Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    No one meaning of 'rationality' is sufficient to support ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Religious Experience
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Alston's use of 'rationality' is indefensible because no single meaning of that term can do the work he requires it to do.

    No one meaning of 'rationality' is sufficient to support all the roles Alston assigns to it.

    Philosophy of LanguageReligious Experience
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Religious ExperiencePhilosophy of Language

    Related

    Alston employs 'rationality' loosely across his argument.Alston's use of 'rationality' is indefensible because no single meaning of that ...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Religious Experience
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Alston's use of 'rationality' is indefensible because no single meanin...87%Formalistic rationality is a species of instrumental reason.86%Alston employs 'rationality' loosely across his argument.85%It does not make sense to speak of a universal standard of rationality...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mysticism
    View source passageHide passage
    Most objections to Alston are equally objections to the Argument from Experience or come from general epistemological complaints. Objections that apply specifically to Alston include Jonathan Kvanvig’s (1994) faulting of Alston for a loose employment of “rationality.” He argues that no one meaning of that term can do the work Alston does with it. Another objection is that Alston moves from “It is practically rational to engage in a Christian doxastic practice” to “It is rational for me to believ

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective