yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Answering Presuppositionalism: Basic


2m read
·Nov 8, 2024

Theists who subscribe to the presuppositionalist school of thought say that atheists can't account for inductive reasoning. They claim that, in fact, whenever an atheist uses inductive reasoning, she is borrowing from the Christian worldview, because according to them, it's the only worldview that can account for the uniformity of nature, which is needed for inductive reasoning to work.

But even if the Christian is correct in his claim that an atheist can't account for a given facet of nature that she nevertheless depends upon, this is not that urgent deal-breaking problem that the presuppositionalist tends to paint for us.

Imagine a primitive society where most people believe that spirit ancestors reward the ritual act of watering a plant by causing that plant to grow. A person in this society who didn't believe in the existence of spirit ancestors would still go ahead and water his plants, because otherwise they would die.

The skeptics' peers might ask him, "How can you account for the fact that applying water causes the plant to grow in your worldview?" The skeptic, ignorant of plant biology, would have no answer. His peers might then say, "Every time you water your plants, you're borrowing from our worldview, because ours is the only system that can account for the connection between applying water to a plant and that plant's growth."

I hope the points I wanted to illustrate with this analogy are already clear, but I'll spell them out:

One, having an explanation does not make your position superior to that of those who may lack one.

Two, not being able to explain a phenomenon doesn't preclude you from legitimately assuming the reliability of that phenomenon.

Three, assuming the reliability of a phenomenon without being able to account for it does not mean that you implicitly accept the worldview of people claiming that theirs is the only explanation of that phenomenon.

Four, the failure of a person to explain a phenomenon doesn't invalidate their worldview or render it inconsistent.

Five, acknowledging that you don't have an answer is better than making things up.

More Articles

View All
How To Make the Best To-Do List For School
There’s something just so satisfying about getting things done, you know? Checking the boxes off in your to-do list, walking the dog, sending emails, doing your laundry. You know, it makes you feel good inside. It makes you feel like you’re not as lazy as…
How secure is 256 bit security?
In the main video on cryptocurrencies, I made two references to situations where in order to break a given piece of security, you would have to guess a specific string of 256 bits. One of these was in the context of digital signatures, and the other in th…
Nietzsche - How to Become Who You Are
For Nietzsche, becoming who you are leads to greatness. And in Ecce Homo, he wrote, “[that] one becomes what one is presupposes that one does not have the remotest idea what one is.” The question of how you become what you are begins with the idea that yo…
Mirrors And The Fourth Dimension
Mirrors do not show us a fourth dimension, but they do show us what a fourth dimension could do to us. First, notice that some things are the same as their mirror image, but some things are not. These two shapes are similar, but they cannot be rotated to …
15 Things You Didn't Know About LACOSTE
[Music] Fifteen things you didn’t know about Lacoste. Welcome to a Lux.com, the place where future billionaires come to get inspired. Hello, Alxer, and welcome to another LXCOM original video. This is the best place to get inspired and learn more about t…
Shockwave Shadows in Ultra Slow Motion (Bullet Schlieren) - Smarter Every Day 203
Hey, it’s me Destin. Welcome back to “Smarter Every Day.” As long as I’ve understood the physics, I’ve wanted to visualize the shock wave on the front of a supersonic bullet. But the problem with doing this is you have to have access to some pretty expens…