Naturalism is the view that the 'natural' universe, the universe of matter and energy, is all that there really is. By ruling out a spiritual part of the human person which might survive death and a (god who might resurrect the body, naturalism also rules out survival after death. In addition, naturalism denies human freedom on the grounds that every event must be explainable by deterministic natural laws. It denies any absolute values because it can find no grounds for such values in a world made up only of matter and energy. And finally, naturalism denies that the universe has any meaning or purpose because there is no God to give it a meaning or purpose, and nothing else which can give it a meaning or purpose. Anyone who accepts the first three denials, of God, spiritual beings, and immortality, might be called a naturalist in the broad sense, and anyone who adds to these the denial of freedom, values, and purpose might be labeled a naturalist in the strict sense, or a strict naturalist; Some opponents of naturalism would argue that naturalists in the broad sense are at least somewhat inconsistent and that naturalism in the broad sense leads logically to strict naturalism. Many Strict naturalists would agree with this. Those who reject naturalism in both the strict and broad sense do so for a variety of reasons. They may have positive arguments for the existence of some of what naturalists deny, or they may have what seem to be decisive refutations of some or all of the arguments for naturalism. But, in addition to particular arguments against naturalist tenets or their grounds of belief, some opponents of naturalism believe that there is a general argument which holds against any form. of naturalism. These opponents hold that naturalism has a 'fatal flaw' or, to put it more strongly, that naturalism is self-destroying. If naturalism is true, then human reason must be the result of natural forces. These natural forces are not, on the naturalistic view, rational themselves, nor can they be the result of a rational cause. So human reason would be the result of nonrational causes. This, it can be argued, gives us a strong reason to distrust human reason, especially in its less practical and more theoretical exercises. But the theory of naturalism is itself such an exercise of theoretical reason. If natural ism is true, we would have strong reasons to distrust theoretical reasoning. If we distrust theoretical reasoning, we distrust particular applications of it, such as the theory of naturalism. Thus, if natural ism is true, we have strong reasons to distrust naturalism. Naturalism believes that