Abstract :
In Alvin Plantinga’s evolutionary argument against naturalism(EAAN), he contends that someone who holds both naturalism (N) and evolution(E) acquires an undefeated defeater for her belief that ‘human cognitive facultiesare reliable’ (R) and as a result an undefeated defeater for everything else shebelieves when she comes to realize that P(R/N&E) is low or inscrutable. I arguefor two theses in this paper. First, when a naturalist-evolutionist comes to thinkthat P(R/N&E) is inscrutable, that does not constitute an undefeated defeater forher belief that R if her original grounds for believing R are something other thanan assessment of P(R/N&E). Second, even if she acquires an undefeated defeaterfor her belief that R when she comes to think that P(R/N&E) is inscrutable,it does not follow that she has a defeater for all her other beliefs. Themain contribution lies in my response to Plantinga’s attempt to resist mysecond thesis
