Skip to content

In Defense of Natural Theology 14: David Hume and a Cumulative Case Argument


Didn’t even remember to write a note on this chapter. . . some good points are made. I think it’s important to avoid criticizing arguments for what they are not. An argument may be A therefore B, and another may be B therefore C. Together they bring us A therefore C, but assuming C is what we want, and B is controversial, and A is assumed, we need both arguments to bring the conclusion.

This may be the case for the arguments for God. If each argument brings us a higher probability that God exists, then together, they may bring the probability to being over .5. That would be sufficient.

Of course, you can’t carry water with a bucket with a hole in it, much less 10, so each one must succeed in some way, and I’m not certain they actually do.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: