William Lane Craig on the Prior Probability of Theism and the Fine-Tuning Argument

q397_web

One objection to fine-tuning arguments for God's existence goes like this: simply showing that so-called 'fine-tuning' is more probable on theism than on atheism isn't enough to show that God exists. One must also take into account the prior probability of theism.William Lane Craig responds to this objection in a recent Q&A on his website. He begins: Your professor’s objection will be more comprehensible if we put it into the context of the probability calculus. Let’s compare the pro … [Read more...]

WLC Denies That Anyone Has Ever Died a Sincere Seeker Without Finding God

Can anyone sincerely lack belief in God? And even if they can, can anyone sincerely lack belief in God for the rest of their lives? Many people, including nontheists but not just nontheists, think the answer to both questions is plainly "yes." But some (many?) theists, no doubt motivated by beliefs such as divine goodness, Biblical inerrancy, and Christian particularism, deny this for the second question and possibly the first.  We'll call people who deny a "yes" answer to the second quest … [Read more...]

Stupid Atheist Meme #4: “Let’s Put an End to the Philosophy of Religion!”

Note: For the avoidance of doubt, in calling this and other memes"stupid" I'm not claiming--and don't think--that anyone who agrees with any or all of these memes is a stupid person.  J.L. Schellenberg has written all that needs to be said on this topic, in a combox on another site (skip down to comment #47). I think it’s worth quoting in full.Having done philosophy of religion as an atheist for more than twenty years, I find the idea that atheistic belief should lead one to view philosophy … [Read more...]

Index: Draper’s Evidential Argument from Biological Evolution

The purpose of this page is to provide an index for my blog series on Paul Draper's evidential argument against theism based on biological evolution.Part 1: a summary of the argument Part 2: a critical assessment of William Lane Craig's attempt to turn the tables on Draper and argue that evolution is evidence favoring theism over naturalism.See also:Summary and Assessment of the Craig-Draper Debate on the Existence of God (1998) "Religious Experience and the Evidential Argument … [Read more...]

Index: Draper’s Evidential Argument from Pain and Pleasure

The purpose of this page is to provide an index for my blog series on Paul Draper's classic 1989 article defending an evidential argument from evil which focuses on the biological role (and apparent moral randomness) of pain and pleasure.Part 1: summarizes key terminology for the argument, as well as the argument itself. Part 2: summarizes the first part of Draper's argument, which purports to show that facts about pain and pleasure are more probable on the hypothesis of indifference (HI) … [Read more...]

Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 4

This post is part of a series on Paul Draper’s classic version of the evidential argument from evil. In the previous entry, I summarized Draper's refutation of three theodicies which might be used as an objection to the claim that HI explains the facts about the biological role of pain and pleasure much better than T does. In this post, I'm going to review the final section of Draper's classic 1989 article on the evidential argument from evil.1. Darwin's Argument from EvilIn the final se … [Read more...]

Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 3

APP-T1

This post is part of a series on Paul Draper’s classic version of the evidential argument from evil. In the previous entry, I summarized Draper's first argument, which attempts to show that certain facts about the types, quantity, and distribution of pain and pleasure (P&P) are much more probable on the hypothesis of indifference (HI) than on theism (T), and so constitute strong evidence against T and for HI. In this entry, I summarize Draper's discussion of theistic explanations for those f … [Read more...]

Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 2

APP-arg2-5

This post is part of a series on Paul Draper's classic version of the evidential argument from evil. In the previous entry, I explained Draper's terminology and summarized the logical form of Draper's two arguments. In this entry, I focus on Draper's first argument, which attempts to show that known facts about the biological role of pain and pleasure are much more probable on the hypothesis of indifference than on the hypothesis of theism.1. Background KnowledgeLike all abductive a … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X