Garth Hallett’s way to the God of theism is charted in between the approaches commended by Richard Swinburne and Alvin Plantinga. Swinburne treats theism as a hypothesis which may be tested using confirmation theory. Swinburne stands in the tradition of natural theology which includes Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, and Butler who believe that unfettered and not already pre-disposed-totheism reason will show theism to be more reasonable than atheism or agnosticism. Plantinga has gone toe-to-toe with anti-theistic moves by Ayer, Flew, Solomon, (...) Mackie, Russell et al and bolstered several classical theistic arguments: ontological, design, and religious experience arguments. But Plantinga is now best known for his sustained argument that theistic belief may be fully warranted as a basic belief not resting upon inference from more warranted convictions. This so-called “Reformed Epistemology” posits that within us lies a sensus divinitatus, a receptive capacity for apprehending God. (shrink)

Proofs for belief in God polarize between the extremes that no demonstration is required and arguments based upon a complex, inductive calculus. Since traditional questions are no longer fruitful, Hallett proposes a lateral shift in our thinking by undertaking an exploration of what “rationality and good evidence look like in areas where standard criteria do not apply”. The goal is to promote fresh vision through a shift in perspective.

E. H. Carr was one of the most influential theorists of international relations, and his works, notably The Twenty Year's Crisis (1939), are widely read by students of the subject. He is generally regarded as a hard-nosed, right-wing political realist, but Charles Jones' study reveals him as a much more radical figure. By examining the political context in which he wrote, and the ruthless ways in which he sought to persuade his contemporaries in a period of national crisis, this (...) book offers a radical reinterpretation of a major theorist of international relations. (shrink)

Though some doubts about the principle that every proposition is either true or false were entertained even by Aristotle, both the number and the vigor of criticisms of this principle have been increasing in recent years. This paper attempts a restatement and a re-examination of the issues involved in this dispute, and in particular an evaluation of the effects on the argument of such recent discoveries as that of the “many-valued logics.”.

This book is a clear, engaging, and ambitious introduction to the philosophy of John Dewey. First, a comment about the subtitle: while I recognize that it reflects the book’s inclusion in a series of “beginner’s guides,” the subtitle (“a beginner’s guide”) is unfortunate. The book is much more than that, and, as such, it is more valuable than the subtitle suggests. It is clearly of help to people new to Dewey, and yet it is also a significant resource for those (...) returning to Dewey in a variety of capacities. For example, this reviewer has found Hildebrand’s book helpful for thinking about pedagogical strategies for teaching Dewey in a recent seminar class (on James and Dewey), and I expect many other teachers will .. (shrink)

The use of high hypothetical payoffs has been justified by the realism and relevance of large monetary consequences and by the impracticality of making high cash payments. We argue that subjects may not be able to imagine how they would behave in high payoff situations.