Faith Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! === Religious epistemology === {{see also|Religious epistemology|reformed epistemology|foundationalism|basic belief}} [[Religious epistemology|Religious epistemologists]] formulated and defended reasons for the rationality of accepting belief in God without the support of an argument.<ref name=InternetReligious>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://iep.utm.edu/relig-ep/ |title=Religious Epistemology |last=Clark|first=Kelly James |date=2 October 2004 |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=23 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111103164220/http://www.iep.utm.edu/relig-ep/ |archive-date=3 November 2011 |url-status=live }}</ref> Some religious epistemologists hold that belief in God is more analogous to belief in a person than belief in a scientific hypothesis. Human relations demand trust and commitment. If belief in God is more like belief in other persons, then the trust that is appropriate to persons will be appropriate to God. American [[psychologist]] and [[philosopher]] [[William James]] offers a similar argument in his lecture ''[[The Will to Believe]]''.<ref name=InternetReligious /><ref name=WillToBelieve>{{cite journal |last=James |first=William |title=1896 |journal=New World |volume=5 |pages=327β347 |url=https://educ.jmu.edu//~omearawm/ph101willtobelieve.html |access-date=23 October 2011 |archive-date=7 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111007233257/http://educ.jmu.edu/~omearawm/ph101willtobelieve.html |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Foundationalism]] is a view about the structure of justification or [[knowledge]].<ref name="InternetFoundational">{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://iep.utm.edu/foundationalism-in-epistemology/ |title=Foundationalism |last=Poston|first=Ted |date=10 June 2010 |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=23 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111103033308/http://www.iep.utm.edu/found-ep/ |archive-date=3 November 2011 |url-status=live }}</ref> Foundationalism holds that all knowledge and [[Theory of justification|justified belief]] are ultimately based upon what are called [[Basic belief|properly basic beliefs]]. This position is intended to resolve the [[Regress argument|infinite regress]] problem in [[epistemology]]. According to foundationalism, a belief is epistemically justified only if it is justified by properly basic beliefs. One of the significant developments in foundationalism is the rise of [[reformed epistemology]].<ref name=InternetFoundational /> Reformed epistemology is a view about the epistemology of religious belief, which holds that belief in God can be properly basic. [[Analytic philosophy|Analytic]] philosophers [[Alvin Plantinga]] and [[Nicholas Wolterstorff]] develop this view.<ref name=Plantinga1983>{{cite book |title=Faith and Rationality: Reason and Belief in God |last1=Plantinga |first1=Alvin |author-link=Alvin Plantinga |first2=Nicholas|last2= Wolterstorff |year=1983 |publisher=University of Notre Dame Press |location=Notre Dame, IN |isbn=0-268-00964-3 }}</ref> Plantinga holds that a person may rationally believe in God even though the person does not possess sufficient evidence to convince an agnostic. One difference between reformed epistemology and fideism is that the former requires defense against known objections, whereas the latter might dismiss such objections as irrelevant.<ref name=StanfordReligious>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religion-epistemology/ |title=The Epistemology of Religion |last=Forrest|first= Peter |date=11 March 2009 |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=23 October 2011 }}</ref> Plantinga developed reformed epistemology in ''Warranted Christian Belief'' as a form of [[externalism]] that holds that the justification-conferring factors for a belief may include external factors.<ref name=Plantinga2000>{{cite book |title=Warranted Christian Belief |url=https://archive.org/details/warrantedchristi0000plan |url-access=registration |last=Plantinga |first=Alvin |author-link=Alvin Plantinga |year=2000 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York |isbn=0-19-513192-4 }}</ref> Some [[Theism|theistic]] philosophers have defended theism by granting [[evidentialism]] but supporting theism through deductive arguments whose premises are considered justifiable. Some of these arguments are probabilistic, either in the sense of having weight but being inconclusive or in the sense of having a [[probability|mathematical probability]] assigned to them.<ref name=InternetReligious /> Notable in this regard are the cumulative arguments presented by [[United Kingdom|British]] philosopher [[Basil Mitchell (academic)|Basil Mitchell]] and [[Analytic philosophy|analytic]] philosopher [[Richard Swinburne]], whose arguments are based on [[Bayesian probability]].<ref>{{multiref2 |1={{cite book |title=The Justification of Religious Belief |last=Basic |first=Mitchell |author-link=Basil Mitchell (academic) |publisher=Macmillan |location=London }} |2={{cite book |title=The Existence of God |last=Swinburne |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Swinburne |publisher=Clarendon Press |location=Oxford}} }}</ref> In a notable exposition of his arguments, Swinburne appeals to an inference for the best explanation.<ref>{{multiref2 |1={{cite book |title=God without the Supernatural |url=https://archive.org/details/godwithoutsupern00forr_0 |url-access=registration |last=Forrest |first=Peter |year=1996 | author-link=Peter Forrest (philosopher) |publisher=Cornell University Press |location=Ithaca |isbn=978-0-8014-3255-2 }} |2={{cite book |title=Is there a God? |last=Swinburne |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Swinburne |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford}} }}</ref> [[Professor of Mathematics]] and [[philosopher of science]] at [[University of Oxford]] [[John Lennox]] justifies his religious belief in Jesus's resurrection and miracles by believing God's capability of breaking the commonly recognized law of nature.<ref>{{cite web|title=God Delusion Debate (Dawkins β Lennox)|website=[[YouTube]]|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF5bPI92-5o|quote=...having produced some sort of a case for a kind of deistic God, perhaps some God β The Great Physicist who adjusted the laws and constants of the universe. That's all very grand and wonderful and then suddenly we come down to the resurrection of Jesus. It's so petty, it's so trivial...|access-date=2023-03-06|archive-date=2023-03-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230326025938/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF5bPI92-5o&t=172s&ab_channel=LarryAlexTaunton|url-status=live}}</ref> [[John Lennox]] has stated, "Faith is not a leap in the dark; it's the exact opposite. It's a commitment based on [[evidence]]β¦ It is irrational to reduce all faith to blind faith and then subject it to ridicule. That provides a very anti-intellectual and convenient way of avoiding intelligent discussion." He criticises [[Richard Dawkins]] as a famous proponent of asserting that faith equates to holding a belief without evidence, thus that it is possible to hold belief without evidence, for failing to provide evidence for this assertion.<ref>{{cite book|last=Lennox|first=John|title=God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?|url=https://archive.org/details/godsundertaker00john|url-access=registration|publisher=Lion UK|year=2009}}</ref>{{clarify|date=May 2018}} Critics of reformed epistemology argue that it fails to provide a compelling justification for belief in God and that it is unable to account for the diversity of religious belief and experience. They also argue that it can lead to a kind of epistemic relativism, in which all religious beliefs are considered equally valid and justified, regardless of their content or coherence. Despite these criticisms, reformed epistemology has been influential in the contemporary philosophy of religion and continues to be an active area of debate and discussion.<ref>{{cite book|title=Reformed Epistemology and the Problem of Religious Diversity|first=Joseph|last=Kim|publisher=Pickwick Publications|date=June 8, 2011}}</ref> Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page