PhilArchive
open access
The Argument from Reason, and Mental Causal Drainage: A Reply to van Inwagen
According to Peter van Inwagen, C. S. Lewis failed in his attempt to undermine naturalism with his Argument from Reason. According to van Inwagen, Lewis provides no justification for his central premise, that naturalism is inconsistent with holding beliefs for reasons. What is worse, van Inwagen argues that the main premise in Lewis's argument from reason is false. We argue that it is not false. The defender of Lewis's argument can make use of the problem of mental causal drainage, a longstanding issue in philosophy of mind, to show how van Inwagen's objection fails.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Entitlement, Leaching and Counter-Closure#729241
- Against an Inferentialist Dogma#762342
- Anti-Naturalistic Arguments From Reason#709544
- Neural and Environmental Modulation of Motivation: What's the Moral Difference?#720978
- Modality and constitution in distinctively mathematical explanations#761499
Record · ID 763193
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive