Joshua Rasmussen - A Dialogue

Joshua Rasmussen and Felipe Leon

Is God the Best Explanation of Things? A Dialogue

This is a terrific book. It is bold in its approach, and interesting in its details. Rasmussen and Leon are to be congratulated both for the spirit in which their investigation is conducted and for the contributions that they make to advancing discussion.

Graham Oppy, Professor of Philosophy, Monash University, Australia

The authors of this clear and absorbing volume are intent on saying the best that can presently be said on behalf of theism and naturalism. Energetically, they produce clever arguments for their respective views, many of them new or interestingly refashioned, grounded in the latest relevant results from a wide range of areas. But Leon and Rasmussen have also adopted a more deliberately collaborative and constructive approach than is visible in any similar work. And by this means they succeed in exposing how much more flexible and variously construable are the concepts of theism and naturalism themselves than the history of their discussion would have led one to expect. One almost dares to think that a future agreement on the God question is possible!

J. L. Schellenberg, Professor of Philosophy, Mount Saint Vincent University, Canada

Felipe Leon and Joshua Rasmussen bravely tackle the most profound ontological question we can ask: what is the foundation of existence? Exploring this question in dialogue, they offer a fascinating exchange of ideas regarding such philosophical issues as causation, morality, evolution, the fine-tuning of the universe, consciousness, and the existence of God. I found this to be one of the most engaging, informative, and thought-provoking philosophical dialogues I have ever read.

Yujin Nagasawa, H. G. Wood Professor of the Philosophy of Religion, University of Birmingham, UK

Is God the Best Explanation of Things? is an exemplar of the virtues a philosophical dialogue should display. It is about fundamental issues, is engagingly written, and offers original arguments. Moreover, it is a genuinely open-minded series of exchanges that exhibit the philosophical progress that can be achieved when the interlocutors are eager to learn from one another and see themselves as partners in their search for the truth of the matter.

Evan Fales, Professor of Philosophy (emeritus), University of Iowa, USA

This book brings together the formidable talents of two philosophers to bear on one of the most intractable problems in philosophy: the question of whether or not we have good reason to accept the existence of God. The prose is clear and accessible, and the arguments are well-developed and rigorous. It should be of interest and value to a wide range of readers and would make an excellent text for courses in the philosophy of religion, in particular.

Andrei Buckareff, Associate Professor of Philosophy; Co-Director of the Cognitive Science Program, Marist College, USA

In recent years, philosophers have made remarkable progress on the development and analysis of arguments relevant to the existence/nonexistence of a supreme being. A problem, however, is that many of these developments become lost in the smoke of polarizing debates. We want to explore this topic afresh, by bringing the latest ideas into a new, collaborative investigation of the ultimate explanation of things.

We explore the topic in a friendly, constructive manner. Rather than seek to win an argument, we aim to build upon each others ideas in an effort to see more truth. We do not hold up flags for a team or tribe. Nor do we seek victory in a debate. Instead, we seek to learn from each other, as we seek new paths into new lands.

We find that debates often become entrenched in the defense of previous packages. Progress stalls. Time and effort go into the defense of prior positions, leaving unexplored territories unexplored.

We seek another path. We want to see if we can promote significant progress on a universal question through a depolarized style. We want to break new ground, if we can. Our aim, then, is to see if we can bring into view a clearer vision of the foundation of existence.