Does God Exist? Part 3

I'm still working on development of an analysis of the question "Does God exist?" that would help to organize systematic investigations of the question.In the Part 1 post in this series I suggested an analysis in terms of logical possibility, logical necessity, certainty, and probability (click on image below for a clearer view of the diagram):        In that same post I suggested another possible way to analyze … [Read more...]

William Lane Craig Endorses My Argument from Scale against Theism!

He doesn't mention by name, of course, and may not have even had my argument in mind, but the sort of Bayesian considerations he raises support my Bayesian argument from scale, in two ways. First, he agrees with me about the "direction" the evidence points (against theism). Second, he agrees with me about the "magnitude" of that evidential support (very weak). (The words "direction" and "magnitude" are not Craig's words, but were inspired by David Schum, who pointed out long ago that evidence … [Read more...]

We Don’t Have Father-ist Apologetics; Why Do We Need Theistic Apologetics?

Anyone who has (or had) a loving father in their lives did not spend their time studying abstract, philosophical arguments for the existence of their father. In fact, the whole idea of "father-ist apologetics" as a thing seems weird as soon as you think about it.Compare theistic apologetics. I suspect that many people -- or at least many theists -- don't think there is anything odd about the idea of theistic apologetics. But I think the idea of theistic apologetics is odd for the same reason … [Read more...]

The Old “You’d Have to be God to Know There is No God” Objection

(Redated post originally published on 9 December 2011)Layman at Answers in Genesis repeats the myth that atheism is self-refuting because it requires knowledge that only God could have. In his words: To say there is no God is to say you have enough knowledge to know there is no God. But an atheist can never have enough knowledge to be certain there is no God. He would have to know everything, because if there is something outside his area of knowledge, that something could include God. An … [Read more...]

Atheistic Teleological Arguments, Part 5: Dawkins’s Ultimate Boeing 747 Gambit

(Redated post originally published on 7 December 2011)A. The Argument FormulatedIn chapter 4 of his book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins advances an argument for atheism he calls the "Ultimate Boeing 747 Gambit," in reference to Fred Hoyle's famous comment about a Boeing 747 arising by chance in a junkyard.[26] Just as Hoyle's argument appeals to the (alleged) improbability of evolution, Dawkins's argument appeals to the (alleged) improbability of God.Dawkins is not a philosopher … [Read more...]

The Problem of Epistemic Evil

The problem of epistemic evil is raised by Rene Descartes in the fourth of his Meditations on First Philosophy. In the previous meditation he believed that he had exorcised the Evil Genius who might be systematically and comprehensively deceiving us. Descartes believes that he has proven the existence of a good God who will not permit us to be always deceived. However, in the fourth meditation he considers the question of why, if a good God will not allow us to be always deceived, he still p … [Read more...]

Victor Reppert on the Argument from Evil as a Reductio

(Redated post originally published on 12 June 2012)Can atheist who rejects moral realism press the argument from evil? Many theists, including William Lane Craig and Ravi Zacharias, have argued that the answer is "no." In my old critique of one of Zacharias's books, I wrote the following. Zacharias presents two objections to AE. First, he suggests that it is incoherent for atheists to appeal to evil as evidence of the nonexistence of God since objective moral evil could not exist if there … [Read more...]

LINK: Alvin Plantinga’s Turnaround Argument from Evil

(Redated post originally published on 20 October 2011)LINK (HT: Victor Reppert) … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X