On this blog I mainly talk about classical/traditional theism. Classical/traditional theism, at bottom, claims that there exists a Being who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good. More specifically this Being is all-loving, personal, timeless, spaceless, uncaused, immaterial, immutable, etc. This position is also known as "Anselmian theism", "Perfect Being Theism", or "Theism". Saint Anselm held that …
Author: Philosophy of Religion blog (Does God Exist?)
This blog presupposes the importance of having some knowledge in philosophy, particularly philosophy of religion; although, this is not absolutely necessary to read my posts. In addition, when speaking of "God", I use that term to describe the Being of traditional theism/classical theism. Traditional theism is the belief in a Being who is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnibenevolent.
Philosophy of religion examines subjects like the following: the existence of God, miracles, the rationality of religious belief, science vs. religion, faith vs. reason, etc. On this blog, I mainly focus on the arguments for/against the existence of God and the rationality of religious belief.
About Me:
My name is Jonathan Garner. I went to the University of Tennessee for my undergraduate work where I studied Philosophy. I recently finished graduate school in Philosophy with a focus in Philosophy of Religion.
Argument from Undesire
#Throwback post
One common argument for the existence of the God of classical theism is the argument from desire. If the argument is construed in an inductive manner, the claim is that it’s not surprising that many people would have a desire for God on the hypothesis that theism is true.
However, this is not the whole story. If classical theism were true, it does indeed seem that many people would desire God. However, one can easily see why we would expect everyone to desire God. The problem is that this is not what we observe. Not only do we see people who lack a desire for God in the world, but we also see people that desire for there to not be a God.
If God exists, God could have easily made it that case that everyone desires God.
Also, what I mean by “desire” is simple. All I mean is…
View original post 1,073 more words
An evolutionary explanation of the belief in God and the (supposed) genetic fallacy
We’ve all had our views or arguments misrepresented at some point. Typically, if you (mis)represent your opponent as giving a deductive argument, then you can easily find a fallacy. Conversely, when certain arguments are, for example, properly represented as abductive arguments, some of those same fallacies just don’t apply.
One argument against the existence of God has to do with the evolutionary origin of belief in God. If one interprets an atheist here as presenting a deductive argument, then one can see how an atheist is committing a genetic fallacy. However, we should always be charitable when interpreting someone’s argument; get into the habit of steal-manning your opponent’s argument instead of attacking strawmen.
Here’s how the argument actually goes:
It is a known fact that belief in God is (in part) the product of evolutionary mechanisms. This fact is not surprising on the hypothesis of metaphysical naturalism. That’s because the range of…
View original post 163 more words
Should we also refer to God as a “she”?
It's no secret that traditionally speaking God has been referred exclusively as "he". Most of the time people don't really think of why they refer to God only as a 'he'; it's more of a custom or tradition. What's more, everyone agrees that God isn't male or female. Given that this is the case, I …
How Aquinas and Feser rely on incomplete premises
It's no secret that Edward Feser is a big fan of Thomas Aquinas. One could even say that Feser is somewhat of a 'popularizer' of Aquinas. In particular, Feser specializes in Aquinas's natural theology (i.e. arguments for God's existence). Feser himself believes that Aquinas' arguments are airtight arguments. Naturally, I would say that I am …
Continue reading How Aquinas and Feser rely on incomplete premises
Non-supernaturalism vs. naturalism
Most of us in Western society have heard of the term 'naturalism'. Metaphysical naturalism is the position that the only entities that exist are natural entities, and anything that is mental depends on the physical. Supernaturalism, however, gives priority to the mental, and anything that is physical is dependent on the mental. Non-supernaturalism is the …
Some New Arguments for the Principle of Sufficient Reason?
The Principle of Sufficient Reason (or PSR) states that everything that exists has an explanation for its existence. As Sean Carroll points out, "The PSR is kind of like that bumper sticker that says 'Everything Happens For A Reason' ". Defending the truth of the PSR has not been easy for those that endorse it. …
Continue reading Some New Arguments for the Principle of Sufficient Reason?
