From a Necessary Being to a Perfect Being: A Reply to Byerly

European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 14 (1):257-268 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Cosmological arguments for God typically have two stages. The first stage argues for a first cause or a necessary being, and the second stage argues from there to God. T. Ryan Byerly offers a simple, abductive argument for the second stage where the best explanation for why the being is found to have necessary existence is that it is a perfect being. The reasoning behind this argument is that universal generalizations explain observations of their instances; for example, the universal generalization that all ravens are black explains why some particular raven is observed to be black. Similarly, the fact that a being has all perfections explains why we find the being to have necessary existence. I distinguish between two readings of Byerly’s proposed theistic explanation, and conclude that his explanation does not offer an advantage to the theist in either case.

Similar books and articles

The gap problem made easy?Tien-Chun Lo - 2020 - Analysis 80 (3):486-492.
The Ontological Argument.Robert Merrihew Adams - 1994 - In Adams Robert Merrihew (ed.), Leibniz: determinist, theist, idealist. New York: Oxford University Press.
From a necessary being to god.Joshua Rasmussen - 2009 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 66 (1):1-13.
And This All Men Call God.Timothy O’Connor - 2004 - Faith and Philosophy 21 (4):417-435.
The Contingency Cosmological Argument.Mark T. Nelson - 2011-09-16 - In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments. Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 18–21.
Reverse Ontological Argument.James Henry Collin - 2022 - Analysis 82 (3):410-416.
Cosmological and design arguments.A. R. Pruss & Richard M. Gale - 2005 - In William J. Wainwright (ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of religion. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 116--137.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-01

Downloads
517 (#38,069)

6 months
142 (#28,099)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

On what grounds what.Jonathan Schaffer - 2009 - In Ryan Wasserman, David Manley & David Chalmers (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. pp. 347-383.
Explanation as a guide to induction.Roger White - 2005 - Philosophers' Imprint 5:1-29.
Thick Evaluation.Simon Kirchin - 2017 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.

View all 8 references / Add more references