>I am still asking what the arguments are for metaphysical naturalism. Why believe that over theism?
Wouldn't the arguments against God's existence (found, say, in any philosophy of religion anthology) coupled with a eliminativist materialist arguments in the philosophy of mind, together count as a cumulative case for naturalism?
But why think naturalism and theism are the only two options. Why not turn to pragmatism which I consider an offshoot of naturalism.
And by the way, my old professor just published a book on Wittgenstein, so I finally have a short guide to recommend!
I enjoyed Hans Sluga's audiobook on wittgenstein:
http://www.amazon.com/Wittgenstein-Hans-Sluga/dp/1405118482
>I am still asking what the arguments are for metaphysical naturalism. Why believe that over theism?
Wouldn't the arguments against God's existence (found, say, in any philosophy of religion anthology) coupled with a eliminativist materialist arguments in the philosophy of mind, together count as a cumulative case for naturalism?
But why think naturalism and theism are the only two options. Why not turn to pragmatism which I consider an offshoot of naturalism.
And by the way, my old professor just published a book on Wittgenstein, so I finally have a short guide to recommend!