Dawkins’ Unrebuttable Refutation

Authors

Tamás HANKOVSZKY Pázmány Péter Catholic University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v10i1.204

Keywords:

atheism, creationism, belief, probability, design, Darwinism, God, Dawkins

Abstract

In the whole fourth chapter of The God Delusion Richard Dawkins in a long and complicated argumentation attempts to prove that God’s existence is improbable and we have no reason to believe in Him. In my paper I am going to examine the basic structure of his train of thought first so that I present the detailed reconstruction of the single steps later on. Having scrutinized the reconstructed reasoning in the last section I am going to show that his main argument for atheism is unsuccessful.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Tamás HANKOVSZKY, Pázmány Péter Catholic University

Tamás HANKOVSZKY (PhD, Dr. Habil.) is assistant professor at Department of Philosophy, Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Budapest, Hungary. He studied philosophy, theology, literature and chemistry. His areas of interest include German idealism (Kant and Fichte), philosophy of religion, and logic. Hankovszky is the author of 4 monographs and 52 scientific articles. Recent publications: “The Logic of Truth. Kant on Formal and Transcendental Logic”, “The Truth of Analytic Judgments”, “Incongruence of Philosophy and Theology”, “Philosophy of Education in Early Fichte”.

References

Anglberger, A. J. J., Feldbacher, Ch. J., & Gugerell, S. H. (2010). Richard Dawkins Hauptargument wissenschaftstheoretisch betrachtet. In A. J. J. Anglberger, & P. Weingartner (Eds.), Neuer Atheismus wissenschaftlich betrachtet (pp. 181-198). Frankfurt, M. – Paris – Lancaster – New Brunswick, NJ: Ontos-Verlag.
Aquinas, Th. (1947). Summa Theologica. New York: Benziger Brothers, 1947. Retrieved May 28, 2018, from: https://dhspriory.org/thomas/summa.
Crean, R. (2007). God is No Delusion: A Refutation of Richard Dawkins. Fort Collins, CO: Ignatius Press.
Dawkins, R. (2006). The God Delusion. Boston – New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Ganssle, G. (2008). Dawkins's Best Argument: The Case against God in the God Delusion. Philosophia Christi, 10(1), 39-56.
Glass, D. H. (2012). Darwin, Design and Dawkins' Dilemma. Sophia, 51(1), 31-57.
McGrath, A., & McGrath, J. C. (2007). The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press.
Nagel, Th. (2006, October). The Fear of Religion. The New Republic, 23, 25-29.
Plantinga, A. (2007). The Dawkins Confusion. Books and Culture, XIII(2), 21-24. Retrieved May 28, 2018, from: https://www.booksandculture.com/articles/2007/marapr/1.21.html 1-6.
Sober, E. (2004). The design argument. In W. Mann (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to the philosophy of religion (pp. 117-147). Oxford: Blackwell.
Wielenberg, E. (2009). Dawkins's Gambit, Hume's Aroma, and God's Simplicity. Philosophia Christi, 11(1), 111-125.

Downloads

Published

2018-06-25

How to Cite

HANKOVSZKY, T. (2018). Dawkins’ Unrebuttable Refutation. WISDOM, 10(1), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v10i1.204

Download Citation

Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1 (2018): 1-2018

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial (CC BY-NC). CC BY-NC allows users to copy and distribute the article, provided this is not done for commercial purposes. The users may adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material giving appropriate credit, and providing a link to the license. The full details of the license are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.