About this item
Highlights
- Who ought to hold claim to the more dangerous idea-Charles Darwin or C. S. Lewis?
- About the Author: Reppert (Ph. D., University of Illinois) is adjunct professor of philosophy at Glendale Community College in Glendale, Arizona.
- 132 Pages
- Religion + Beliefs, Philosophy
Description
About the Book
Who ought to hold claim to the more dangerous idea--Charles Darwin or C. S. Lewis? Daniel Dennett argued for Darwin in Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Offering careful, able development of Lewis's thought, Victor Reppert now champions C. S. Lewis, demonstrating that Lewis's "argument from reason" can bear up under the weight of the most serious philosophical attacks.
Book Synopsis
Who ought to hold claim to the more dangerous idea-Charles Darwin or C. S. Lewis? Daniel Dennett argued for Darwin in Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Offering careful, able development of Lewis's thought, Victor Reppert now champions C. S. Lewis, demonstrating that Lewis's "argument from reason" can bear up under the weight of the most serious philosophical attacks.
Review Quotes
"According to the standard account, chapter three of C. S. Lewis's Miracles, his argument against naturalism, is a philosophical embarrassment, a beguiling house of cards that collapses at the merest breath of rigorous critique. Victor Reppert, in C. S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea, certainly proves thestandard account wrong. But he does more than that: he deepens and extends Lewis's argument against naturalism and makes an intellectually exciting and persuasive case of his own. Reppert's book is philosophical revisionism at its finest."
"One mark of a great apologist is that the apologist's central arguments are reappropriated and refined profitably by later thinkers. One mark of an outstanding Christian philosopher is the ability to do such work in a manner that meets the contemporary demands of philosophical argument. Victor Reppert has accomplished this in this clear, cogent and pertinentdefense of the argument from reason. Consider it one more nail in the coffin of naturalism."
"Victor Reppert's book is a delight on two counts. First, it is asophisticated and well-informed discussion of C. S. Lewis and hisapologetic arguments, demolishing some well-known myths and demonstrating that Lewis had important and serious things to say as a philosopher. Second, and perhaps even more important, Reppert honors Lewis by developing and defending one of Lewis's central arguments against naturalism in a way that is both rigorous and readable, paying attention both to the objections raised against Lewis by Elisabeth Anscombe and to contemporary philosophical debates. This makes the book an important andoriginal contribution to Christian apologetics in its own right."
Reppert provides his readers a fresh, clear, and able exposition and defense of what he calls C. S. Lewis's dangerous idea: that a purely naturalistic account of the world cannot explain the reality of human rationality. A fine work. Well-written, the book glows with Reppert's engaging style and ability as an incisive thinker. This book represents a real advance in apologetics generally and Lewis scholarship specifically, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in either.
About the Author
Reppert (Ph. D., University of Illinois) is adjunct professor of philosophy at Glendale Community College in Glendale, Arizona. He is active in several C. S. Lewis societies, and he has written articles on Lewis's apologetics for such journals as The Christian Scholar's Review, Philosophia Christi and the International Journal for Philosophy of Religion.