Belief in God is not properly basic

In this article I shall concern myself with the question ‘Is some type of justification required in order for belief in God to be rational?’ Many philosophers and theologians in the past would have responded affirmatively to this question. However, in our own day, there are those who maintain that natural theology in any form is not necessary. This is because of the rise of a different understanding of the nature of religious belief. Unlike what most people in the past thought, religious belief is not in any sense arrived at or inferred on the basis of other known propositions. On the contrary, belief in God is taken to be as basic as a person's belief in the existence of himself, of the chair in which he is sitting, or the past. The old view that there must be a justification of religious belief, whether known or unknown, is held to be mistaken. One of the most outspoken advocates of this view is Alvin Plantinga. According to Plantinga the mature theist ought not to accept belief in God as a conclusion from other things he believes. Rather, he should accept it as basic, as a part of the bedrock of his noetic structure. ‘The mature theist commits himself to belief in God; this means that he accepts belief in God as basic.’

Belief in God · Epistemology · Existence of God · Natural (archaeology) · Philosophy of religion · Reflexive pronoun · Religious belief · Theism · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Christian Theology and Mission · History · Philosophy · Theology and Philosophy of Evil

• Perceptual reports and the impossibility of perceiving god

  Open Access•Timothy Perrine•The Philosophical Quarterly•2025

  Incluir item

• Basic beliefs and Christian faith

  Open Access•Gregory W Dawes•Religious Studies•2015

  Incluir item

• The Philosophical Works of Descartes

  Elizabeth S Haldane, G R T Ross•The Philosophical Works of…•1934

  Incluir item

• Rationality and Religious Belief

  Open Access•Louis P Pojman•Religious Studies•1979

  Incluir item