I'm looking for contemporary philosophers other than those typically labeled as part of the New Atheism movement (i.e., Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Victor J. Stenger) who have responded to some of Alvin Plantinga's works.

Could you recommend any?

  • 2
    Plantinga has put forth many different positions. For which were you seeking counterarguments? Who is the group of "Dawkins et al." anyway, given that Dawkins is not a philosopher?
    – Rex Kerr
    Jul 3, 2012 at 16:18
  • 1
    @RexKerr "religious belief as properly basic" mainly. Dawkins et al is the so called "new atheists" group that is composed by mostly non philosophers (Sam Harris, Hitchens and a few others) that have delved into philosophy as aggressively atheistic, attacking religion. I'm looking for more nuanced counterarguments for Plantinga's well reasoned postulates.
    – Vinko Vrsalovic
    Jul 3, 2012 at 19:21
  • 6
    Since "Dawkins et al" is an ad hoc group that is used primarily as a means to lump together people for the purposes of dismissing their actual arguments, I would say that either that such modern atheists cannot exist by definition, or else that group contains all atheists except Richard Dawkins.
    – philosodad
    Jul 5, 2012 at 13:27
  • Stephen J. Wykstra, William L. Rowe, Paul Tillich, to name a few... if you had a specific argument to address I could refer to specific papers by these authors.
    – stoicfury
    Jul 5, 2012 at 15:53
  • 1
    @stoicfury The specific argument has been explained a couple of times already, any input?
    – Vinko Vrsalovic
    Jul 10, 2012 at 12:11

2 Answers 2


My colleague Colin Allen is a representative of a consistently naturalistic point of view.

Are you looking for people with a specifically atheist response to Plantinga's arguments in particular? If so, which of AP's arguments?

The more specific you can be with your question, the easier it will be to give you a useful answer.

  • I'm mainly looking for counterpoints to "religious belief as properly basic"
    – Vinko Vrsalovic
    Jul 8, 2012 at 7:16

Well, according to Wikipedia, Michael Martin is such a philosopher. Also, the ontological argument in every form has been pretty thoroughly eviscerated by any number of philosophers--atheist and otherwise. I wouldn't restrict myself to just atheists when looking for well reasoned arguments against Plantinga.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.