According to the metaphysical definition of atheism, atheism is the proposition, "God does not exist." Arguments for atheism (in its metaphysical sense) can be divided into categories based on the following taxonomy.
I. Impossibility Arguments
A. Internal Inconsistency Arguments
B. External Inconsistency Arguments
C. Performative or Pragmatic Inconsistency Arguments
II. Improbability or Evidential Arguments
A. C-Inductive Arguments
B. P-Inductive Arguments
C. Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) Arguments
D. Bayesian Arguments
III. Pragmatic Arguments
In what follows, I will list various arguments for atheism and where they fit into this taxonomy. This list will be developed over time; I am well aware that it is incomplete. For a much more complete list of arguments for atheism, see the list maintained by Ex-Apologist.
I. Impossibility Arguments
An impossibility argument is an argument which concludes either that X cannot exist, happen, or be true; or one cannot take some action regarding X (such as believing X) without contradicting a presupposition or entailment of X.
A. Internal Inconsistency Arguments
Internal inconsistency arguments attempt to show that the content of theism is inconsistent. There are two types of internal inconsistency arguments: single attribute disproofs and multiple attribute disproofs.
1. Single Attribute Disproofs
2. Multiple Attribute Disproofs
Against Theism Simpliciter:
| Attributes |
Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| Aseity vs. Temporal |
Lowder 2023 |
TBD |
| Essential Moral Perfection vs. Essential Omnipotence |
Morriston 2001 |
Sound |
| Perfect Freedom vs. Perfect Goodness |
Rowe 2004 |
TBD |
| Eternity (interpreted as contingent timelessness) vs. Creator |
Lowder 2023 |
Sound |
| Perfect Mercy vs. Perfect Justice |
TBD |
TBD |
| Necessary Existence vs. Being a Concrete Entity |
TBD |
TBD |
| Omniscience vs. Immutability |
Kretzmann 1966 |
TBD |
| Transcendent vs. Personal |
Drange 1998 |
TBD (see my partial assessment here) |
Against Christian theism:
B. External Inconsistency Arguments
1. Big Bang Cosmology:
| External Fact | Author(s) | My Verdict |
|---|
| Big Bang Cosmology | Q. Smith 1992 | Unsound
|
2. Relativity Theory:
| External Fact |
Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| General Fact | Davies 1983 |
Unsound |
3. Evil (in the Broad Sense)
4. Divine Hiddenness
| Fact |
Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| General Fact | Schellenberg | TBD |
| Former Nonbelievers | Schellenberg | TBD |
| Lifelong Seekers | Schellenberg | TBD |
| Converts to Nontheistic Religions | Schellenberg |
TBD |
| Isolated Nontheists | Schellenberg | TBD |
5. Metaphysical Possibility of God's Non-Existence
- Modal Ontological Argument: Oppy
6. Moral Autonomy:
| External Fact |
Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| Moral Autonomy | Rachels 1971 |
Unsound |
II. Improbability Arguments
A. C-Inductive Arguments
This section intentionally left blank.
B. P-Inductive Arguments
C. Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) Arguments
This section intentionally left blank.
D. Bayesian Arguments
1. Physical Universe
| Argument Name | Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| Argument from Physicality | Lowder 2014 | Sound |
2. Evolution
3. Mind-Brain Dependence
| External Fact | Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| General Fact |
Draper 1998 | Sound
|
4. Evil (in the Broad Sense)
5. Nonresistant Nonbelief
| Fact |
Author(s) |
My Verdict |
| General Fact | Schellenberg | Sound |
| Former Nonbelievers | Schellenberg | Sound |
| Lifelong Seekers | Schellenberg | Sound |
| Converts to Nontheistic Religions | Schellenberg |
Sound |
| Isolated Nontheists | Schellenberg | Sound |
| Biological Basis for |
Lowder 2015 |
Sound |
| Demographics of Theism | Maitzen 2006 |
TBD |
| Demographics of Evidence about God |
Lowder 2015 | Sound |
Note: Schellenberg formulates all of his arguments as what I call "External Inconsistency Arguments," but I believe they can also be easily reformulated as evidential or "Improbability Arguments." I'm listing them here because I believe they are sound as improbability arguments. I'm undecided about whether they work as External Inconsistency Arguments.
6. Success of Science
No comments:
Post a Comment