Jump to content

Transcendental argument for the existence of God: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m →‎The argument: The quote omitted the key adjective "univocal" without inserting ellipses. additional ellipses for the omitted "to them"
Line 14: Line 14:
[[Cornelius Van Til]] likewise wrote:
[[Cornelius Van Til]] likewise wrote:


{{quote|We must point out that reasoning itself leads to self-contradiction, not only from a theistic point of view, but from a non-theistic point of view as well... It is this that we ought to mean when we say that we reason from the impossibility of the contrary. The contrary is impossible only if it is self-contradictory when operating on the basis of its own assumptions.|(''A Survey of Christian Epistemology'' [Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1969], p. 204).}}
{{quote|We must point out ... that univocal reasoning itself leads to self-contradiction, not only from a theistic point of view, but from a non-theistic point of view as well... It is this that we ought to mean when we say that we reason from the impossibility of the contrary. The contrary is impossible only if it is self-contradictory when operating on the basis of its own assumptions.|(''A Survey of Christian Epistemology'' [Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1969], p. 204).}}


Therefore, the TAG differs from [[thomistic]] and [[evidentialist]] arguments, which posit the probable existence of God in order to avoid an infinite regress of causes or motions, to explain life on Earth, and so on. The TAG posits the necessary existence of a particular conception of God in order for human knowledge and experience to be possible at all. The TAG argues that, because the [[trinity|triune]] God of the [[Bible]], being completely logical, uniform, and good, exhibits a character in the [[Genesis creation myth|created order]] and the creatures themselves (especially in [[human]]s), human knowledge and experience are possible. This reasoning implies that all other alternatives such as [[Buddhism]] and [[Islam]], when followed to their logical conclusions, descend into [[Reductio ad absurdum|absurdity]], arbitrariness or inconsistency.
Therefore, the TAG differs from [[thomistic]] and [[evidentialist]] arguments, which posit the probable existence of God in order to avoid an infinite regress of causes or motions, to explain life on Earth, and so on. The TAG posits the necessary existence of a particular conception of God in order for human knowledge and experience to be possible at all. The TAG argues that, because the [[trinity|triune]] God of the [[Bible]], being completely logical, uniform, and good, exhibits a character in the [[Genesis creation myth|created order]] and the creatures themselves (especially in [[human]]s), human knowledge and experience are possible. This reasoning implies that all other alternatives such as [[Buddhism]] and [[Islam]], when followed to their logical conclusions, descend into [[Reductio ad absurdum|absurdity]], arbitrariness or inconsistency.

Revision as of 19:26, 30 October 2013

The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) is the argument that attempts to prove God's existence by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose a Christian theistic worldview, and that God must be the source of logic and morals.[1] A version was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his 1763 work The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God and most contemporary formulations of the transcendental argument have been developed within the framework of Christian presuppositional apologetics[2]

Transcendental reasoning

Transcendental arguments should not be confused with transcendent arguments, or arguments for the existence of something transcendent. In other words, they are distinct from both arguments that appeal to a transcendent intuition or sense as evidence, and arguments that move from direct evidence to the existence of a transcendent thing (Classical Apologetics).

They are also distinct from standard deductive and inductive forms of reasoning. Where a standard deductive argument looks for what we can deduce from the fact of X, and a standard inductive argument looks for what we can infer from experience of X, a transcendental argument looks for the necessary prior conditions to both the fact and experience of X. Thus, "I entitle transcendental all knowledge which is occupied not so much with objects as with the mode of our knowledge of objects insofar as this mode of knowledge is to be possible a priori." (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, Introduction, VII).

The argument

The TAG is a transcendental argument that attempts to prove that God is the precondition of all human knowledge and experience, by demonstrating the impossibility of the contrary; in other words, that logic, reason, or morality cannot exist without God. The argument proceeds as follows:[3]

  1. If there is no god (most often the entity God, defined as the god of the Christian Bible, Yahweh), knowledge is not possible.
  2. Knowledge is possible (or some other statement pertaining to logic or morality).
  3. Therefore a god exists.

Cornelius Van Til likewise wrote:

We must point out ... that univocal reasoning itself leads to self-contradiction, not only from a theistic point of view, but from a non-theistic point of view as well... It is this that we ought to mean when we say that we reason from the impossibility of the contrary. The contrary is impossible only if it is self-contradictory when operating on the basis of its own assumptions.

— (A Survey of Christian Epistemology [Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1969], p. 204).

Therefore, the TAG differs from thomistic and evidentialist arguments, which posit the probable existence of God in order to avoid an infinite regress of causes or motions, to explain life on Earth, and so on. The TAG posits the necessary existence of a particular conception of God in order for human knowledge and experience to be possible at all. The TAG argues that, because the triune God of the Bible, being completely logical, uniform, and good, exhibits a character in the created order and the creatures themselves (especially in humans), human knowledge and experience are possible. This reasoning implies that all other alternatives such as Buddhism and Islam, when followed to their logical conclusions, descend into absurdity, arbitrariness or inconsistency.

Criticisms

The chief criticism of all formulations of the TAG revolve around its premise that "without a god, knowledge cannot exist". While acceptance of this premise can lead to the conclusion that a god must exist, the argument itself provides no demonstrated necessity to accept the premise. Martin (1997) suggested the invalidity of this assertion when he reformulated the TAG as the 'Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God' starting with the negation of TAG's premise, namely, that 'the existence of knowledge presupposes the non-existence of God'[2]

See also

References

  1. ^ Michael Martin (1997). "Does Induction Presume the Existence of the Christian God?". Retrieved 21 April 2011. But what about The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG)--the argument that logic, science, and objective ethical standards presuppose the existence of God? {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |publicado= ignored (help)
  2. ^ a b Martin, Michael (1997). "Does Induction Presuppose the Existence of the Christian God?". Skeptic. 5 (2): 71–75.
  3. ^ Meister, Chad V.; Mittelberg, Mark; McDowell, Josh (2007). Reasons for Faith: Making a Case for the Christian Faith. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books. ISBN 1-58134-787-1. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)[page needed]
Notes
  • E. R. Geehan, ed., Jerusalem and Athens: Critical Discussions on the Philosophy and Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1980).
  • Greg L. Bahnsen, Van Til's Apologetic: Readings and Analysis (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1998).
  • John M. Frame, Cornelius Van Til: An Analysis of His Thought (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1995).
  • Steven M. Schlissel, ed., The Standard Bearer: A Festschrift for Greg L. Bahnsen (Nacogdoches: Covenant Media Press, 2002).
  • Greg L. Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith". Robert R. Booth, ed. (Nacogdoches: Covenant Media Press, 1996).
  • John M. Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God: An Introduction (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1994).
  • John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1987).

Articles

Debates