Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin
Despite their divergent metaphysical assumptions, Reformed and evolutionary epistemologists have converged on the notion of proper basicality. Where Reformed epistemologists appeal to God, who has designed the mind in such a way that it successfully aims at the truth, evolutionary epistemologists ap...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2013
|
| _version_ | 1797098849188184064 |
|---|---|
| author | De Cruz, H De Smedt, J |
| author_facet | De Cruz, H De Smedt, J |
| author_sort | De Cruz, H |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Despite their divergent metaphysical assumptions, Reformed and evolutionary epistemologists have converged on the notion of proper basicality. Where Reformed epistemologists appeal to God, who has designed the mind in such a way that it successfully aims at the truth, evolutionary epistemologists appeal to natural selection as a mechanism that favors truth-preserving cognitive capacities. This paper investigates whether Reformed and evolutionary epistemological accounts of theistic belief are compatible. We will argue that their chief incompatibility lies in the noetic effects of sin and what may be termed the noetic effects of evolution, systematic tendencies wherein human cognitive faculties go awry. We propose a reconceptualization of the noetic effects of sin to mitigate this tension. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:15:34Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:dd12dbd1-5def-4445-a244-c843f20c4fc0 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:15:34Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:dd12dbd1-5def-4445-a244-c843f20c4fc02022-03-27T09:22:16ZReformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sinJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:dd12dbd1-5def-4445-a244-c843f20c4fc0EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2013De Cruz, HDe Smedt, JDespite their divergent metaphysical assumptions, Reformed and evolutionary epistemologists have converged on the notion of proper basicality. Where Reformed epistemologists appeal to God, who has designed the mind in such a way that it successfully aims at the truth, evolutionary epistemologists appeal to natural selection as a mechanism that favors truth-preserving cognitive capacities. This paper investigates whether Reformed and evolutionary epistemological accounts of theistic belief are compatible. We will argue that their chief incompatibility lies in the noetic effects of sin and what may be termed the noetic effects of evolution, systematic tendencies wherein human cognitive faculties go awry. We propose a reconceptualization of the noetic effects of sin to mitigate this tension. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. |
| spellingShingle | De Cruz, H De Smedt, J Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| title | Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| title_full | Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| title_fullStr | Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| title_full_unstemmed | Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| title_short | Reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| title_sort | reformed and evolutionary epistemology and the noetic effects of sin |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT decruzh reformedandevolutionaryepistemologyandthenoeticeffectsofsin AT desmedtj reformedandevolutionaryepistemologyandthenoeticeffectsofsin |