This show of even-handedness bespeaks Sobel’s overall fairness and objectivity in his assessments. This is not to say that Sobel’s treatment always goes against the theist: he defends the coherence of an omniscient being, providing a masterful defense of God’s knowledge of all true propositions against Patrick Grimm’s anti-omniscience arguments and offering a (somewhat kooky) defense of the coherence of foreknowledge of future contingents moreover, he argues for the viability of at least some Pascalian wagers in favor of theistic belief. He judges all the theistic arguments to be unsound and the concept of God as a perfect being to be incoherent, while arguing that the problem of evil succeeds in proving that God as traditionally conceived does not exist. Sad to say, Sobel’s verdict on theism is almost uniformly negative. This willingness to defy conventional views adds to the interest of his discussion. Moreover, he holds that no being worthy of worship can be necessarily existent. He thinks that it can be proved that no concrete object can be necessarily existent. He presents a surprisingly persuasive argument on behalf of the idea that God must create a best of all possible (or, alternatively, of all feasible) worlds. For example, in reaction to the prevailing view that the logical version of the problem of evil is no longer a problem, he snaps, “I do not believe it” (437) and proceeds to press the problem at length. Sobel shows himself to be a bold and independent thinker, unafraid to challenge consensus views.
The book is thus marked by tremendous rigor, helping to clarify exactly which premises are at stake in the debate between theists and atheists. Another nearly hundred pages of detailed commentary appear in the book’s endnotes.
Fortunately for the sake of readability much of the heavy-duty work is reserved for the multiple appendices that cluster at the close of nearly every chapter. The book is divided into five parts: “Divinity,” a short introductory section that is surprisingly interesting on what it means to say that God exists “Arguments for the Existence of God,” which treats ontological, cosmological, teleological, and miracle-based arguments for God over the space of 370 pages “On Two Parts of the Common Conception ,” dealing with the coherence of omnipotence and omniscience “Arguments against the Existence of God,” a defense of both evidential and logical versions of the problem of evil and, finally, “Practical Arguments for and against Theistic Beliefs,” a sympathetic and wide-ranging look at all sorts of Pascalian wagers that a would-be theist might confront.Īs the title of the book intimates, Sobel’s strong suit is logic, mathematics, and probability theory, and these are brought heavily to bear in his analysis of the various arguments he considers. The product of a lifetime of study, Logic and Theism is testimony to Howard Sobel’s remarkable mastery of his subject, for very few contemporary philosophers could have written so comprehensive and incisive a treatment. Its combination of wide-ranging scope and penetrating analysis makes it a unique contribution to philosophical theology. I can think of no other treatment of theism, whether by theist or non-theist, comparable to it. This is an impressive book, a truly extraordinary achievement. ReasonableFaithOrg (Full-Length Videos).#835 Why Does My Soul Act on My Particular Body?.In fact the outdated information the Chicago Department of Water Management is giving us about letting the water run for three to five minutes or longer can sometimes increase the amount of lead in the water from what it would have been in the first draw if the lead in the service line has been disturbed by new water main construction and connections to the service line. The phosphate compounds the city uses to coat the lead service line cannot stop the disturbed line from increasing the lead in the water that enters our homes. We know that replacing the water mains disturbs the lead and increases lead in water from the taps in our kitchens or bathroom. Its more than 300,000 lead service lines are more than any other U.S. It only did so because the federal government required it in 1986. Chicago was the last city in the United States to stop the use of water lead service lines. Yet Chicago requires that the homeowner pay the entire cost: both under the city street, from the water main, and on our property to our homes.
0 kommentar(er)
