-3-
FAITH AND REASON
(EVIDENTIALISM AND
FOUNDATIONALISM)
EVINDENTIALISM AND BASICALITY OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF
Do we need evidence (arguments) for our beliefs beforehand in order to be rational? Cannot there be rational beliefs without evidence?
The Cliffordian Evidentialism (Strong Rationalism): «it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence».
A theistic response (by Alvin Plantinga): A religious belief can be rational without evidence. If we consider that a religious belief can be «basic belief»
one does not further evidence to support the rationality of her belief.
But what is «basic belief»?
FOUNDATIONALISM AND BASIC BELIEFS
Foundationalists make a distinction between our beliefs:
Basic beliefs which do not depend on other beliefs.
Non-basic or derived beliefs which depend on basic beliefs,
therefore are evidentially supported.
BASIC BELIEF ACCORDING TO FOUNDATIONALISM
For the foundationalists, basic beliefs are such that it almost impossible to be mistaken. And these are (1) self-evident beliefs and, (2) sense-evident (or incorrigible beliefs).
(1) Self-evident beliefs are seen to be true by anyone who understands them. For example a simple aritmetical truth that «2+2=4».
(2) Sense-evident (or incorrigible beliefs) are about our own immediate experience such as «I see a tree» or «I feel a pain» etc.
According to foundationalism, a person is rational only if her beliefs
are self-evident, or sense-evident (or incorrigible), or is inferred from
these basic beliefs.
CRITIQUE OF FOUNDATIONALISM
Plantinga argues
that the the scope of basic beliefs on the classical foundationalist account is too narrow as it excludes our beliefs about other minds (persons) or beliefs which depend on memory;
that the criterion of classical foundationalism is self-
defeating in that it is neithe self-evident nor sense-evident
(or incorrigible) nor derived from these beliefs..
IS BELIEF IN GOD BASIC?
According to Plantinga, belief that «God exists» can be a properly basic belief.
For this reason, there is no need for the theist to produce proofs for God’s existence in order to be justified in believing in God.
WHAT IS THE CRITERION FOR A BASIC BELIEF?
If the theistic belief that «God exists» can be taken as properly basic, what about some non-theistic or even bizzare beliefs? Cannot they be equally taken as basic?
Plantinga defends an inductive method in determing the set of properly basic beliefs.
Thus, one must consider each claim of an instance of basic belief on its own merit in order to see if it can shown to be a basic belief.
CAN A BASIC BELIEF BE REFUTED?
According to Plantinga, basicality of a belief does not guarantee that it will be a basic belief forever.
Thus, for example, if someone claims that she is seeing a lake in the middle of a desert can be a basic belief in the first place, but then can be refuted if it can be shown that it was due to an illusion.
