Speaker presents arguments against atheism
“The conjunction of naturalism with evolutionary theory is self-defeating: it provides for itself an undefeated defeater. It is therefore unacceptable and irrational,” said Alvin Plantinga, the John O’Brien professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame.
Plantinga discussed the argument against the plausibility of naturalism and atheism in a scientific perspective at Thursday’s Chancellor’s Distinguished Lectureship Series titled “Atheism vs. Theism: An Evolutionary Argument Against Atheism.”
“I argue against the constitution of naturalism and evolution. They create serious intellectual problems because evolution underrates naturalism,” Plantinga said.
Plantinga defined theism as belief in “creation by a wholly good, all-powerful and all-knowing being” and naturalism as a “theistic picture minus God.”
He outlined his lecture into three main points: the problem with Naturalism, Darwin’s doubt and the argument against Naturalism.
Plantinga explained humans have knowledge and beliefs based on cognitive facilities of memory: perception and reason. These support the basis of theism.
“Everything depends on the way in which their behavior is related to their beliefs. Our behavior is adaptive, but our true beliefs are not. Belief is invisible to behavior,” Plantinga said.
Rational creatures have understanding, making them the likeness of God, which is essential to understanding theism, he said.
“Perhaps Darwin is dead wrong,” Plantinga said.
Plantinga said Darwin doubted the reliability of cognitive faculties. This is seen with Darwin’s quote, “With me, the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which have been developed from the mind of lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions in such a mind?”
The question of what a belief is has three possible answers, said Plantinga. The first is epiphenomenalism as defined by T.H. Huxley. He could not understand why organisms have feelings, based on his statement, “Orthodox biologists believe behavior, no matter how complex, is governed entirely by biochemistry and the attendant sensations are just shadows cast by biochemistry, not themselves vital to the organisms behavior,” reported J.M. Smith in a 1992 “Time” article.
Electrochemical properties, not content, make up the second virtue. Plantinga illustrated this idea by saying that a glass breaks when an opera singer hits a certain pitch, which is because of properties of sound. It would be content if the words of her song caused the glass to break, but they don’t.
Probability is the basis for the third virtue. Plantinga used the example of the behavior of a person who encounters a tiger. Most likely, he will flee as opposed to staying. The dispute, however, arises from why he will flee because many explanations fit a given behavior, Plantinga said.
“Beliefs don’t casually produce behavior by themselves; it is beliefs, desires and other factors that do so together,” Plantinga said.
This is a basis for agnostic belief because of lack of sufficient information.
Plantinga is a world-renowned philosopher and a specialist in religious philosophy. He has written over 12 books and 100 articles relating to this topic. He has taught at Yale, Wayne State University and Calvin. He also has spoken at prestigious universities such as Harvard, Oxford and the University of Chicago.
Melissa Prescott