Hitchens's razor

Last updated

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor that serves as a general rule for rejecting certain knowledge claims. It states:

Contents

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". [1] [2] [3] [a]

The razor was created by and later named after author and journalist Christopher Hitchens. It implies that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens used this phrase specifically in the context of refuting religious belief. [3] : 258 

Analysis

The dictum appears in Hitchens's 2007 book God Is Not Great: How religion poisons everything . [3] : 150, 258  The term "Hitchens's razor" itself first appeared (as "Hitchens' razor") in an online forum in October 2007, and was used by atheist blogger Rixaeton in December 2010, and popularised by, among others, evolutionary biologist and atheist activist Jerry Coyne after Hitchens died in December 2011. [4] [5] [6]

Some pages earlier in God Is Not Great, Hitchens also invoked Occam's razor.{{efn| [ William Ockham ] devised a principle of economy, popularly known as Ockham's razor, which relied for its effect on disposing of unnecessary assumptions and accepting the first sufficient explanation or cause. Do not multiply entities beyond necessity. This principle extends itself. Everything which is explained through positing something different from the act of understanding, he wrote, can be explained without positing such a distinct thing. [3] : 119 

In 2007, Michael Kinsley observed in The New York Times that Hitchens was rather fond of applying Occam's razor to religious claims, [7] [b] and according to The Wall Street Journal 's Jillian Melchior in 2017, the phrase "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" was "Christopher Hitchens's variation of Occam's razor". [8] [c] Hitchens's razor has been presented alongside the Sagan standard ("Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence") as an example of evidentialism within the New Atheism movement. [9]

Use in atheism criticism

Academic philosopher Michael V. Antony argued that despite the use of Hitchens's razor to reject religious belief and to support atheism, applying the razor to atheism itself would seem to imply that atheism is epistemically unjustified. According to Antony, the New Atheists (to whom Hitchens also belonged) invoke a number of special arguments purporting to show that atheism can in fact be asserted without evidence. [9]

Criticism

Philosopher C. Stephen Evans outlined some common Christian theological responses to the argument made by Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and the other New Atheists that if religious belief is not based on evidence, it is not reasonable, and can thus be dismissed without evidence. Characterising the New Atheists as evidentialists, Evans counted himself amongst the Reformed epistemologists together with Alvin Plantinga, who argued for a version of foundationalism, namely that "belief in God can be reasonable even if the believer has no arguments or propositional evidence on which the belief is based". The idea is that all beliefs are based on other beliefs, and some "foundational" or "basic beliefs" just need to be assumed to be true in order to start somewhere, and it is fine to pick God as one of those basic beliefs. [10]

Footnotes

  1. ↑ And remember, miracles are supposed to occur at the behest of a being who is omnipotent as well as omniscient and omnipresent. One might hope for more magnificent performances than ever seem to occur.
    The "evidence" for faith, then, seems to leave faith looking even weaker than it would if it stood, alone and unsupported, all by itself.
    What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
    This is even more true when the 'evidence' eventually offered is so shoddy and self-interested. [3] : 258 
  2. ↑ Hitchens is attracted repeatedly to the principle of Occam's razor: That simple explanations are more likely to be correct than complicated ones. (e.g., Earth makes a circle around the Sun; the Sun doesn't do a complex roller coaster ride around Earth.)
    You might think that Occam's razor would favor religion; the biblical creation story certainly seems simpler than evolution. But Hitchens argues effectively again, and again, that attaching the religious myth to what we know from science to be true adds nothing but needless complication. [7]
  3. ↑ Mr. Coffman cited Christopher Hitchens's variation of Occam's razor:
    What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without [evidence] [8]

See also

Related Research Articles

Agnosticism is the view or belief that the existence of God, the divine, or the supernatural is either unknowable in principle or unknown in fact. It can also mean an apathy towards such religious belief and refer to personal limitations rather than a worldview. Another definition is the view that "human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Argument from ignorance</span> Informal fallacy

Argument from ignorance, also known as appeal to ignorance, is a fallacy in informal logic. The fallacy is committed when one asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. If a proposition has not yet been proven true, one is not entitled to conclude, solely on that basis, that it is false, and if a proposition has not yet been proven false, one is not entitled to conclude, solely on that basis, that it is true. Another way of expressing this is that a proposition is true only if proven true, and a proposition is false only if proven false. If no proof is offered, then the proposition can be called unproven, undecided, inconclusive, an open problem or a conjecture. In debates, appealing to ignorance is sometimes an attempt to shift the burden of proof. The term was likely coined by philosopher John Locke in the late 17th century.

In philosophy, Occam's razor is the problem-solving principle that recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements. It is also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony. Attributed to William of Ockham, a 14th-century English philosopher and theologian, it is frequently cited as Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, which translates as "Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity", although Occam never used these exact words. Popularly, the principle is sometimes paraphrased as "The simplest explanation is usually the best one."

The existence of God is a subject of debate in the philosophy of religion and theology. A wide variety of arguments for and against the existence of God can be categorized as logical, empirical, metaphysical, subjective or scientific. In philosophical terms, the question of the existence of God involves the disciplines of epistemology and ontology and the theory of value.

Jewish atheism is the atheism of people who are ethnically and culturally Jewish.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Antony Flew</span> English analytic and evidentialist philosopher (1923–2010)

Antony Garrard Newton Flew was an English philosopher. Belonging to the analytic and evidentialist schools of thought, Flew worked on the philosophy of religion. During the course of his career he taught philosophy at the universities of Oxford, Aberdeen, Keele, and Reading in the United Kingdom, and at York University in Toronto, Canada.

Antitheism, also spelled anti-theism, is the philosophical position that theism should be opposed. The term has had a range of applications. In secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to the belief in any deity.

The argument from miracles is an argument for the existence of God that relies on the belief that events witnessed and described as miracles – i.e. as events not explicable by natural or scientific laws – indicate the intervention of the supernatural. See God of the Gaps.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Russell's teapot</span> Analogy devised by Bertrand Russell

Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, as opposed to shifting the burden of disproof to others.

Criticism of atheism is criticism of the concepts, validity, or impact of atheism, including associated political and social implications. Criticisms include positions based on the history of science, philosophical and logical criticisms, findings in both the natural and social sciences, theistic apologetic arguments, arguments pertaining to ethics and morality, the effects of atheism on the individual, or the assumptions that underpin atheism.

<i>The God Delusion</i> 2006 book by Richard Dawkins

The God Delusion is a 2006 book by British evolutionary biologist and ethologist Richard Dawkins. In The God Delusion, Dawkins contends that a supernatural creator, God, almost certainly does not exist, and that belief in a personal god qualifies as a delusion, which he defines as a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence. He is sympathetic to Robert Pirsig's statement in Lila (1991) that "when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion." In the book, Dawkins explores the relationship between religion and morality, providing examples that discuss the possibility of morality existing independently of religion and suggesting alternative explanations for the origins of both religion and morality.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Implicit and explicit atheism</span> Types of atheism

Implicit atheism and explicit atheism are types of atheism. In George H. Smith's Atheism: The Case Against God, "implicit atheism" is defined as "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it", while "explicit atheism" is "the absence of theistic belief due to a conscious rejection of it". Explicit atheists have considered the idea of deities and have rejected belief that any exist. Implicit atheists, though they do not themselves maintain a belief in a god or gods, have not rejected the notion or have not considered it further.

<i>God Is Not Great</i> 2007 book by Christopher Hitchens

God Is Not Great is a 2007 book by author and journalist Christopher Hitchens in which he makes a case against organized religion. It was originally published in the United Kingdom by Atlantic Books as God Is Not Great: The Case Against Religion and in the United States by Twelve as God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, but was republished by Atlantic Books in 2017 with no subtitle.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to atheism:

<i>The Portable Atheist</i> 2007 anthology

The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever (2007) is an anthology of atheist and agnostic thought edited by Christopher Hitchens.

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which is the belief that at least one deity exists.

Agnostic atheism — or atheistic agnosticism — is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity, and they are agnostic because they claim that the existence of a divine entity or entities is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact.

The term New Atheism describes the positions of some atheist academics, writers, scientists, and philosophers of the 20th and 21st centuries. New Atheism advocates the view that superstition, religion, and irrationalism should not be tolerated. Instead, they advocate the antitheist view that the various forms of theism should be criticised, countered, examined, and challenged by rational argument, especially when they exert strong influence on the broader society, such as in government, education, and politics. Critics have characterised New Atheism as "secular fundamentalism" or "fundamentalist atheism". Major figures of New Atheism include Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett, collectively referred to as the "Four Horsemen" of the movement.

In philosophy, a razor is a principle or rule of thumb that allows one to eliminate unlikely explanations for a phenomenon, or avoid unnecessary actions.

<i>The Rage Against God</i> Book by Peter Hitchens

The Rage Against God is the fifth book by Peter Hitchens, first published in 2010. The book describes Hitchens's journey from atheism, far-left politics, and bohemianism to Christianity and conservatism, detailing the influences on him that led to his conversion. The book is partly intended as a response to God Is Not Great, a book written by his brother Christopher Hitchens in 2007.

References

  1. ↑ Ratcliffe, Susan, ed. (2016). Oxford Essential Quotations: Facts (4 ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN   9780191826719 . Retrieved 4 November 2020. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
  2. ↑ McGrattan, Cillian (2016). The Politics of Trauma and Peace-Building: Lessons from Northern Ireland. Abingdon: Routledge. p. 2. ISBN   978-1138775183.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 Hitchens, Christopher (6 April 2009). God Is Not Great: How religion poisons everything (Kindle ed.). Twelve Books. ASIN   B00287KD4Q.
  4. ↑ Rixaeton (1 December 2010). "Hitchens' razor". Rixaeton's space adventures in space and other places (blog). Retrieved 20 August 2021– via rixaeton.blogspot.com.
  5. ↑ Rixaeton (2 January 2012). "Correcting Hitchens' razor to Hitchens's razor". Rixaeton's space adventures in space and other places (blog). Retrieved 20 August 2021– via rixaeton.blogspot.com.
  6. ↑ Coyne, Jerry (25 December 2011). "Readers' tributes to Hitchens: The final day, with music". Why evolution is true (whyevolutionistrue.com). Retrieved 20 August 2021.
  7. 1 2 Kinsley, Michael (13 May 2007). "In God, distrust" . The New York Times . Retrieved 21 August 2021.
  8. 1 2 Melchior, Jillian (21 September 2017). "Inside the madness at Evergreen State" . The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 19 June 2019.
  9. 1 2 Antony, Michael V. (2010). "Where's the evidence?". Philosophy Now . No. 78. pp. 18–21 – via philosophynow.org.
  10. ↑ Evans, C. Stephen (2015). Why Christian Faith Still Makes Sense: A response to contemporary challenges. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. pp. 16–17. ISBN   9781493400225 . Retrieved 21 August 2021– via Google books.


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.