NATÜRALİZM VE TEİZM AÇISINDAN AKIL DELİLİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 2, 362 - 389, 31.07.2017

Sare Levin Atalay , Caner Taslaman

https://doi.org/10.18317/kader.311053

Öz

Akıl natüralist paradigmada doğal bir fenomen olarak
görülür. Çağdaş zihin felsefecilerinin çoğunluğu aklın, evrimin bir yan ürünü
ve beyin gibi karmaşık yapıdaki fiziksel sistemin zorunlu bir sonucu olduğunu
düşünür. Buna göre, beynin sırları çözüldükçe akıl yürütmenin nasıl bir olay
olduğu tamamen açıklanacak ve bu sayede yakın gelecekte tıpkı insan gibi düşünen
yapay zekâların üretilmesi mümkün olacaktır. Fakat akıl öyle bir fenomendir ki,
taşıdığı özellikler maddeye indirgenememekte ve indirgemeci materyalizmin
dayandığı prensiplerle çatışmakta ve natüralist paradigmaya ciddi sorunlar
çıkarmaktadır.  Hatta aklı açıklama
çabası, ondan şüphe etmeye yol açtığı için natüralizmi çürütmektedir.  Elbette bu yeni bir argüman değildir, ancak
zihin felsefesindeki son tartışmalar ışığında bugün bu iddia, her zamankinden
daha da gelişmiş ve güçlenmiştir. Bu çalışmada son yıllarda öne çıkan birkaç
filozof tarafından savunulan “akıl delili” bağlamında, aklın natüralizmin
reddini gerektirdiğini ortaya koyacağız, ardından aklın varlığını açıklamada ve
güvenilirliğini temellendirmede teizmin natüralizmden daha makul bir izah
olduğunu savunacağız.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Akıl delili, din felsefesi, zihin felsefesi, natüralizm

AN EVALUATION OF THE ARGUMENT FROM REASON WITH REGARD TO NATURALISM AND THEISM

Öz

Reason
has been regarded as a natural phenomenon in naturalist paradigm. Most of the
philosophers of mind think that reason is the by-product of evolution and the
necessary result of a complicated physical system such as brain. Accordingly,
as the mysteries of brain are uncovered, reasoning process will be fully
explained and by means of this knowledge an artificial intelligence which thinks
like human brain does is going to be produced in the near future. However,
reason is such a phenomenon that properties of which can not be reduced to
matter and conflict with the basic principles of reductive materalism and
naturalism. As a matter of fact every effort to naturalize reason eventually
contributes to the refutation of naturalism, since it leads to a skepticism and
jeopardizes the reliability of human reasoning. Certainly, this is not a new
argument but it has became stronger and more sophisticated than ever in the
light of contemporary debates in philosophy of mind. The purpose of this
article is to explain with the help of “the argument from reason” how, indeed,
aiming for naturalizing of reason makes naturalism to refute itself. Consequently
the article argues that theism in lieu of naturalism is more reasonable
concerning the existence of reason and founding the trust in reasoning.

Anahtar Kelimeler

The argument from reason, philosophy of religion, philosophy of mind, naturalism, theism, evolution

Kaynakça

• Adams, Robert M., The Virtue of Faith and Other Essays in Philosophical Theology, New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.
• Alıcı, Tevfik, Gerçek Bir Yanılsama Bilinç, İstanbul: Metis, 2014.
• Allison, Henry E, “Kant’s Refutation of Materialism”, The Monist, Kant’s Critical Philosophy, 72/2 (1989): 190-208.
• Alston, William P. v.dğr., Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism, Ithaca&London: Cornell University Press, 2002.
• Armstrong, David M., “Naturalism, Materialism and First Philosophy”, Philosophia, 8/2-3 (1978).
• Baker, Lynne R, “Are Beliefs Brain States?”, Explaining Beliefs, Lynne Ruder Baker and Her Critics, ed. Anthonie Mejers, Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2001.
• Balfour, Arthur J., The Foundations of Belief: Being Notes Introductory To The Study Of Theology, New York: Longmans, 1906.
• Bassham, Gregory, “Introduction: Oxford’s Bonny Apologist”, C.S. Lewis’s Christian Apologetics, Leiden, Boston: Brill Rodopi, 2015.
• Cevizci, Ahmet, Felsefe Tarihi, Say Yayınları, http://www.ekitapcilar.com/ahmet-cevizci-felsefe-tarihi-thalesten-baudrillarda/ (erişim: 14 Ekim 2016). Chalmers, David J., Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings, New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
• Churchland, Patricia S., “Epistemology in the Age of Neuroscience,” The Journal of Philosophy, 84/10 (1987): 544-553.
• Churchland, Paul M., “On the Ontological Status of Observables”, A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT/Bradford, 1990.
• Churchland, Paul M., The Engine of Reason, the Seat of the Soul, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1996.
• Churchland, Paul M., Madde ve Bilinç, İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları, 2012.
• Collins, Robin, “Tanrı, Tasarım ve İnce Ayar”, Allah Felsefe ve Bilim, ed. Caner Taslaman v.dğr., çev. Fehrullah Terkan, 12. Baskı, İstanbul: İstanbul Yayınevi, 2015.
• Darwin, C., “Letter to William Graham, Down, July 3, 1881”, The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin Including an Autobiographical Chapter, ed. Francis Darwin, London: John Murray, Albermarle Street, 1887.
• Dennett, Daniel C., Darwin’in Tehlikeli Fikri, çev. Aybey Eper, Bahar Kılıç, İstanbul: Alfa Bilim, 2011.
• Dennett, Daniel C., The Intentional Stance, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987.
• Fales, Evan, “Darwin’s Doubt, Calvin’s Calvary”, Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism, ed. James Beilby, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002.
• Flew, Antony, “The Third Maxim”, The Rationalist Annual, 72 (1955): 64.
• Fodor, Jerry, “Making Mind Matter More”, A Theory of Content and Other Essays, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990.
• Fodor, Jerry, “Is Science Biologically Possible?”, Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism, ed. James Beilby, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002.
• Garvey, Brain, Philosophy of Biology, Stocksfield: Acumen, 2007.
• Grant, Edward, God and Reason in the Middle Ages, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Goetz, Stewart - Taliaferro, Charles, Naturalism, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmands Publishing Co., 2008.
• Hasker, William, “The Transcendental Refutation Of Determinism”, The Southern Journel of Philosophy, U.S.A: Memphis State University, 11/ 3 (1973): 175-183. Hasker, William, Emergent Self, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999.
• Inwagen, Peter V., “C.S. Lewis’s Argument Against Naturalism”, Res Philosophica, 90/1 (2013): 113-124.
• Johnson, D. Kyle, “The Argument From Reason: Lewis’s Fundamental Mistakes”, C.S. Lewis’s Christian Apologetics: Pro And Con, ed. Gregory Bassham, Leiden, Boston: Brill Rodopi, 2015.
• Jordan, James, “Determinism’s Dilemma”, The Review of Metaphysics, 23/1 (1969): 48-66.
• Kılıç, Recep, "Olgu Ve Değer Problemi", Ankara İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, XXXV (Ankara, 1996): 363-369.
• Lennox, John C., Aramızda Kalsın Tanrı Var, çev. Sare Levin Atalay, Reşit Şahin, İstanbul: Ufuk Yayınları, 2012.
• Levine, Joseph, Purple Haze: The Puzzle of Consciousness, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
• Lewis, C. S., Miracles, London: Collins, 2012.
• Lewis, C. S., “The empty universe”, Present Concerns, ed. W. Hopper, San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace, 1986.
• Lewis, C. S., “De Futilitate”, Christian Reflections, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1967.
• Lovell, Steven, J. J., “C. S. Lewis’ Case Against Naturalism” http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/annotations/content/csl_vs_naturalism.pdf (erişim: 18 Kasım 2016).
• McGinn, Colin, The Mysterious Flame: Conscious Minds in a Material World, New York: Basic Books, 1999.
• Moreland, J. P., “God and the Argument from Mind”, Scaling the Secular City, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1987.
• Moreland, J. P., “The Argument From Consciousness”, The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, ed. W. Lane Craig v. dğr., İngiltere: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2012.
• Moser, Paul K. - Yandell, David, “Farewell to Philosophical Naturalism”, Naturalism and A Critical Analysis, ed. William Lane Craig v.dğr., New York: Routledge, 2001.
• Nagel, Thomas, Zihin ve Evren, Materyalist Neo-Darwinci Doğa Görüşü Neden Neredeyse Kesinlikle Yanlış, çev. Özge Çağlar Aksoy, İstanbul: Jaguar Kitap, 2015.
• Nagel, Thomas, The Last Word, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
• Papineau, David, “Naturalism” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/ (erişim: 8 Kasım 2016).
• Paton, H. James, The Categorical Imperative: A Study in Kant’s Moral Philosophy, 5th ed., London: Hutchinson, 1965.
• Plantinga, Alvin, “Theism, Atheism, and Rationality” https://www.calvin.edu/academic/philosophy/virtual_library/articles/plantinga_alvin/theism_atheism_and_rationality.pdf (erişim: 2 Kasım 2016).
• Plantinga, Alvin, “Introduction”, Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism, ed. James Beilby, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002.
• Plantinga, Alvin, “Reply to Beilby’s Cohorts”, Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism, ed. James Beilby, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002.
• Plantinga, Alvin, “Natüralizme Karşı Evrimsel Argüman”, Allah Felsefe ve Bilim, ed. Caner Taslaman v.dğr., çev. Fehrullah Terkan, 12. Baskı, İstanbul: İstanbul Yayınevi, 2015.
• Quine, W. V. O., Word and Object, New Edition, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1960.
• Ramachandran, V. S., “İnsanın Evriminde İleriye Doğru Bürük Sıçramanın İtici Gücü Olarak Ayna Nöronlar ve Taklit Yoluyla Öğrenme”, Zihin, ed. John Brockman, çev. Beyza Bilal, Zeynep Gül, İstanbul: Alfa, 2013.
• Ramsey, William, “Naturalism Defended”, Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga’s Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism , ed. James Beilby, New York: Cornell University Press, 2002.
• Reppert, Victor, C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: A Philosophical Defense of Lewis’s Argument from Reason, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2003.
• Reppert, Victor, “Eliminative Materialism, Cognitive Suicide, And Begging The Question”, Metaphilosophy, 23/4 (1992): 378-392.
• Reppert, Victor, “The Argument From Reason”, The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, ed. W. Lane Craig v.dğr., İngiltere: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2012.
• Ruse, Michael, Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
• Ryle, Gilbert, The Concept of Mind 60th Anniversary Edition, London and New York: Routledge, 2009.
• Searl, John R., Zihin Dil ve Toplum, çev. Alaattin Tural, 2. bs., İstanbul: Litera Yayıncılık, 2015.
• Searl, John R., “Minds, Brains, and Programs”, Behavioral and Brain Science, 3/3 (1980): 417-457.
• Smart, John J. C., Between Science and Philosophy, New York: Random House, 1968.
• Strobel, Lee, Hani Tanrı Ölmüştü?, çev. Sare Levin Atalay, Reşit Şahin, İstanbul: Ufuk Yayınları, 2011.
• Swinburne, Richard, Is There a God?, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
• Taliaferro, Charles, “Naturalism and the Mind”, Naturalism: A Critical Analysis, ed. William Lane Craig v.dğr., London: Routledge, 2001.
• Taslaman, Caner, Allah’ın Varlığının 12 Delili, İstanbul: İstanbul Yayınevi, 2015.
• Taslaman, Caner, “Arzu Delili: Arzulardan Allah’a Ulaşmak”, Allah Felsefe ve Bilim, ed. Caner Taslaman v.dğr., İstanbul: İstanbul Yayınevi, 2015. Thiselton, Anthony C., A Concise Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Religion, Oxford: Oneworld, 2002.
• Williams, Raymond, Anahtar Sözcükler, Kültür ve Toplumun Sözvarlığı, çev. Savaş Kılıç, İstanbul: İletişim, 2007.
• Yalowitz, Steven, “Anomalous Monism”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anomalous-monism/ (erişim: 13 Nisan 2017).