Can Bayes' Theorem, given the evidence of this universe, be used to support theism
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11420408 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John Ostrowick (University of Cape Town, corresponding author), John M Ostrowick |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 163-172 |
| Publication date | 2013-08-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | South African Journal of Philosophy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0258-0136 • E-ISSN: 2073-4867 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/02580136.2013.810036 |
| OpenAlex | W2085643199 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 14 |
Given ht as the hypothesis of theism, hm as the hypothesis of materialism, and e as the evidence of a complex life-bearing universe, Richard Swinburne presents these arguments in The Existence of God: (1) that this ordered universe is a priori improbable, given the stringent requirements for life and the Second Law of Thermodynamics; (2) that this universe's structure is evidence for theism, and that theism therefore explains this universe; Swinburne argues that because P(e|ht) > P(e|hm), it follows that P(ht|e)>P(hm|e); and (3) a theistic explanation for the universe is more probable because it is simpler; therefore it is more likely that God exists than not. As I have addressed (3) in a prior paper, this paper will address the Bayesian argument that Swinburne offers in (2), i.e. that P(e|ht)>P(e). In the paper I draw a number of conclusions, most pertinently, that Hacking's Total Probability Rule (TPR) for cases of mutually exclusive hypotheses [ht vs hm] and evidence e entails that ht can only be confirmed if P(e|∼ht) is low. I also conclude that if we follow the TPR for Swinburne's argument, we achieve the result that theism is at best slightly improbable, or equiprobable with materialism
Epistemology · Existence of God · Materialism · Physics · Theism · Universe · Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Highly cited | No |
|---|