Did Richard Rorty Dispute Christian Natural Theology?

Abstract

This study examines whether Richard Rorty’s critique of the traditional language of natural philosophy—that such language rests on an unwarranted foundation—also challenges the possibility of Christian natural theology. Rorty argues that the contingent language of the Western philosophical tradition has been wrongly regarded as the sole tool for modern epistemology and natural philosophy, and his critique appears plausible. Therefore, it becomes an important question whether Christian natural theology, which has developed in interaction with philosophy, is likewise implicated in that critique. This study closely analyzes Rorty’s arguments concerning the contingency of the language used in traditional natural philosophy and his criticism of epistemological foundationalism. It then argues, drawing on the justification offered by the Reformed epistemologist Alvin Plantinga, that Christian natural theology is grounded in a different foundationthe authority of Scripture. Consequently, it maintains that Christian natural theology is not subject to Rorty’s critique of natural philosophy.