Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalismAnd Sosa's critique and Plantinga's response

Alvin Plantinga, on the relationship between science and religion, has two general approaches: defensive and aggressive. In the first approach, he tries to show that there is no deep-seated conflict between science and religion. But in the second approach, it seeks to show that, contrary to popular opinion, there is a profound conflict between science and naturalism. He puts forward an argument called "evolutionary argument against naturalism." The main idea of his argument is that the probability of the reliability of the cognitive capacity of man with the acceptance of the combination of naturalism and the theory of evolution is low, and this includes all beliefs produced by the cognitive capacity of man, including the very belief in naturalism. Therefore, the simultaneous acceptance of naturalism and the theory of evolution is not reasonable , While this problem does not exist in the simultaneous acceptance of theism and evolutionary theory. Plantinga's argument has come up with many reactions and criticisms. Ernest Sosa has written two criticisms. By referring to Descartes and distinguishing between non-reflective and reflectivel knowledge; By referring to Descartes and distinguishing between non-formal and informal knowledge, he considers Plantinga to be essentially concerned with reflective knowledge and considers it to be incorrect; in Sosa's view, the status of theism and naturalism is the same. Plantinga, on the other hand, sees the main problem in reflctive knowledge, and believes that theism is better than naturalism, because naturalism is confronted with a defeater.