On the stupidity of asking, “but where’s the evidence we need evidence for things?”


On Twitter:


There’s a longer answer I have to this that didn’t fit on Twitter, so here it is: it’s a mistake to think that if someone thinks maybe you should have some evidence for a particular thing you believe, they are therefore committed to a sweeping philosophical doctrine about needing evidence for absolutely everything.

Imagine I accused you of taking part in Satanic rituals that involved literally eating babies. “What?” you’d probably ask, “what evidence could you possible have for that absurd claim?”

Imagine I responded, “Ha! By demanding evidence, you’re committing yourself to the claim that we should have evidence for everything! But there’s no evidence we should have evidence for everything! I WIN I WIN I WIN!!!”

If I did that, you’d probably be wondering if I’d gone completely insane.

When I look at a question like, “Did Jesus rise from the dead?” my approach is pretty simple. I don’t believe Joseph Smith’s claims about the book of Mormon, and I don’t see any better evidence for the claims of Christianity than the claims of Mormonism, so I don’t believe the claims of Christianity either.

I do not need any sweeping philosophical theory to do that.

This is really not that hard.

William Lane Craig rationalizes his lie about Ehrman
I've read Draper's paper, and I am puzzled
My debate with Randal Rauser is out!
Kris Komarnitsky's Doubting Jesus' Resurrection

CLOSE | X

HIDE | X