Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Knowledge of God as Properly Basic?

PolyCarp
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?
"Perhaps the atheist cannot find God for the same reason the thief cannot find a policeman"

--G.K Chesterton
uncung
Posts: 3,433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 2:28:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

yes, excatly. God grant us with brain, the most rational thing is all things are coming to exist due to something generates them. As well as the universe,where it came to exist and on going expanding belongs to its in order physics and any natural patterns. Some thing must created it, that is so called the Creator.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 2:31:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
No, it isn"t. It"s an absolutely terrible one. In fact, it"s just a bare assertion of something that can"t even be shown to be true and wouldn"t prove god"s existence even if it were. The fact Christian apologists keep wheeling Plantinga our as if he has anything worthwhile to say is pretty damning of the state of Christian apologetics.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 2:47:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Believers create their deity to suit them. It is unknown if a deity actually exists as there is no verifiable evidence one way or the other.
bulproof
Posts: 25,197
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:49:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I can think of purple green dragonoids, ergo they exist.

Do you call your idiocy thinking?

WOW.

ROFLMAO
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:51:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

St. Paul said it like this:

Acts 17
24: The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by man,
25: nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all men life and breath and everything.
26: And he made from one every nation of men to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their habitation,
27: that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel after him and find him. Yet he is not far from each one of us,
28: for ..In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your poets have said, ..For we are indeed his offspring.'
29: Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the Deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, a representation by the art and imagination of man.
30: The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent,
31: because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all men by raising him from the dead."
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:53:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:47:07 AM, JJ50 wrote:
Believers create their deity to suit them. It is unknown if a deity actually exists as there is no verifiable evidence one way or the other.

There's a reason God's people form a false deity in their minds, though. These thoughts come from our Creator to give His people the sense that there is a Creator, even though they don't know Him at all.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 5:24:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

How do you explain the Australian aboriginal? They have 40,000 years of history and no concept of God in the sense you are using it. It's a similar story with other isolated cultures such as the American Indian. A spirit world yes, a God no.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:46:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

The assertion is baseless. We know other minds because we see the bodies they reside in, feel the warmth of the hands that hold us, know that someone feeds us, etc. The non-existent god does none of these things.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:55:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:31:26 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
No, it isn"t. It"s an absolutely terrible one. In fact, it"s just a bare assertion of something that can"t even be shown to be true and wouldn"t prove god"s existence even if it were. The fact Christian apologists keep wheeling Plantinga our as if he has anything worthwhile to say is pretty damning of the state of Christian apologetics.

You know that he wasn't actually trying to prove God's existence with that argument, right? lol wow
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:57:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 3:46:34 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

The assertion is baseless. We know other minds because we see the bodies they reside in, feel the warmth of the hands that hold us, know that someone feeds us, etc. The non-existent god does none of these things.

How do you know you aren't a brain in a vat wherein which scientists are manipulating your brain into think you have the external world? How do you know you aren't a single mind being systematically deceived by an all powerful Cartesian demon into thinking there is an external world?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 3:59:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 3:57:39 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 3:46:34 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

The assertion is baseless. We know other minds because we see the bodies they reside in, feel the warmth of the hands that hold us, know that someone feeds us, etc. The non-existent god does none of these things.

How do you know you aren't a brain in a vat wherein which scientists are manipulating your brain into think you have the external world? How do you know you aren't a single mind being systematically deceived by an all powerful Cartesian demon into thinking there is an external world?

How do you know other minds aren't mindless automatons that are functionally equivalent to humans but actually don't posses anything approaching mental states of your like?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 4:15:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 5:24:58 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

How do you explain the Australian aboriginal? They have 40,000 years of history and no concept of God in the sense you are using it. It's a similar story with other isolated cultures such as the American Indian. A spirit world yes, a God no.

What? The aboriginals (or at least a significant percentage of aboriginals) had/have a concept of a/the High God...just as some native americans do/did. I'm not sure what you are talking about.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2015 4:16:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 3:59:01 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 3:57:39 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 3:46:34 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

The assertion is baseless. We know other minds because we see the bodies they reside in, feel the warmth of the hands that hold us, know that someone feeds us, etc. The non-existent god does none of these things.

How do you know you aren't a brain in a vat wherein which scientists are manipulating your brain into think you have the external world? How do you know you aren't a single mind being systematically deceived by an all powerful Cartesian demon into thinking there is an external world?

How do you know other minds aren't mindless automatons that are functionally equivalent to humans but actually don't posses anything approaching mental states of your like?

Simple answer. I don't, but until there is some evidence of these implicit assertions you're making I will behave as if the reality I perceive is indeed reality. I'm guessing you will do the same, since we really have no choice. None of what you've said has any real bearing on this topic and I'm not sure why you said it.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 1:19:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 4:15:48 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 5:24:58 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

How do you explain the Australian aboriginal? They have 40,000 years of history and no concept of God in the sense you are using it. It's a similar story with other isolated cultures such as the American Indian. A spirit world yes, a God no.

What? The aboriginals (or at least a significant percentage of aboriginals) had/have a concept of a/the High God...just as some native americans do/did. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

You speak in ignorance:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Aboriginal people traditionally adhered to animist spiritual frameworks. Within Aboriginal belief systems, a formative epoch known as 'the Dreamtime' stretches back into the distant past when the creator ancestors known as the First Peoples travelled across the land, creating and naming as they went.[93] Indigenous Australia's oral tradition and religious values are based upon reverence for the land and a belief in this Dreamtime.

The situation with American Indians is similar, I believe.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 1:20:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 3:55:03 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:31:26 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
No, it isn"t. It"s an absolutely terrible one. In fact, it"s just a bare assertion of something that can"t even be shown to be true and wouldn"t prove god"s existence even if it were. The fact Christian apologists keep wheeling Plantinga our as if he has anything worthwhile to say is pretty damning of the state of Christian apologetics.

You know that he wasn't actually trying to prove God's existence with that argument, right? lol wow

So claiming we all know god exists from birth isn't a claim for evidence of god's existence? Yeah, sure thing champ. Are you on crack? It's a necessary implication of his argument and even Plantinga isn't that clueless.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 9:40:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 1:19:56 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/2/2015 4:15:48 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 5:24:58 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

How do you explain the Australian aboriginal? They have 40,000 years of history and no concept of God in the sense you are using it. It's a similar story with other isolated cultures such as the American Indian. A spirit world yes, a God no.

What? The aboriginals (or at least a significant percentage of aboriginals) had/have a concept of a/the High God...just as some native americans do/did. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

You speak in ignorance:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Aboriginal people traditionally adhered to animist spiritual frameworks. Within Aboriginal belief systems, a formative epoch known as 'the Dreamtime' stretches back into the distant past when the creator ancestors known as the First Peoples travelled across the land, creating and naming as they went.[93] Indigenous Australia's oral tradition and religious values are based upon reverence for the land and a belief in this Dreamtime.

The situation with American Indians is similar, I believe.

Not really:

Australian Aborginials:

https://books.google.com...

Native Americans:

http://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 9:51:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 1:20:09 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 3/2/2015 3:55:03 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:31:26 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
No, it isn"t. It"s an absolutely terrible one. In fact, it"s just a bare assertion of something that can"t even be shown to be true and wouldn"t prove god"s existence even if it were. The fact Christian apologists keep wheeling Plantinga our as if he has anything worthwhile to say is pretty damning of the state of Christian apologetics.

You know that he wasn't actually trying to prove God's existence with that argument, right? lol wow

So claiming we all know god exists from birth isn't a claim for evidence of god's existence? Yeah, sure thing champ. Are you on crack? It's a necessary implication of his argument and even Plantinga isn't that clueless.

This shows that you actually haven't read his arguments. It's not presented as a claim for evidence of God's existence...champ.

Even Tyler Wunder, a critic, knows that.

"TYLER: Yes. I think you can divide his religious epistemology pretty fruitfully into three stages following James Beilby and his recent book on Plantinga"s religious epistemology. Starting with stage one, there is Plantinga"s first book, which is called "God and Other Minds." I suppose I should probably set up what belief in other minds is. It is just simply the belief that there are other mental experiences out there, in reality, that are not your own, that there are people out there who are just as real as you are.

LUKE: It"s a rather astonishing belief that not only do I have a mind, but you"re not a robot.

TYLER: Yes. Yes, exactly. So, anyway, what Plantinga is doing is that in this book he argues the traditional arguments for the existence of God are all failures, but so are many arguments against the existence of God. And then he considers the issue of whether or not there are other minds, whether the belief that there are minds other than our own are justified. And what he ultimately concludes with is that belief in other minds is no better argumentatively supported than belief in God, but that since belief in other minds is clearly rational, then he offers this as a tentative conclusion: then so, too, is belief in God as well. So that"s the basic gist of God and Other Minds, which you can call the first stage in Plantinga"s religious epistemology

. LUKE: So he"s trying to show that it might be rational to believe in God, even if there are no good arguments for God.

TYLER: Exactly, yes. That"s exactly what he"s trying to suggest because there are beliefs that do so qualify " belief in other minds " even though, according to his analysis, there are no good arguments, or ultimately successful arguments for belief in other minds; nevertheless, it"s still rational to believe it. So since there are, he concludes, beliefs that are like that, well, maybe belief in God is like that, too. I mean he does actually have some kind of argument for that. He suggests that there is a similarity between the best, yet unsuccessful argument for God, and the best yet, unsuccessful argument for belief in other minds, that they both somehow share a similar failing. So on that basis, he seems to conclude that, well, then maybe these beliefs are sort of on par in their ability to be rational without their being sort of any successful argument for them. So that"s in the first stage. The second stage of his religious epistemology gets a good deal more explicit with the epistemological terms, such as foundationalism and properly basic, and reformed epistemology itself is introduced in this second stage of his religious epistemology which, I think, best represented by a series of essays that run from about 1979 until about 1983, and are maybe best represented by a flagship essay called "Reason and Belief in God."

LUKE: Ok. So there he"s maybe saying much the same thing, but he"s just using the philosophical language in a more standard way in talking about foundationalism, properly basic beliefs, and that kind of thing?

TYLER: Yes. It is essentially an extension of the previous argument; he"s just fleshing it out quite a bit. For example, he explicitly identifies his opposition in this second stage, and he called it evidentialism. Evidentialism is essentially the view that belief in God requires some sort of evidential or argumentative considerations if it is to be rational. So having, sort of, explicitly identified that which he is opposed to, he then sets about trying to undermine it. He does that by asking what reason there is to accept evidentialism". - See more at: http://commonsenseatheism.com...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 3:08:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 9:51:43 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
This shows that you actually haven't read his arguments. It's not presented as a claim for evidence of God's existence...champ.

This shows I am responding to the opening post. I long ago stopped bothering to read Plantinga because, as Christian Apologetics' greatest mind, he does nothing but damn the whole movement with that faint praise.

Do you go out and buy a book to read before responding to any thread on here? No? Then you should probably dial back on being such a smug tw*t.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 3:47:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

This is a fallacy, PC, since there are cultures tens of thousands of years old that have never entertained the notion that the world has a single creator, much less one exhibiting the characteristics of the god of Abraham. Yet if there were some innate belief, one would expect it to manifest in each culture time and time again.

Further, all around the world and regardless of belief, the biggest statistical predictor of faith is the faith of your family and community. Again, if Abrahamic belief were innate, this would not be so.

I would suggest that instead, adults steeped from childhood in an Abrahamic faith find it hard to imagine growing up without it. They may conflate the cultural cues from parents, schools, friends, art and architecture with their own subconscious impulses and ideas, and thus in ignorance, project these same ideas onto disparate cultures they don't really care about, have never investigated and do not understand.

Essentially it's a mild form of bigotry: dismissing any view other than one's own as being unnatural and therefore implying that if you hold that belief it's somehow willful recalcitrance against some supposed, innate, revealed truth.

Another doctrinal benefit of this bigotry is that religious supremacists can consign to purgatory or hell anyone of some other culture who might never have heard of their faith, while still pretending that this metaphysical hate-speech is benign and just.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 6:21:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 9:40:00 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/3/2015 1:19:56 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/2/2015 4:15:48 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/2/2015 5:24:58 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/2/2015 2:14:51 AM, PolyCarp wrote:
Alvin Plantinga has said that we can know God exists through our own brains thinking some higher power exists from infancy, the same way we know other minds exist. Is that a fair way to claim belief in God? Do our intuitions rely on any reason in this area?

How do you explain the Australian aboriginal? They have 40,000 years of history and no concept of God in the sense you are using it. It's a similar story with other isolated cultures such as the American Indian. A spirit world yes, a God no.

What? The aboriginals (or at least a significant percentage of aboriginals) had/have a concept of a/the High God...just as some native americans do/did. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

You speak in ignorance:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Aboriginal people traditionally adhered to animist spiritual frameworks. Within Aboriginal belief systems, a formative epoch known as 'the Dreamtime' stretches back into the distant past when the creator ancestors known as the First Peoples travelled across the land, creating and naming as they went.[93] Indigenous Australia's oral tradition and religious values are based upon reverence for the land and a belief in this Dreamtime.

The situation with American Indians is similar, I believe.

Not really:

Australian Aborginials:

https://books.google.com...

Native Americans:

http://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com...

Ha ha ha ha. White men with an agenda pontificating on what native people believed. You can't be serious. These ideas dating from the 19th century have been discredited as obvious attempts by Christians to shoehorn their beliefs into ancient cultures.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

By the 1950s, the hypothesis of primitive ethical monotheism was rejected by the academic establishment, so its proponents of Schmidt's "Vienna school" rephrased it to the effect that while ancient cultures may not have known "true monotheism", they at least show evidence for "original theism" (Ur-Theismus, as opposed to non-theistic animism), with a concept of Hochgott ("High God", as opposed to Eingott "Single God"). Christian apologetics in the light of this have moved away from postulating a "memory of revelation" in pre-Christian religions, replacing it with an "inkling of redemption" or virtuous paganism unconsciously anticipating monotheism.[2]

From your second link:

The Native Indian concepts of the Great Spirit varies from tribe to tribe who refer to the Supreme Being by a variety of different names. Some of their beliefs about the Great Spirit are derived from both patriarchal and matriarchal traditions. The Lakota Sioux believe that the Great Spirit is an amalgamation of a dominant Father sky god and Mother Earth. The Great Spirit is seen as both a male and female beings, separate, but part of one divine entity. Other tribes refer to the Great Spirit as "Father", "Old Man" or "Grandfather" and in these cultures the Great Spirit is perceived to be a man, or an animal, with human thought and speech.

The creed or doctrine of these belief systems held that intelligent spirits inhabited all natural objects and every object is controlled by its own independent spirit. Spirits inhabit the sky, stars, sun, moon, rivers, lakes, mountains, forests, the animals, insects, fish, stones, flowers and birds. Some spirits are good and help men who please them whereas other spirits are bad and liable to wreck havoc on people and on tribes. Animals, refer to Power Animals, are singled out as powerful manifestations of the supernatural, including those seen in dreams or Vision Quests. Lesser spirits inhabited stones and plants and viewed as 'spirit helpers'.

This is hardly supportive of your assertions. Naturally, if you believe in a spirit world, the concept would arise of one spirit being greater than the others. That is not monotheism though. Not even close.