Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2005

Abstract

William Rowe’s a posteriori arguments for the non-existence of God are well-known. Rather less attention has been given, however, to Rowe’s intriguing a priori argument for atheism. In this paper, I examine the three published responses to Rowe’s a priori argument (due to Bruce Langtry, William Morris, and Daniel and Frances Howard- Snyder, respectively). I conclude that none is decisive, but I show that Rowe’s argument nevertheless requires more defence than he provides.

Comments

This paper appears in Faith and Philosophy 22 (2005): 211-234. The published version can be

found online at : http://www.pdcnet.org/collection/faithphil_2005_0022_0002_0211_0234.pdf .



Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS