Re: What goes around comes around

From: George Murphy <>
Date: Thu Oct 06 2005 - 20:04:26 EDT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cornelius Hunter" <>
To: <>
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.

Received on Thu Oct 6 20:05:13 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Oct 06 2005 - 20:05:13 EDT