Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:13:28.781Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rejoinder to Scott

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2005

BRIAN ZAMULINSKI
BRIAN ZAMULINSKI
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5A5, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Michael Scott attacks my use of likelihood in assessing two explanations for human religion. He assumes that I rely on likelihood alone. He is attacking a straw man. We have no alternative but to rely on likelihood when the probabilities of two competing hypotheses are identical, as I charitably assumed with respect to the hypotheses I discussed. His other criticisms likewise miss the mark.

Type
Research Article
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , June 2005 , pp. 225 - 229
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)