When we meet an atheist, or an aggressive agnostic (someone who doesn't claim that there is no god, but who claims they merely don't believe in god, seeking thereby to escape the obligation to defend their claim), it is easy to default to their world-view, which they insist is the true default. We are then left to defend when it is really their obligation.
There is no 'default' world-view.
They might claim that we 'worship' a 'sky-daddy'.
What has rarely occurred to them is that they worship a 'cosmic dust-bunny'. They, if materialist/naturalists, which most Western moderns are, hold that dust particles is the final reality. If they are more sophisticated they might say that either space or energy is the final reality, but similar questions apply.
The trouble with this position, is that it brings nothing with it. As J. P. Moreland has put it:
Intellectually responsible naturalists cannot merely deny God’s existence. Additionally, they must provide an account of what ideas naturalists ought to hold regarding epistemological commitments, a broad creation story (the Grand Story) about how all entities have come-to-be, and a resulting ontology such that all entities can be located in the Grand Story as certified by naturalist epistemological commitments.
Moreland, J. P.. 2023. A Critical Assessment of Shafer-Landau’s Ethical Non-Naturalism.
Religions 14: 546.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated and will be published entirely at the blog-master's discretion.