We All Make Assumptions Part 2

Reblogged from doubtingmarcus

We All Make Assumptions Part 2

*Part 1 - an explanation of my epistemology

Is there a real difference between the assumptions made by atheists like myself and Christians who accept Van Tillian presuppositionalism? One might argue that ultimately all epistemologies have to start with some assumptions so one is just as circular as another. This, I believe, could hardly be more incorrect. Suppose I begin my search for knowledge with the assumption that an evil daemon exists which is manipulating me and as such that some things are exactly opposite of what they initially seem. This would obviously make reasoning rather difficult if not impossible, and hence limit the ability to build a set of beliefs, but more importantly this isn’t in any way similar to far more basic the assumptions which underlie my particular brand of evidentialism.

Just to recap my particular assumptions are:

I exist

My senses aren’t always wrong

Physical evidence is a way to justify beliefs

These aren’t conclusions about how the world operates but rather a basic framework for discovering how it does. Let’s compare these to the assumptions of Van Tillian presuppositionalism:

A god exists (and that we have any idea what ‘god’ refers to)

This god has interacted with humans

The product of that interaction is Christian scripture

I’d hope it is easy to see that these kinds of assumptions are not equivalent. Even if granted that these Van Tillian assumptions merely serve as an apparatus to gather knowledge, as the assumption that physical evidence is a way to justify beliefs serves in my view, far more broad conclusions are drawn and they aren’t generic items to build a belief system, they are a belief system. Additionally I believe that without realizing it this view has already assumed the two assumptions of my form of evidentialism. Without assuming that you exist there is no way to extrapolate to any idea and without assuming that your senses are sometimes accurate you could never accept that there is a world to be interacted in or that the Christian scripture actually exists or even if it exists that it doesn’t say the opposite of what you believe it does. Moreover none of the assumptions that underlie evidentialism are facts about historical events or the existence of other minds. If, as it’s sometimes claimed, I were just assuming whatever I so pleased as a baseline I could assume, for instance, that the natural world is all that exists and that there are no gods but I don’t do so.

In fact almost no epistemologies not based in religion begin with such bold assumptions because these aren’t just be assumptions, they are far-reaching conclusions about reality. The goal of epistemology and theories of justification is to acquire accurate knowledge about reality not to impose conclusions. This is part of the fundamental difference between assuming an entire worldview and assuming the tools to construct a worldview. To borrow a bit of coherentist jargon presuppositionalism begins with an unalterable thoroughly fleshed out web of beliefs while most epistemologies try to construct one of many possible web of beliefs given a few far more basic starting points.

Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, I object to the idea that the first assumption in presuppositionalism is even logically coherent given the lack of an ontology for god. Until there is some coherent description of what this god is to say rely on god for anything is unreasonable. Still even if ‘god exists’ is coherent I believe that the Christian god is logically impossible because it is self-refuting in numerous ways, as is Christian scripture (by the way which Christian scripture?), and despite the claims of presuppositionalists no being can be the foundation of logic. All epistemologies seem to have their problems but hardly any approach this level of encompassing foundationalism and self-contradiction. We all make assumptions but some of them are more bold, less justified and far more self-contradictory than others. Van Tillian presuppositionalism is quite possibly at the apex of this unholy trinity.

Individual Sovereignty

We All Make Assumptions Part 2

Notes