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
15 Things That Change Once You Get Rich
You know, some people say that money can’t change them, and even if that might be true, money does change the things around you. These are 15 things that change once you get rich. Welcome to Alux, the place where future billionaires come to get inspired. …
Why Should I Start a Startup? by Michael Seibel
Alright, Michael Seibel. So today, we’re gonna do something different and talk about a few of the essays you’ve worked on in the past. I think these are maybe the past two years. Yes, so the first one is “Why Should I Start a Startup?” You start this ess…
My Response To MeetKevin | The Full Story
What’s up you guys? It’s Graham here. So I need to make a video about this because there’s a lot you need to hear. A little over three years ago, this guy reached out to me over email and said we had a lot in common. He told me that he had been watching …
Crowding out | AP Macroeconomics | Khan Academy
In this video, we’re going to use a simple model for the loanable funds market to understand a phenomenon known as crowding out. This is making reference to when a government borrows money; to some degree, it could crowd out private sector borrowing and i…
Return on capital and economic growth
One of the core ideas of “Capital in the 21st Century” is comparing the after-tax return on capital, let me write that a little bit neater: return on capital, to economic growth. The contention is that if the return on capital ® is greater than economic g…
The Gilded Age part 2 | The Gilded Age (1865-1898) | US History | Khan Academy
So, we were talking about the wealth inequality that characterized the Gilded Age, but you were telling me that that’s not the only thing, Kim, that characterizes this period. Right? What really makes the Gilded Age happen is what we call the Second Indus…