-
oa [Een Atheïstische Tripliek, An Atheist Surrejoinder]
- Amsterdam University Press
- Source: NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion, Volume 62, Issue 3, Aug 2008, p. 203 - 209
Abstract
In their reply to my ‘Religious Belief in the Age of Science', called ‘A Failing Atheistic Argument’, Rik Peels and René van Woudenberg commit the same logical errors that I already pointed out in that article, and some new ones. They overlook the restrictions on the domain of the destructive dilemma supporting my atheistic position, they confuse two different notions of ‘fact’, they assume, mistakenly, that a proposition to the effect that God exists can be logically necessary, and they are confused about multiple causal explanations of the same event. The relevant points of logic are elucidated and it is concluded again that my argument for atheism has not been undermined by their criticisms.
© 2018 Amsterdam University Press