5 - Theistic arguments
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Summary
The famous twentieth-century British philosopher and atheist Bertrand Russell was once asked what he would say to explain his atheism if he were to confront God after his death. Russell's famous reply was: “Not enough evidence, God! Not enough evidence.”
Russell's response has an implicit and an explicit side. Implicitly his remark indicates that a certain amount of evidence – presumably propositional evidence – is required for reasonable belief in God. Explicitly, he is claiming that there isn't any such evidence. In the last chapter we saw some powerful reasons for thinking that Russell is wrong when it comes to the implicit claim. Belief in God might be justified even in the absence of propositional evidence. It might, for example, be grounded in and justified on the basis of some sort of religious experience.
Still, there are many people who would say that they have had no religious experiences and who furthermore find themselves with no other sort of non-propositional evidence for theism, not even an initial inclination toward belief in God. Others might at least have the initial inclination toward belief in God, but they might think that whatever evidential force that initial inclination carries, as well as the evidential force of whatever religious experiences they might have had, is defeated by other things that they know about the world – for example, that the world contains vast amounts of evil and suffering.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion , pp. 123 - 156Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2008