Is belief illogical?
As I demonstrated in a previous post there is evidence for the existence of God, although atheists discount all such evidence as insufficient or irrelevant or fake. Atheists also argue that belief in God is "illogical" because "...the existence of God has not been logically proven by anyone, ever." [The five best reasons not to believe in God]
Are all believers simply being illogical or irrational? We know that many famous scientists and engineers have been religious people including Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Fred Brooks, Tim Berners-Lee, Donald Knuth, and Larry Wall just to name a few. [List of Christians in science and technology] These are not people given to irrational thinking.
Are all believers simply being illogical or irrational? We know that many famous scientists and engineers have been religious people including Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Fred Brooks, Tim Berners-Lee, Donald Knuth, and Larry Wall just to name a few. [List of Christians in science and technology] These are not people given to irrational thinking.
Arguments for God
There have been a lot of logical arguments for the existence of God. I first learned of some these in a college Intro to Philosophy class. Usually, the arguments that receive the most attention are classified as cosmological, teleological, and ontological arguments. Each of these categories has many variations. Here is one simple variation for each:- "Paley's teleological argument is based on an analogy: Watchmaker is to watch as God is to universe. Just as a watch, with its intelligent design and complex function must have been created by an intelligent maker: a watchmaker, the universe, with all its complexity and greatness, must have been created by an intelligent and powerful creator. Therefore a watchmaker is to watch as God is to universe." [The Teleological Argument]
- "The Cosmological argument is another simple argument. We know that everything that exists has a cause related to its existence. We know that the universe exists. Because it is exists it must have an uncaused cause. The uncreated cause is God." [Evidence God Exists]
- "The first ontological argument in the Western Christian tradition was proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in his 1078 work Proslogion. Anselm defined God as 'that than which nothing greater can be thought', and argued that this being must exist in the mind, even in the mind of the person who denies the existence of God. He suggested that, if the greatest possible being exists in the mind, it must also exist in reality. If it exists only in the mind, then an even greater being must be possible—one which exists both in the mind and in reality. Therefore, this greatest possible being must exist in reality." [Ontological argument]
"German philosopher Immanuel Kant devised an argument from morality based on practical reason." [Argument from morality] C.S. Lewis used a variation of this argument in his book Mere Christianity. In summary, "Kant argued that the goal of humanity is to achieve perfect happiness and virtue (the summum bonum) and believed that an afterlife must exist in order for this to be possible, and that God must exist to provide this." [Argument from morality]
"In 1748, philosopher David Hume published Of Miracles. In the essay, Hume argues that when someone claims to have seen a miracle, this is poor evidence it actually happened, since it goes against what we see every day.... As a believer in the miracle of Jesus’s resurrection, Price took exception. He believed Bayes’ formula proved it [Hume's claim] wrong. In a 1767 essay, Price shows that even if a person observes that the tide has come in a million times, on statistical grounds they cannot reasonably say it will never stop coming in. Using Bayes’ theorem, based on those million observations, Price calculated that there is a 50% chance the true probability of the tide not coming in one day is somewhere between 1 in 600,000 and 1 in 3 million. Therefore, he argued, it is not possible to eliminate the chance of a miracle based on a large number of negative observations. Although Hume never disavowed his argument, he took Price’s rejoinder seriously. 'I own to you, that the Light, in which you have put this Controversy, is new and plausible and ingenious, and perhaps solid,' Hume wrote to Price." [The most important formula in data science was first used to prove the existence of God]
The above is classified as a probabilistic argument; other types of arguments for miracles include deductive, criteriological, and explanatory. [Miracles] "Here, for example, is a deductive reconstruction of an argument given by William Paley (1859), broadly modeled on the version given by Richard Whately (1870: 254–258) and other Victorian logicians:
Arguments for Miracles
There are also some interesting arguments for the possibility of miracles."In 1748, philosopher David Hume published Of Miracles. In the essay, Hume argues that when someone claims to have seen a miracle, this is poor evidence it actually happened, since it goes against what we see every day.... As a believer in the miracle of Jesus’s resurrection, Price took exception. He believed Bayes’ formula proved it [Hume's claim] wrong. In a 1767 essay, Price shows that even if a person observes that the tide has come in a million times, on statistical grounds they cannot reasonably say it will never stop coming in. Using Bayes’ theorem, based on those million observations, Price calculated that there is a 50% chance the true probability of the tide not coming in one day is somewhere between 1 in 600,000 and 1 in 3 million. Therefore, he argued, it is not possible to eliminate the chance of a miracle based on a large number of negative observations. Although Hume never disavowed his argument, he took Price’s rejoinder seriously. 'I own to you, that the Light, in which you have put this Controversy, is new and plausible and ingenious, and perhaps solid,' Hume wrote to Price." [The most important formula in data science was first used to prove the existence of God]
The above is classified as a probabilistic argument; other types of arguments for miracles include deductive, criteriological, and explanatory. [Miracles] "Here, for example, is a deductive reconstruction of an argument given by William Paley (1859), broadly modeled on the version given by Richard Whately (1870: 254–258) and other Victorian logicians:
- All miracles attested by persons, claiming to have witnessed them, who pass their lives in labors, dangers, and sufferings in support of their statements, and who, in consequence of their belief, submit to new rules of conduct, are worthy of credit.
- The central Christian miracles are attested by such evidence.
Therefore, - The central Christian miracles are worthy of credit." [Miracles]
Comments
Post a Comment