What is Faith? – Part 4
We have looked at a simple and widespread understanding of ‘faith in God’: Definition 1 Person P has faith in God IF AND ONLY IF P believes that God exists. One problem with Def. 1 is that the devil himself would have ‘faith in God’ based on this definition, and thus this could hardly be considered to … What is Faith? – Part 4
What is Faith? – Part 3
I said that I was not going to walk slowly through the rest of Chapter 4 of Faith and Reason (FAR), by Richard Swinburne. But there is a lot going on in the next few paragraphs of Chapter 4, and I find myself wanting to make several comments on them. So, contrary to my previous … What is Faith? – Part 3
What is Faith? – Part 2
What does the word “faith” mean? According to my dictionary (The American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition), the word “faith” has several different meanings: Definition 1: A confident belief in the truth, value, trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. Definition 2: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Definition 3: Loyalty … What is Faith? – Part 2
What is Faith? – Part 1
Some general observations to consider before attempting to answer the question “What is faith?”: 1. Don’t criticize what you can’t understand. Or better: Try to understand what faith is before you try to evaluate the goodness or badness of faith. 2. The word ‘faith’ has multiple definitions in any decent dictionary. The word ‘faith’ is … What is Faith? – Part 1
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 6
I will now try to wrap up this series of posts on Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience (AFR). I don’t have any big bold conclusion that I’m driving toward, just a few observations, clarifications, and an objection or two. One thing I have done is to make use of the concepts of dependence and … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 6
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 5
Here is a brief plot summary of the movie Harvey: Due to his insistence that he has an invisible six-foot rabbit for a best friend, a whimsical middle-aged man is thought by his family to be insane – but he may be wiser than anyone knows. James Stewart played Elwood P. Dowd, the “whimsical middle-aged man” … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 5
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 4
Although I have been considering the implications of the idea that the veridicality of a Theistic Religious Experience (TRE) is independent of the veridicality of other TREs, this is NOT the view of Swinburne. In fact, Swinburne clearly holds the opposite view, the view that the veridicality of a TRE is dependent on the veridicality … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 4
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 3
Previously, I have only considered the very simple case where one person has a memory of having previously had a theistic religious experience (hereafter: TRE) of a generic sort–an experience in which it seemed (epistemically) to him/her that God was present. There were a couple of basic points made about probable inferences in contrast to … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 3
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 2
Richard Swinburne’s argument from religious experience (AFR) as given in The Existence of God (2nd ed.- hereafter: EOG) is based on three key epistemological principles: EXPERIENCE …(in the absence of special considerations), if it seems (epistemically) to a subject that x is present (and has some characteristic), then probably x is present (and has that characteristic)… (EOG, p. 303) … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 2
Evolution vs. The Argument from Providence
In the Existence of God (2nd edition, hereafter: EOG) Richard Swinburne lays out a carefully constructed, systematically presented case for the the claim that it is more likely than not that God exists. I have previously argued that there is a big problem with this case that arises with the third argument. In order to know that … Evolution vs. The Argument from Providence