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
Ordering decimals
What we’re gonna do in this video is do a few examples ordering numbers that involve decimals. So let’s say that we had the numbers 1.001, 0.113, and 1.101. What I would like you to do is order these numbers from least to greatest. Take out some paper an…
My Investing Plan For 2021
What’s up you guys? It’s Graham here. So, arguably, 2021 is, how should we say, one of the more unique times of investing. This is not your standard year of more of the same everything is fine, but instead it’s a unique combination of an economic shutdown…
The True Cost of the Royal Family Explained
Look at that! What a waste! That Queen living it off the government in her castles with her corgis and gin. Just how much does this cost to maintain? £40 million. That’s about 65p per person per year of tax money going to the royal family. Sure, it’s stil…
Has Technological Advancement Gone Too Far? #Shorts #Apple #VisionPro
VR can be an incredible experience. It can convince your body that a fake world is real. Anyone who has looked down into a canyon with their headset on will be very familiar with how it can trick the senses. But to get to that world, you must put on the …
Triggerfish - Smarter Every Day 4
[Music] [Rushing waves] Hey, it’s me, Destin. We’re in the Gulf of Mexico and we’re about to go fishing. And I’m gonna beat all these guys at fishing. It’s not gonna happen. It’s not gonna be me. (Destin) Alright ladies, how’re we doing over here? L…
Multiplying two 2-digit numbers using partial products
In a previous video, we figured out a way to multiply a two-digit number times a one-digit number. What we did is we broke up the two-digit numbers in terms of its place value. So, the three here in the tens place, that’s three tens; this is seven ones. …