1 / 10

The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism

The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. Ratio Christi Tamu. Background. Various formulations by various people C.S. Lewis, Miracles Richard Taylor, Metaphysics Others Formulated by Professor Alvin Plantinga in 1993, Warrant and Proper Function. Definitions. Defeater

thetis
Download Presentation

The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism Ratio Christi Tamu

  2. Background • Various formulations by various people • C.S. Lewis, Miracles • Richard Taylor, Metaphysics • Others • Formulated by Professor Alvin Plantinga in 1993, Warrant and Proper Function

  3. Definitions • Defeater • Evidence supporting the rejection of a currently held belief • Reliability of Cognitive Faculties (R) • The trustworthiness of human thinking to arrive at truth • Naturalism (N) • The Cosmos is all that is, was, and every will be • Evolution (E) • The diversity of life is attributed to change over time

  4. Argument • The probability of Rgiven Nand Eis low • Believing Nand Eproduces a defeater for R • A defeater for Ris a universal defeater • Therefore holding Nand Eis self defeating

  5. Premise 1 • The probability of Rgiven Nand Eis low • This means that evolution and naturalism are not likely to produce reliable cognitive faculties • Evolution produces positive results, not truth

  6. Premise 2 • Believing Nand Eproduces a defeater for R • Since Ris not likely given Nand E, we have a good reason to disbelieve R

  7. Premise 3 • A defeater for Ris a universal defeater • If we cannot trust our cognitive faculties, we cannot reason • Therefore any belief that causes us to doubt Rshould also cause us to doubt all other beliefs, including Evolutionand Naturalism

  8. Conclusion • Therefore holding Nand Eis self defeating • If the result of Nand Eis that we doubt everything we know, we have good reason to disbelieve either Nor E

  9. Darwin’s Doubt • Darwin recognized the problem with cognitive faculties given naturalism and evolution. • But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind? — Charles Darwin, to William Graham 3 July 1881

  10. Questions?

More Related