| Reformed Epistemology |
Article Index for Reformed |
Website Links For Reformed |
Information AboutReformed Epistemology |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT REFORMED EPISTEMOLOGY | |
| epistemology | |
| religious philosophy and doctrine | |
| christian philosophy | |
|
Reformed epistemology aims to demonstrate the failure of objections that theistic Christian belief is unjustified, unreasonable, intellectually sub-par or otherwise epistemically-challenged in some way. Rationalists , Foundationalists and Evidentialists claim that theistic belief is rational only if there is propositional and or physical evidence for it, of which they assert there is none. Reformed epistemology seeks to defend Faith As Rational by demonstrating that epistemic propositions of theistic belief are Properly Basic and hence justified; as opposed to the truth of theistic belief. Reformed epistemology grew out of the parity argument presented by Alvin Plantinga in his book 'God and Other Minds' of 1967. There Plantinga concluded that belief in other minds is rational, hence, belief in God is also rational. Later, Plantinga in his 1999 book 'Warranted Christian Belief' argues that theistic belief has 'warrant' because there is an epistemically possible model according to which theistic belief is justified in a basic way. In epistemology, ''warrant'' refers to that part of the Theory Of Justification that deals with understanding how beliefs can be justified or ''warranted''. Plantinga contends that this model is likely true if theistic belief is true; and on the other hand, the model is unlikely to be true if theism is false. This connection between the truth of theism and its positive epistemic status implies that the goal of showing theistic belief to be externally rational or warranted requires reasons for supposing that theism is true {Link without Title} . CRITICISMS Those of faith have frequently criticized Reformed epistemology for favoring or for being exclusively committed to negative apologetics, counter-arguments to arguments that faith is not rational, and that it offers no reasons for supposing that theism or Christianity is true, so-called positive apologetics. Criticisms from those critical of or neutral to faith as rational have included that Reformed epistemology rests on the presupposition that there is religious truth, but does not present any argument to show that there is any. Another common criticism is that as a tool for discriminating justified from unjustified constituent beliefs, Reformed epistemology falls short; that it springs forth from a presupposition that within each of us resides a doxastic mechanism that generates religious convictions, belief in God, etc., supporting the conclusion that such beliefs are innate, hence properly basic. SEE ALSO ADDITIONAL READING
EXTERNAL LINKS
|
|
|