Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The argument from reason is a transcendental argument against metaphysical naturalism and for the existence of God (or at least a supernatural being that is the source of human reason). The best-known defender of the argument is C. S. Lewis .
The KK thesis or KK principle (also known as epistemic transparency or positive introspection [1] [2]) is a principle of epistemic logic which states that "If you know that P is the case then you know that you know that P is the case." [3] This means that one cannot know that P is, if one does not know whether one's knowledge of P is correct. [4]
Whether an argument is valid only depends on its form. An important feature of formal logic is that for a valid argument, the truth of its premises ensures the truth of its conclusion, i.e. it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. [18] [17] [1] [3]
Victor Reppert (born 1953) is an American philosopher best known for his development of the "argument from reason".He is the author of C.S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea (2003) and numerous academic papers in journals such as Christian Scholars' Review, International Journal for the Philosophy of Religion, Philo, and Philosophia Christi.
Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One's Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences (French: Discours de la Méthode pour bien conduire sa raison, et chercher la vérité dans les sciences) is a philosophical and autobiographical treatise published by René Descartes in 1637.
Foundationalism is an attempt to respond to the regress problem of justification in epistemology. According to this argument, every proposition requires justification to support it, but any justification also needs to be justified itself.
Rational fideism is the philosophical view that considers faith to be precursor for any reliable knowledge.Every paradigmatic system, whether one considers rationalism or empiricism, is based on axioms that are neither self-founding nor self-evident (see the Münchhausen trilemma), so it appeals to assumptions accepted as belief (in reason or experience respectively).
A transcendental argument is a kind of deductive argument that appeals to the necessary conditions that make experience and knowledge possible. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] Transcendental arguments may have additional standards of justification which are more demanding than those of traditional deductive arguments. [ 3 ]