The Existence of God (book)

Last updated

The Existence of God
TheExistenceOfGod-RichardSwinburne-Book cover-2ndEd-2004.jpeg
Second edition cover 2004 (Hardcover)
Author Richard Swinburne
LanguageEnglish
Subjectthe existence of God, philosophy of religion, theology, rational theism
Genretreatise
Publisherfirst edition Oxford University Press, second edition Clarendon Press
Publication placeUnited Kingdom
Published in English
First edition: 1979
Reissued with appendices: 1991
Second edition: 2004
Pagesviii + 363
ISBN 0-19-927167-4

The Existence of God is a 1979 book by British philosopher of religion Richard Swinburne, [1] [2] claiming the existence of the Abrahamic God on rational grounds. The argument rests on an updated version of natural theology with biological evolution using scientific inference, mathematical probability theory, such as Bayes' theorem, and of inductive logic. [3] In 2004, a second edition was released under the same title. [4] [5] [6] [7]

Contents

Swinburne discusses the intrinsic probability of theism, with an everlastingly omnipotent, omniscient and perfectly free [lower-alpha 1] God. He states various reasons for the existence of God, such as cosmological and teleological arguments, arguments from the consciousness of the higher vertebrates including humans, morality, providence, history, miracles and religious experience. Swinburne claims that the occurrence of evil does not diminish the probability of God, and that the hiddenness of God can be explained by his allowing free choice to humans. He concludes that on balance it is more probable than not that God exists, with a probability larger than 0.5, on a scale of 0.0 (impossible) to 1.0 (absolutely sure).

Swinburne summarised the same argument in his later and shorter book Is There a God? , omitting the use of Bayes' theorem and inductive logic, but including a discussion of multiple universes and cosmological inflation in the 2010 edition. [4] [9] [10]

Arguments in inductive logic

Central to the argument of Swinburne is the use of inductive logic. He defines a correct C-inductive argument as an argument where the premisses merely add to the probability of the conclusion, and a stronger correct P-inductive argument when the premisses make the conclusion probable with a probability larger than ⁠1/2⁠. [11]

Probability of God according to theism using Bayes' theorem

Swinburne applies mathematical conditional probability logic to various hypotheses related to the existence of God and defines

as the available evidence,
as the hypothesis to be tested, and
as the so-called "tautological" background knowledge.

The notation is used for the conditional probability of an event occurring given that another event occurred previously. This is also termed the posterior probability of given .

The probability of the present evidence given background knowledge can be written as the sum of the evidence with God existing (, e and h) and the evidence without God (, e and not h): [12]

, with , and .

Application of Bayes' theorem to , the probability of the God hypothesis given evidence and background knowledge , results in [13]

The probability of a universe of our kind, as evidenced by without a single omnipotent god () can be written as the sum of the probabilities of several optional hypotheses without a god, i = 1, 2, 3:

The sum of probabilities becomes [14]

Swinburne then claims to refute these three hypotheses:

Admittedly this hypothesis can explain the present state of affairs in the universe - the evidence - without the need of a God, that means the probability is 1.0: .

However, Swinburne estimates that the probability given the background knowledge is infinitesimally low.

Then the sum of probabilities of the various hypotheses without God [16]

will not exceed
.

So , the posterior probability of theism or God on the evidence considered with background knowledge , will be ⁠1/2⁠ or more, by a "correct P-inductive argument". Swinburne states that it is impossible to give exact numerical values for the probabilities used.

Swinburne concludes that deductive proofs of God fail, but claims that on the basis of the above P-inductive argument, theism is probably true. He notes that in his calculation the evidence from religious experience and historical evidence of life, death and resurrection of Jesus were ignored: its addition would be sufficient to make theism overall probable with a probability larger than ⁠1/2⁠. [17]

Reception

In 2005 Joshua Golding reviewed The Existence of God and noted that the lack of justification for the afterlife leads to skepticism about whether God exists due to the problem of evil. The principle of credulity cannot be relied on without caution. Golding would prefer a priori proof that God exists, a better inductive argument for God's existence, or an argument assuming for practical purposes, that God exists. [18]

In 2009 Jeremy Gwiazda, a philosopher at The City University of New York argued that Swinburne did not prove his starting point that God is simple and thus likely to exist. The arguments from mathematical simplicity and scientists' preferences both fail. [19]

Gabe Czobel analysed Swinburne's arguments including his use of Bayesian statistics and pointed out errors in reasoning. Even if Swinburne's logic were right, a theist could not derive much consolation from it. [20]

Dutch philosopher Herman Philipse (Utrecht University) debated Swinburne in front of an academic audience at Amsterdam in 2017. [3] He praised Swinburne for attempting a scientific approach to the probability of God's existence, at variance with Dutch theologians who refused rational arguments. A large number of points were raised, for instance Philipse claimed that a religious explanation for the universe presupposes a finite history. A class of cyclical "bouncing universe" theories, which could be tested, features an infinite history of the universe. According to Philipse's 2012 book God in the Age of Science? attributing mental properties to a being requires observing its bodily behaviour, so God could not be bodiless. Swinburne replied that universe itself can be viewed as God's body. According to Philipse, a hypothesis is tested scientifically not only for simplicity, but also for accordance with extensive background knowledge. Furthermore, Bayesian statistics cannot be applied if God is unfathomable.

Notes

  1. ↑ Swinburne defines God as perfectly "free" because his actions are claimed to be determined only by his uncaused choice at the moment of choice. No object, event or state—including his own previous states—causally influences what God does, according to Swinburne. [8]

Related Research Articles

The teleological argument also known as physico-theological argument, argument from design, or intelligent design argument, is a rational argument for the existence of God or, more generally, that complex functionality in the natural world, which looks designed, is evidence of an intelligent creator.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Raven paradox</span> Paradox arising from the question of what constitutes evidence for a statement

The raven paradox, also known as Hempel's paradox, Hempel's ravens, or rarely the paradox of indoor ornithology, is a paradox arising from the question of what constitutes evidence for the truth of a statement. Observing objects that are neither black nor ravens may formally increase the likelihood that all ravens are black even though, intuitively, these observations are unrelated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abductive reasoning</span> Inference seeking the simplest and most likely explanation

Abductive reasoning is a form of logical inference that seeks the simplest and most likely conclusion from a set of observations. It was formulated and advanced by American philosopher and logician Charles Sanders Peirce beginning in the latter half of the 19th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mathematical proof</span> Reasoning for mathematical statements

A mathematical proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement, showing that the stated assumptions logically guarantee the conclusion. The argument may use other previously established statements, such as theorems; but every proof can, in principle, be constructed using only certain basic or original assumptions known as axioms, along with the accepted rules of inference. Proofs are examples of exhaustive deductive reasoning which establish logical certainty, to be distinguished from empirical arguments or non-exhaustive inductive reasoning which establish "reasonable expectation". Presenting many cases in which the statement holds is not enough for a proof, which must demonstrate that the statement is true in all possible cases. A proposition that has not been proved but is believed to be true is known as a conjecture, or a hypothesis if frequently used as an assumption for further mathematical work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Swinburne</span> English philosopher and Christian apologist

Richard Granville Swinburne is an English philosopher. He is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford. Over the last 50 years, Swinburne has been a proponent of philosophical arguments for the existence of God. His philosophical contributions are primarily in the philosophy of religion and philosophy of science. He aroused much discussion with his early work in the philosophy of religion, a trilogy of books consisting of The Coherence of Theism, The Existence of God, and Faith and Reason. He has been influential in reviving substance dualism as an option in philosophy of mind.

Inferences are steps in reasoning, moving from premises to logical consequences; etymologically, the word infer means to "carry forward". Inference is theoretically traditionally divided into deduction and induction, a distinction that in Europe dates at least to Aristotle. Deduction is inference deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true, with the laws of valid inference being studied in logic. Induction is inference from particular evidence to a universal conclusion. A third type of inference is sometimes distinguished, notably by Charles Sanders Peirce, contradistinguishing abduction from induction.

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.

Probabilistic logic involves the use of probability and logic to deal with uncertain situations. Probabilistic logic extends traditional logic truth tables with probabilistic expressions. A difficulty of probabilistic logics is their tendency to multiply the computational complexities of their probabilistic and logical components. Other difficulties include the possibility of counter-intuitive results, such as in case of belief fusion in Dempster–Shafer theory. Source trust and epistemic uncertainty about the probabilities they provide, such as defined in subjective logic, are additional elements to consider. The need to deal with a broad variety of contexts and issues has led to many different proposals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">God</span> Principal object of faith in monotheism

In monotheistic belief systems, God is usually viewed as the supreme being, creator, and principal object of faith. In polytheistic belief systems, a god is "a spirit or being believed to have created, or for controlling some part of the universe or life, for which such a deity is often worshipped". Belief in the existence of at least one god is called theism.

The Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit is a counter-argument to modern versions of the argument from design for the existence of God. It was introduced by Richard Dawkins in chapter 4 of his 2006 book The God Delusion, "Why there almost certainly is no God".

The argument from beauty is an argument for the existence of a realm of immaterial ideas or, most commonly, for the existence of God, that roughly states that the evident beauty in nature, art and music and even in more abstract areas like the elegance of the laws of physics or the elegant laws of mathematics is evidence of a creator deity who has arranged these things to be beautiful and not ugly.

The argument from religious experience is an argument for the existence of God. It holds that the best explanation for religious experiences is that they constitute genuine experience or perception of a divine reality. Various reasons have been offered for and against accepting this contention.

The argument from consciousness is an argument for the existence of God that claims characteristics of human consciousness cannot be explained by the physical mechanisms of the human body and brain, therefore asserting that there must be non-physical aspects to human consciousness. This is held as indirect evidence of God, given that notions about souls and the afterlife in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam would be consistent with such a claim.

Colin Howson was a British philosopher. He was Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto, where he joined the faculty on 1 July 2008. Previously, he was Professor of Logic at the London School of Economics. He completed a PhD on the philosophy of probability in 1981. In the late 1960s he had been a research assistant of Imre Lakatos at LSE. He died on Sunday 5 January 2020.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Philosophical theism</span> Belief that a deity exists or must exist

Philosophical theism is the belief that the Supreme Being exists independent of the teaching or revelation of any particular religion. It represents belief in God entirely without doctrine, except for that which can be discerned by reason and the contemplation of natural laws. Some philosophical theists are persuaded of God's existence by philosophical arguments, while others consider themselves to have a religious faith that need not be, or could not be, supported by rational argument.

Skeptical theism is the view that people should remain skeptical of their ability to discern whether their perceptions about evil can be considered good evidence against the existence of the orthodox Christian God. The central thesis of skeptical theism is that it would not be surprising for an infinitely intelligent and knowledgeable being's reasons for permitting evils to be beyond human comprehension. That is, what may seem like pointless evils may be necessary for a greater good or to prevent equal or even greater evils. This central thesis may be argued from a theistic perspective, but is also argued to defend positions of agnosticism.

<i>God in the Age of Science?</i> 2012 book by Herman Philipse

God in the Age of Science? A Critique of Religious Reason is a 2012 book by the Dutch philosopher Herman Philipse, written in English and published in the United Kingdom. Philipse found his Atheist Manifesto (1995) to be too hastily and superficially written, and decided to set up a more complete work to systematically refute all the arguments for the existence of God and adherence to any form of theism.

Inductive probability attempts to give the probability of future events based on past events. It is the basis for inductive reasoning, and gives the mathematical basis for learning and the perception of patterns. It is a source of knowledge about the world.

Pure inductive logic (PIL) is the area of mathematical logic concerned with the philosophical and mathematical foundations of probabilistic inductive reasoning. It combines classical predicate logic and probability theory. Probability values are assigned to sentences of a first-order relational language to represent degrees of belief that should be held by a rational agent. Conditional probability values represent degrees of belief based on the assumption of some received evidence.

<i>Is There a God?</i> 1996 book by Richard Swinburne

Is There a God? is a 1996 book by British philosopher of religion Richard Swinburne, claiming the existence of the Abrahamic God. The argument rests on an updated version of natural theology with biological evolution and Big Bang theory using scientific inference. In 2010, a revised version of the original book was released under the same title.

References

  1. ↑ Swinburne, Richard (2004). "The Existence of God. Second Edition (full text pdf, 374 pages)" (PDF). aprender.ead.unb.br. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 August 2021. Retrieved 23 August 2021.
  2. ↑ Sturch, R. L. (April 2006). "The Existence of God. Second edition. By Richard Swinburne". The Journal of Theological Studies. 57 (1): 401–405. doi:10.1093/jts/fli242 . Retrieved 30 November 2021. Review.
  3. 1 2 "Is There a God? Herman Philipse & Richard Swinburne. An academic debate of Veritas Forum Amsterdam: Religious Belief in an Age of Science (YouTube video, from 17:30)". www.youtube.com. Het Veritas Forum. 14 November 2016. Retrieved 10 August 2021.
  4. 1 2 Tam, Josaphat C. (June 2013). "An Update on Swinburne's Two Handy Books on God" . The Expository Times. 124 (10): 516–517. doi:10.1177/0014524613489640n. S2CID   202961031 . Retrieved 19 November 2021. Also available at: Tam, Josaphat C. (June 2013). "copy of: An Update on Swinburne's Two Handy Books on God". researchgate.net. Retrieved 7 August 2021.
  5. ↑ Braunsteiner-Berger, Julia (September 2014). "Swinburne's argument for the existence of God: a critical comment on conceptual issues". Religious Studies. 50 (3): 359–378. doi:10.1017/S003441251400002X. JSTOR   43658446 . Retrieved 10 July 2023.
  6. ↑ Prevost, Robert (1985). "Swinburne, Mackie and Bayes' Theorem". International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 17 (3): 175–184. doi:10.1007/BF00134543. JSTOR   40021213 . Retrieved 10 July 2023.
  7. ↑ Smith, Quentin (March 1998). "Review: Swinburne's Explanation of the Universe. Reviewed Work: Is There a God? by Richard Swinburne". Religious Studies. 34 (1): 91–102. doi:10.1017/S0034412597004228. JSTOR   20008142 . Retrieved 10 July 2023.
  8. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 7, 98, 105, 335.
  9. ↑ Swinburne, Richard (1996). Is There a God (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
  10. ↑ Swinburne, Richard (2010). Is There a God (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
  11. ↑ Swinburne 2004, pp. 6, 13.
  12. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 72.
  13. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 339.
  14. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 340-341.
  15. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 341.
  16. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 340.
  17. ↑ Swinburne 2004, p. 342.
  18. ↑ Golding, Joshua (4 April 2004). "Review. The Existence of God, 2d ed. Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God, 2d ed., Oxford University Press, 2004, 363pp". ndpr.nd.edu. Notre Dame Philosophical Review. Retrieved 10 July 2023.
  19. ↑ Gwiazda, Jeremy (2009). "Richard Swinburne, The Existence of God, and Principle P". Sophia . 48 (4). Springer Nature: 393–398. doi:10.1007/s11841-009-0111-x. ISSN   0038-1527 . Retrieved 15 March 2024.
  20. ↑ Czobel, Gabe (2010). "An Analysis of Richard Swinburne's The Existence of God (2010)". infidels.org. The Secular Web. Retrieved 15 March 2024.
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.