most prominent objection against sceptical theism is that the sceptical theses typically adduced in support of it have ramifications that range far more widely than sceptical theists hope or should tolerate: they lead to scepticism about various aspects of commonsense morality, about divine honesty and goodness, about the evidential value of religious experience, and much else besides. This chapter responds to various different defences of this objection presented by Stephen Maitzen, David O’Connor, and Ian Wilks.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
怀疑有神论和“过度怀疑主义”的反对
对怀疑有神论最突出的反对意见是,通常被引用来支持怀疑有神论的怀疑论点,其影响范围远远超过怀疑有神论者希望或应该容忍的范围:它们导致对常识性道德的各个方面的怀疑,对神圣的诚实和善良,对宗教经验的证据价值,以及其他许多方面的怀疑。本章回应了Stephen Maitzen、David O’connor和Ian Wilks对这一反对意见的各种不同辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Relative Identity and the Doctrine of the Trinity Hylomorphism and the Incarnation Wright on Theodicy Sceptical Theism and the ‘Too-Much-Scepticism’ Objection The Ill-Made Knight and the Stain on the Soul
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1