Arguing about Gods

Abstract

In this book, Graham Oppy examines arguments for and against the existence of God. He shows that none of these arguments is powerful enough to change the minds of reasonable participants in debates on the question of the existence of God. His conclusion is supported by detailed analyses of the arguments as well as by the development of a theory about the purpose of arguments and the criteria that should be used in judging whether or not arguments are successful. Oppy discusses the work of a wide array of philosophers, including Anselm, Aquinas, Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Kant, Hume and, more recently, Plantinga, Dembski, White, Dawkins, Bergman, Gale and Pruss.

Gods and Dictatorships: A Defence of Heroical Apatheism

“…However, no claims regarding gods can be said to find factual support. Nor has any convincing ontological foundation been established for the gods (Oppy 2006). What remains is that "the gods' right to rule", perhaps like democracy, is based on a normative foundation.…”

“…Here, the justification for referring to the gods in the singular is founded especially on the same basic assumptions used in the ontological proofs of gods, such as perfect being, greatest conceivable being, transcendent being, infinite being, etc. As a starting point, however, none of these basic assumptions have demonstrated any convincing strength (Oppy 2006). Furthermore, these assumptions are alien to many believers who are attached to specific god doctrines.…”

A Companion to Philosophy in Australia and New Zealand (Second Edition)

“…There have been staff changes: townsend retired in 2006; toby handfield and Jakob hohwy were appointed to lectureships in 2006 and 2007. in research, the school has remained very productive: there have been books by baltzly ( ), Green (2009( ), handfield (2009( ), howhy (2009( ), and oppy (2006a. but maintaining adequate student numbers has proved difficult.…”

Craig ve Sinclair'in Kelam Argümanının Mantıksal Bir Eleştirisi

“…5 Craig ve Sinclair, bu öncülü daha çok nedensellik ilkesi üzerinden yapılan itirazları karşılamaya çalışarak savunur. İlk öncüle en etkili itirazları Grünbaum (1967), Mackie (1982), Oppy (2006) ve Smith (2007) yapmıştır. Bu makalede öncüller sorgulanmayacağı için bu itirazlar burada detaylı olarak ele alınmayacaktır.…”