In theology and the philosophy of religion questions concerning God's existence are often understood and discussed in terms of metaphysical realism. Metaphysical realism, however, is a philosophically untenable perspective, according to this study. Its impact on the philosophy of religion is therefore problematic. By using arguments presented by W.V. Quine, Hilary Putnam and William P. Alston the author shows why metaphysical realism is a philosophically untenable perspective and what this implies when it comes to questions concerning God's existence. Drawing on the work of Putnam, Michael Dummett and Donald Davidson, the author elaborates a non-metaphysical realist perspective that she recommends as a philosophically tenable alternative that can be used in theology and the philosophy of religion. Non-metaphysical realism, this study claims, encourages philosophers of religion to engage in a fruitful reflection on present-day problems caused by the phenomenon of religion and of importance to human beings living in today's society.Some philosophers question whether it really is possible that there may be radically different translation manuals, as outlined by Quine. Ken Gemes discusses this issue and concludes that a#39;purported cases of genuine rival translation manuals, anbsp;...
|Title||:||God Pro Nobis|
|Publisher||:||Peeters Publishers - 2007|