Dennett Science And Religion Analysis

Good Essays
In the book Science and Religion, two philosophers Alvin Plantinga and Daniel Dennett, share their opposing viewpoints on whether they believe the two are compatible. Plantinga is a Christian and he believes that the two are in fact, compatible. His arguments are based on rationality from a theistic view and how it is not present in a naturalist view. He says, (page 9)
"As I argue in Warranted Christian Belief, if theistic belief is true, then very likely it has both rationality and warrant in the basic way, that is, not on the basic of propositional evidence. If theistic belief is true, then very likely there is a cognitive structure something like John Calvin’s sensus divinitatis, an original source of warranted theistic belief. In this
…show more content…
Mainly just because I can't wrap my mind around what Dennett is trying to get across to readers, but also because his arguments were a lot stronger than Dennett's. How can someone honestly believe Superman even compares to God? The way kids are raised nowadays is completely different than how a traditional family raised their children. For example, I grew up going to church on Sundays and learning about God. This makes it extremely hard for me to take in any opinions stating that God doesn't, could not, or might not exist. I just simply was not raised to believe it. Other kids grow up in families that aren't as focused on religion so their own opinions stray away from a God. In this case, I can see why some people might believe what Dennett is saying in the book. Plantinga says that science and religion are compatible, but he switches the argument to focusing more on Evolution vs. Religion. Christianity says that God made man, but evolution says everything happens by random chance. Out of all of Plantinga's theories I like the one that says the evolutionary process is wasteful, God would not permit this sort of process. People don’t believe in God based on an argument. The belief is simply that, something one just knows to be true, like that the world didn't just pop into existence five seconds ago. Therefore, there is no conflict between the two. On the contrary, there does seem to be a conflict between a particular religion, naturalism and science (evolution). Naturalism is the belief that there isn't any such person as God. One cannot believe there isn't a God, and also believe in evolution. The whole argument confuses me because I do not understand how he compares the two using probability equations. I do not believe that science has anything to do with religion when it comes to much. How can religion actually help you form a hypothesis? It can't. How can religion

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Dawkins: Writing In recent discussion of Dawkins’ “Arguments about God’s existence”, a controversial issue has been whether he offers a strong and valid argument about religion. Some argue that his paper is filled with false assertions about religion and the existence of God. From this perspective, Dawkins is proving that God doesn’t exist on false claims such as heredity and Agnostic beliefs. On the other hand, however, others argue that his arguments stem from logic and reason. That one needs evidence to prove that something exists and a lack of evidence against God not existing doesn’t prove that God does exist.…

    • 937 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    If God is not real, then He could not have created or interpreted morals. A response that might be given to this is that agnostics and atheists simply need to be converted, not only to “save” their souls, but also to make them morally upstanding people. However, based upon personal experience, one does not need to believe in any god to act morally, and therefore does not need to be converted to a religion that has yet to be classified as myth (along with so many…

    • 802 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Still, Behe’s bias disqualifies his argument from bearing the title of science. A supernatural cause is not one that can be reliably tested to any extent, and it is immune to falsifiability. Behe’s leap from natural evidence to the existence of God is a personal choice with no natural evidence to support it. If he intended to stay within the realms of science, then it would be necessary to draw a natural conclusion. One way to do this is by suggesting the Darwinian evolution mechanism is incapable of explaining the complexity of several biological complexes.…

    • 1345 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    When the proponents of the theory of conflicting truths argue against the existence of God, they seem to interpret it as a knowledge and not a belief proposal, and when they fail to find the knowledge to support the existence of God, then they discredit the same existence. Therefore, their support for the theory is not based on the lacking existence of God, but lack of knowledge to support the existence of God (Hick J. H., 1983). The religious belief that God exists is a common interest for all the religions, but none has a concrete way to explain…

    • 1726 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Although Bertrand Russell makes some compelling arguments he makes many illogical fallacies within his speech. Russell begins his lecture on first his idea of what a Christian actually is. Russell believes that in order to be a Christian, one must believe in God, immortality, and in Jesus Christ. However, he does not think that a Christian has to believe in Hell. He also tells us that he himself has no belief in any of the things that he believes makes one a Christian.…

    • 1143 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Self-evident propositions are propositions in which the evidence of its truth lies in the proposition itself. Aquinas says “God exists” is a self-evident proposition in itself. Which is true, but just stating “God exists”, does not permit for those who do not believe God exists, to understand how the proposition will prove any existence. In order for a proposition to be self-evident to us, there must be an understanding in addition to the proposition being self-evident within itself. An atheist may argue that solely saying “God exists” does not imply he actually exists, there has to be further analysis in order to make an atheist question whether or not God exists.…

    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He stated that believing in the resurrection of Christ was "petty and small-minded", because it goes against every law of science. He also says that a God who is grand enough to create the universe would not be bothered by a mere human's thoughts. Dawkins believes in Darwin's theory of natural selection to explain evolution, and that the evolution…

    • 1563 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Science can be separated into two groups: science and pseudoscience. For science to be scientific, the theory must be testable, and can be proven false. While religion explains the supernaturals; it’s also about having faith and trust in our religion. There have been arguments for and against Gods in our society. However, people can’t win arguments against God because they can’t disprove it.…

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The article published by Jerry Coyne, titled, Science and Religion Aren’t Friends, is one that demands that science and religion are incompatible, and he makes an attempt to destroy any possibility of compatibility between the two. He claims that religion is merely a fog of superstition that needs to get out of the way of scientific progress. “ And any progress- not just scientific progress- is easier when we’re not yoked to religious dogma.” Coyne argues for the value of science, a value that doesn’t have various religions arguing with one another about which one is right, there is simply one scientific truth. “In contrast, scientists don’t kill each other over matters such as continental drift. We have better ways to settle our differences.…

    • 754 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Atheism Vs Religion

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Questions have also arisen concerning the origin of god where people have found it hard to believe that god might have arisen from nothing. As the Christians claim that god is the creator, then one is bound to ask about who created the god who created everything (Hancock, 1996). Omniscience is also a paradox that atheists find very contradictory. This is based on the idea that this god knows everything and by so doing, he cannot forget but the paradox is that by forgetting some things, then he does not then know everything as claimed. For example, when god forgets his people and lets them suffer then it is true that he does not indeed exist (Drachman,…

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays