Abstract
In response to my “How to Make Naturalism Safe for Supernaturalism: An Evaluation of Willem Drees's Supernaturalistic Naturalism” (Rottschaefer 2001), Willem Drees maintains that I have misunderstood his purpose and views and have failed to make the case against his view that naturalism is intrinsically limited. In this response, I comment on these concerns.
Keywords
underdetermination, limit questions, supernaturalism, empirical theology, Willem B. Drees, naturalism
How to Cite
Rottschaefer, W., (2001) “Discerning the Limits of Religious Naturalism”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 36(3), 467–475. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/0591-2385.00373