Reason for the Hope Within 5: Arguments for Atheism
Lamest chapter yet. So very, very lame. The author actually responds to the argument from lack of evidence and lack of a priori knowability by appealing to faith. When he mentions the obvious objection of “how do we know your faith works” he responds by saying that there could be skeptical aliens who deny our statement that 2+2=4. It’s obvious to us, not obvious to them, but it’s true.
Okay, so there’s a possible example where something is true, but not justifiable, but how do we know your faith falls under that possibility? If you think that it’s fair to justify your beliefs that way, than what if someone does the same thing and claims “faith” that your beliefs are totally false? There would be no way to argue against such a person, and that shows the pure vacuity of this author’s epistemology. Untenable argument from sheer possibility. Is this really the “reason for the hope within?” I know I’ve been given no reason. Just a rationalization.
