Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A response to Almeida and Judisch

  • Published:
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Our new cosmological argument for the existence of God weakens the usual Principle of Sufficient Reason premise that every contingent true proposition has an explanation to a weaker principle (WPSR) that every such proposition could have an explanation. Almeida and Judisch have criticized the premises of our argument for leading to a contradiction. We show that their argument fails, but along the way we are led to clarify the nature of the conclusion of our argument. Moreover, we discuss an argument against us based on a principle of alternate explanation incompatible with our WPSR, and show that his argument fails.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 20057

    Alexander R. Pruss

  2. Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260

    Richard M. Gale

Authors
  1. Alexander R. Pruss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard M. Gale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pruss, A.R., Gale, R.M. A response to Almeida and Judisch. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 53, 65–72 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023384016242

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023384016242

Keywords

Search

Navigation