Post on 03-Jul-2015
Is Christianity Rational?Is Christianity Rational?from a philosophical standpoint
John S. Wilkins
What does it mean to be What does it mean to be rational?rational?
Doesn’t mean correct – a rational decision can be false if one starts from the wrong premises
Doesn’t mean agrees with anyone, such as scientists
Doesn’t mean considers all the evidence, for then nobody would be rational
It means, roughly, to make the right choice with the best available evidence in a reasonable amount of time
How could Christianity be How could Christianity be rational?rational?
If it was consistent with all the evidence we have
If it had no contradictions in its basic tenets
If it provided a way to continue that consistently worked out
In a limited, or bounded, sense, if it is the best epistemic bet one can make given one’s environment and resources
EvidenceEvidenceLack of evidence for Christianity (failed prophecies, obvious interpolations in sacred texts, etc.)
Contradicts evidence we do have (e.g., literalism and science)
Is question begging about evidence (finds awareness of sinfulness in societies where it really didn’t exist)
Often uses false “evidence” (e.g., McDowell, archeology)
ContradictionsContradictionsIs God one or three?
Is God good or powerful? Epicurus’ objection
Is God visible or not?
Is God moved to anger or not?
Why do we need to believe, if God has done the sacrificial work?
Soteriology in particular seems self contradictory - saved by God from God himself?
SuccessFailure of miracles (why no regrown limbs?)
Failure of self-help (mentally disabled)
Failure, for a substantial proportion, of belief states
Failure of exorcisms
Failure of providence (the flowers in the field fallacy)
Failure of Christian society (Albigensians to Fred Phelps)
Bounded rationalityBounded rationalityOne has to make a decision before the leopard leaps
One never has perfect information
So we follow rules (heuristics) like “Imitate the best”
This means we emulate our peers and authorities (because they are not dead yet, and we don’t want to be)
Is this a pathway to truth?
Bounded rationalityBounded rationalityNo, it’s not. At best it’s a pathway to what works well enough in a given context (like suburban Western democratic society in peacetime)
When we have to make a choice, it pays to be sure we are exposed to the right conditions
Science education, for example…
So while Christians can be boundedly rational, that doesn’t make Christianity a rational religion
The hermeneutic circleThe hermeneutic circle
It is often true that a religion appears rational to its adherents when it looks irrational to those outside
This is because adherents hold ideas that force the religion to be rational to them (e.g., taking the scriptures as God’s word) which do not seem so to nonbelievers
This is the hermeneutic circle – a kind of rational bubble that when pricked, cannot be reconstituted
Hence...Hence...
“When two principles really do meet which cannot be reconciled, then each man calls the other a fool and a heretic” – Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty §611
But that doesn’t put every worldview on an equal footing (consider a schizophrenic worldview)
What we basically must do is have evidence, or else we are just making up stories
Do I want Christians to Do I want Christians to apostasise?apostasise?
No I don’t.
But don’t think what you find compelling is going to compel anyone else, and especially do not make it something everyone must agree to [The Secular Imperative]
And when religion and science conflict, so much the worse for religion – belief must give way to knowledge, not vice versa [Knowledge cannot be undercut by faith]
ThanksThanksscienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughtsscienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughtscienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughtscienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
EPICURUS’s old questions are yet unanswered. Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?
David Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, §10
Back