This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: He wants to establish: it is impossible to believe rationally in naturalism. Belief in naturalism leads to an epistemic catastrophe (in which nothing we believe is rational). This isn't a transcendental argument. Naturalism could be true, and we could have rational beliefs, so long as we didn't believe naturalism to be true. However, it does create obvious problems for the naturalist. At the very least, it should motivate the naturalist to look at alternative worldviews that avoid this catastrophe....
View Full Document
- Fall '09