Download Atheism: A Philosophical Justification by Michael Martin PDF

Download Atheism: A Philosophical Justification by Michael Martin PDF

By Michael Martin

"Thousands of philosophers--from the traditional Greeks to fashionable thinkers--have defended atheism, yet none extra comprehensively than Martin. . . . Atheists may still learn it to reinforce their creed, and theists should still learn it to check their religion opposed to the lethal strength of Martin's attack."--Martin Gardner, The Humanist.

Show description

Read or Download Atheism: A Philosophical Justification PDF

Best philosophy books

Écrits philosophiques

Si Marx fascine tant les philosophes, c'est peut-être parce qu'il a si vigoureusement dénoncé l'illusion de "la philosophie", le "discours de los angeles mauvaise abstraction", toujours idéaliste même sous des dehors matérialistes, et toujours stérile malgré sa grandiloquence.

De Nietzsche à maître Eckhart

Jean Yves leloup nous suggest ici deux lectures magistrales de deux géants de los angeles tradition occidentale : Nietzsche, l'athée et Maître Eckhart, le théologien -mystique.

Il tente de remettre "à lendroit" un texte de Nietzsche, ECCE HOMO, souvent cité pour justifier tous les athéismes. Leloup montre que le dieu en lequel Nietzsche voyait une "antithèse de l. a. vie" n'a rien à voir avec le dieu des Evangiles qui est au contraire une puissance de vie et de libération, une claire lumière par laquelle le monde est vu. L'auteur, avec Maître Eckhart, nous entraine ensuite au-delà des contraires, au delà même de Dieu et de tous les Absolus que nous imaginons, vers notre essentielle et silencieuse liberté. ..

Collected Papers on Epistemology, Philosophy of Science and History of Philosophy: Volume I

Those volumes comprise all of my articles released among 1956 and 1975 that may be of curiosity to readers within the English-speaking global. the 1st 3 essays in Vol. 1 care for historic subject matters. In every one case I so far as attainable, meets con­ have tried a rational reconstruction which, transitority criteria of exactness.

An Introduction to Analytic Philosophy: Paradoxes, Arguments and Contemporary Problems

During this publication, Paul Franceschi presents us with an creation to analytic philosophy. In a concrete approach, he chooses to explain 40 paradoxes, arguments or philosophical concerns that characterize such a lot of demanding situations for modern philosophy and human intelligence, for a few paradoxes of millennial origin—such because the Liar or the sorites paradox—are nonetheless unresolved right now.

Extra info for Atheism: A Philosophical Justification

Example text

If thought discovered in the shimmering mirrors of phenomena eternal relations capable of summing them up and summing themselves up in a single principle, then would be seen an intellectual joy of which the myth of the blessed would be but a ridiculous imitation. That nostalgia for unity, that appetite for the absolute illustrates the essential impulse of the human drama. But the fact of that nostalgia's existence does not imply that it is to be immediately satisfied. For if, bridging the gulf that separates desire from conquest, we assert with Parmenides the reality of the One (whatever it may be), we fall into the ridiculous contradiction of a mind that asserts total unity and proves by its assertion its own difference and the diversity it claimed to resolve.

14 Furthermore, the evil demon hypothesis does not give a plausible account of human survival. If there is no connection between evidence and truth, it is difficult to see how the human race has survived to date. We base the actions that we need to perform in order to survive on what we believe is true, and we believe this latter on the evidence. But then, if there were no connection between truth and evidence, our survival would be a mystery. 15 In addition, the -36Questia Media America, Inc. com Publication Information: Book Title: Atheism: A Philosophical Justification.

44 title CHAPTER 1 The Justification of Negative Atheism: Some Preliminaries What must be shown in order to support negative atheism with respect to the existence of the Christian--Hebraic God? How does one justify the view that one ought not to believe in an all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing God who created the universe? Must anything be shown? Is the burden of proof really on theists to provide reasons for their belief? What sort of reasons must theists provide to support their case and must atheists undermine to establish their own?

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.54 of 5 – based on 14 votes
Comments are closed.