Volume 15, Issue 1, 2013
Neuroscience and the Soul: Philosophical Issues
Response to William Lane Craig’s Review of Where the Conflict Really Lies
Science, Religion, and Naturalism
I try to clear up a couple of misunderstandings in William Craig’s review (misunderstandings due, perhaps, to expository inadequacy on my part). The first has to do with the difference between what I call “Historical Biblical Criticism” and historical scholarship. I claim there is conflict between the first and Christian belief; I don’t for a moment think there is conflict between historical scholarship and Christian belief. The second has to do with Platonism, theism and causality. I point out that theism has the resources to see abstract objects as like divine thoughts, in which case they are not causally isolated; this offers a reply to Paul Benacerraf’s suggestion that if, as on Platonism, abstract objects are causally isolated from everything, then there is no way in which we could come to know them or anything about them.