Evidentiary argument

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(There is evidence for the existence of God)
m (We should believe in propositions without evidence: - linked up a couple pages)
(9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
An evidentiary argument is an argument based on evidence. In apologetics and counter-apologetics the argument usually goes as follows:
 
An evidentiary argument is an argument based on evidence. In apologetics and counter-apologetics the argument usually goes as follows:
  
 
+
==Argument==
 
*There is no evidence for the existence of God.
 
*There is no evidence for the existence of God.
 +
*There are good reasons for not believing in the existence of God.
 
*We should not believe in a proposition for which there is no evidence.
 
*We should not believe in a proposition for which there is no evidence.
 
**We should not believe in the existence of God.
 
**We should not believe in the existence of God.
 
+
*We should not believe in a proposition for which there are good reasons for not believing it.
 
+
**We should not believe in the existence of God.
The objections can be grouped into objections to specific premises:
+
  
 
===We should believe in propositions without evidence===
 
===We should believe in propositions without evidence===
This branch of defense arguments usually concern the idea of [[faith]] and the defenses there of.
+
This branch of defense arguments usually concern the idea of [[faith]] and the defenses thereof.
*[[Faith]] is a good within itself.
+
*Faith is a good within itself.
*God wants us to have [[faith]].
+
*God wants us to have faith.
*Faith is a virtue.
+
*[[Faith is a virtue]].
*We have faith in other things: wind, love, trust, [[quantum mechanics]], [[Gödel's incompleteness theorem]]
+
*We have [[Equivocation|faith in other things]]: wind, love, trust, [[quantum mechanics]], [[Gödel's incompleteness theorem]]
  
 
===There is evidence for the existence of God===
 
===There is evidence for the existence of God===
 
*[[Arguments for the existence of God]]
 
*[[Arguments for the existence of God]]
 
*[[Argument from design|Complexity of biological life]].
 
*[[Argument from design|Complexity of biological life]].
*[[Fine tuning argument|The universe is perfect suited for humans]].
+
*[[Fine tuning argument|The universe is perfectly suited for humans]].
 
*[[prayer|Efficacy of prayer]].
 
*[[prayer|Efficacy of prayer]].
 
*[[Bible|The Bible supports God]].
 
*[[Bible|The Bible supports God]].
 
*[[Argument from personal experience|Personal revelations]].
 
*[[Argument from personal experience|Personal revelations]].
 
*[[Jesus fulfilled prophecy]]
 
*[[Jesus fulfilled prophecy]]
 +
 +
===Good reasons for not believing in the existence of God===
 +
*[[Problem of evil]]
 +
*[[Argument from nonbelief]]
 +
*[[Argument from inconsistent revelations]]
 +
*[[Argument from locality]]
 +
*[[Argument from apologetics]]
 +
*[[Omnipotence paradox]]
 +
*[[Argument from improbability]]
  
  
 
This is, much like [[Pascal's Wager]], is an argument for belief rather than the existence of God. The thrust of the argument is that we shouldn't believe in God, not that there are not god(s).
 
This is, much like [[Pascal's Wager]], is an argument for belief rather than the existence of God. The thrust of the argument is that we shouldn't believe in God, not that there are not god(s).
 +
  
 
[[Category:Arguments]]
 
[[Category:Arguments]]
 
[[Category:Arguments against belief]]
 
[[Category:Arguments against belief]]

Revision as of 13:03, 18 February 2011

An evidentiary argument is an argument based on evidence. In apologetics and counter-apologetics the argument usually goes as follows:

Contents

Argument

  • There is no evidence for the existence of God.
  • There are good reasons for not believing in the existence of God.
  • We should not believe in a proposition for which there is no evidence.
    • We should not believe in the existence of God.
  • We should not believe in a proposition for which there are good reasons for not believing it.
    • We should not believe in the existence of God.

We should believe in propositions without evidence

This branch of defense arguments usually concern the idea of faith and the defenses thereof.

There is evidence for the existence of God

Good reasons for not believing in the existence of God


This is, much like Pascal's Wager, is an argument for belief rather than the existence of God. The thrust of the argument is that we shouldn't believe in God, not that there are not god(s).

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox