Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A forum for discussing matters of moment, from a curmudgeonly perspective. (The ideas posted here do not necessarily represent those of any organization with which I am a part). Rude and insulting remarks will not be published, but civil disagreement is welcome.
1 comment:
Doug:
Good analogy on one judging Jazz not to be a "high form of art" based upon an ignorance or lack of understanding of Jazz. Likewise, one cannot judge that God does not exist if one has insufficient knowledge/understanding of the arguments for God's existence. However, how much knowledge is both necessary and sufficient for committing to the belief that God exists?
While this may "cash in on someone's ignorance", I'm unconvinced it could lead the way forward toward belief in God. At least my experience using this modus operandi has always led to nowhere productive in the dialogue.
On a related note: How might this line of reasoning (i.e., requiring the necessary and sufficient knowledge for commitment to God's existence) work against Plantinga's notion of God as a properly basic belief?
Post a Comment