Episode 4 of the podcast is available for download here. In this episode, a classic contribution to 20th century philosophy of religion is analysed. The contribution in question is the symposium in which Antony Flew's short paper "Theology and Falsification" was presented and discussed.
You can subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.
It's been awhile since I read Flew's paper and re-reading it for this podcast made me realise how many important issues it, and the symposium accompanying it, raise. This is all the more impressive given how short and relatively devoid of formal argumentation the original papers are. Admittedly, I may be getting more out of it thanks to my reading in the interim. I will also confess that I have adopted a favourable interpretation of Flew's work.
The original paper, along with the responses of R.M. Hare and Basil Mitchell can be found here.
Horsburgh's critique of Hare's notion of bliks is available here.
Finally, I prepared some notes to accompany the show.
Flew's Argument
 |
| click to see a larger version |
Hare's Argument
 |
| click to see a larger version |
Mitchell's Argument
 |
| click to see a larger version |
Flew's Responses
 |
| click to see a larger version |
Horsburgh on Hare
 |
| click to see a larger version |
Edit: Almost forgot to include this. It's William Lane Craig talking about the role that evidence and argument play in his religious faith. A nice illustration of what Mitchell's argument can lead to:
Very nice, John.
ReplyDeleteWow, this was a great podcast. You're definitely getting better at this. I hope you will tackle Craig's "Inner witness of the Holy Spirit" soon.
ReplyDeleteCheers!
John,
ReplyDeleteReally enjoyed your podcast. Really hated Craig's smug video, whose take-home message is that Christians "have to learn to live with unanswered questions without allowing them to become destructive doubts." Compare that message with his avowed strategy in the widely reprinted essay "The Absurdity of Life without God": namely, to drive atheists into a state of destructive despair at their lack of an answer to the question "What's the ultimate purpose of existence?" I've argued in various places that this question can't possibly have a satisfying answer, which is (I think) a good reason not to despair at the lack of an answer. But Craig wants unbelievers to despair so they can be driven toward Christianity; the last thing he wants is an atheist content to live with unanswered questions. Apparently, only Christians are allowed that.
Thanks guys.
ReplyDeleteSteve,
Good point about Craig's double standard (which is par for the course with Craig). I think the goading of atheists slips out in the video when he starts talking about the ever-present "spiritual dimension" to doubt.
Do you have an RSS feed for your podcasts?
ReplyDeleteI believe so. Whatever feed I have set-up on feedburner is podcast-only. That's the one that goes to iTunes anyway. I have no idea how to subscribe to it (apart from subscribing on iTunes).
ReplyDeleteBogdan, there is no arguing with Craig's "Inner witness of the Holy Spirit". It is beyond reason. Either you get it or you don't. Either you see it or you don't. Either you feel it or you don't. I don't. The best Craig can do is describe his experience of the Holy Spirit and for us to ponder whether we share the same experience. I don't. For me, case closed.
ReplyDeletesmaitzen,
ReplyDeleteGreat point about Craig position.
Emo Civil:
ReplyDeleteI think you can easily take issue with Craig's inner witness argument, which is simply an appeal to personal experience: I've had the compelling experience that I was abducted by aliens, therefore aliens exist. If you don't accept that, then you shouldn't accept the inner witness of the holy spirit, http://www.naturalism.org/projecting_god.htm#justify