Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich.
mehr Informationen...
Gott im Kontext: Religionsphilosophische Überlegungen zum Problem der Existenz Gottes im Gespräch mit dem Kritischen Rationalismus
Ist Teil von
Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie, 2006-07, Vol.48 (3), p.282
Ort / Verlag
Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Erscheinungsjahr
2006
Link zum Volltext
Quelle
Alma/SFX Local Collection
Beschreibungen/Notizen
The critical rationalist Hans Albert contemplates the question of the existence of God within the context of modern cosmology. The claim of God's existence, he suggests, must have a relevant explanatory role. According to Albert, however, such a role does not seem plausible. Following suggestions made by Theodor Mahlmann, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Josef Schmidt and Richard Swinburne, this essay endeavours to offer a rational exposition of the explanatory role of the claim of the existence of God with regard to the contingency as well as the contiunuity of reality. The view that the existence of God possesses explanatory relevance for the, on its own terms, inexplicaple contingency of worldly reality and its continued existence is not to be understood as a dogmatic proposition but as a universal and metaphysically justifiable hypothesis which needs to be defended by argument in the framework of personal explanation. Such a notion of a theological explanation should be introduced into scientific discussion on questions of cosmology from the perpective of considerations concerning the nature, logical status and procedure of explanations, usually discussed in the philosophy of science. Although, in principle, no strict proof for the existence of God can be proposed - which, if we follow Albert, applies to all metaphysical problems - a rational choice for a theistic explanation over possible alternative modes of explanation cannot be ruled out from the outset. Such a decision may not be able to be justified on the basis of the principles of 'classical rationality', it may - and should -, however, be defended by argument within the framework of 'critical rationality'. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]