Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Swinburne - Credulity and Testimony - Coggle Diagram
Swinburne - Credulity and Testimony
CREDULITY
"I suggest that it is a principle of rationality that (in the absence of special considerations) if it seems to... to a subject that x is present, then probably x is present; what one seems to percieve is probably so."
all religious experiences ought to be taken by their subjects as genuine -- so they are substantial grounds for belief
the four special considerations
reliability of the claim: if someone is known to tell lies in the past then there are good grounds for doubting what they say
truth of the claim: e.g. if they make unlikely perceptual claims like being able to read tiny words from 10 metres away, then their RE claim likely to not be true
difficulty of showing that God was present
possibility of what is claimed can be accounted for in different claims (scientific explanations)
Swinburne's rejection of the four considerations
cannot be shown that all claims are reliable -- may not lie about RE
cannot be shown that all claims are untrue
God is presumably everywhere: shouldn't doubt it
as the creator, God underpins all processes, so if God causes an experience through the temporal lobe then its perfectly normal
TESTIMONY
Swinburne argues that:
"...(in the absence of special considerations) the experiences of others are (probably) as they report them."
we should believe what people tell us (if there are no particular reasons not to)
Swinburne's conclusions
someone who had an RE, by credulity has good reason of believing that there is a God
testimony of others who report similar experiences supports such a claim
without RE, probability of the existence of God is 50.50, with testimony, it becomes greater than 50/50