Sunday, July 21, 2013

Naturalism, Questioned.


1. If Naturalism is true, then every event that ever occurs in the universe is a product of, and can in theory be explained by reference to, natural laws and natural forces.

2. Universally across human cultures, in all places and times, people have reported the existence of events that seem to contravene the natural order and have reported experiences that seem to connect them with something beyond the bare, natural state of affairs.

3. If any of these events did contravene the natural order or if any of those experiences did connect someone with anything beyond the bare, natural state of affairs then naturalism is false.

4. It is likely that at least one of these events did contravene natural laws and/or that at least one of the experiences did connect them with something beyond the bare, natural state of affairs.

5. Therefore, it is likely that naturalism is false.

The key premise here is clearly number 4. The whole question is really about whether or not premise 4 is true. The other premises really just exist to explain the situation and provide a sequential framework for making this argument to question naturalism. The basic, undeveloped, intuitive idea on which the step by step argument is based, is this: It seems more likely that some miracles actually happened than it is to say that all of them didn't. 

The appendix to this argument would be to list some of the examples of events that have been considered to be miracles and religious experiences.  Craig Keener's book Miracles is one very comprehensive example of this.