Nostr Web Client

Alvin Plantinga is great on the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism in 'Where the conflict really lies'.

He presents a defeater for belief in Naturalism and evolution if Naturalism and evolution are true.

If our minds have come from a process aimed at survival, the probability that they produce true belief, is low. If the probability that out minds produce true belief is low, it is not rational to believe the beliefs that our minds produce, including belief in Naturalism and evolution.

This argument might seem trivial at first, because we naturally believe the deliverances of our minds to be true, but it is a solid philosophical defeater that has no defeater.

hh 2y ago

That's precisely why we have the scientific method, so we don't have to "believe". And based on it, evolution (natural selection) and the big bang (cosmic inflation) are the best answers we have right now.

Also based on it, because we don't "believe" in evolution and the big bang, we keep applying the scientific method and questioning them, trying to find refinements to them and maybe whole new paradigms that completely supercede them.

What's quite clear though is that there's no magic man in the sky throwing bolts and distributing rewards to individuals based on how closely they believe the apocryphal writings of whatever middle eastern medieval crook.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Force2B 2y ago

I mostly agree, but we will never that we have things right cuz we can never know what we don’t know.

Remember that for years there was only one man on the planet who believed it wasn’t flat, all other figures of authority in “science” believed it was flat and the center of the universe.

There is always room for belief because we don’t know what is around the corner and there is always a chance that what we find around the corner aligns with some beliefs.