Re: What goes around comes around

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cornelius Hunter" <ghunter2099@sbcglobal.net>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 6:03 PM
Subject: What goes around comes around

..............
> Here's some comments on Plantinga. Note Plantinga's use of probability.
>
> Plantinga:
>
> "Why couldn't a scientist think as follows? God has created the world, and
> of course has created everything in it directly or indirectly. After a
> great deal of study, we can't see how he created some phenomenon P (life,
> for example) indirectly; thus probably he has created it directly."
>
>
> The response here is to castigate him for such foolishness.
>
>>1st of course the qualification "after a great deal of study" is pretty
>>vague. At what point is the turn from indirect to direct supposed
>>to be legitimate?
>
> The rationalist approach dislikes ambiguity. Plantinga's "a great deal of
> study" is too vague. Forget that he said "probably," it must be all or
> none. When do we make the turn? Since we cannot decide, then we must not
> consider it at all.
............
To describe my comment as "castigating" Plantinga for "foolishness" is a
considerable overstatement. I simply pointed out that his criterion is
vague, a point you don't dispute. In any case that remark was only a
preliminary to my more substantive criticism.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Thu Oct 6 20:05:13 2005