The Argument From Ignorance

Surely people have heard of the "Argument From Reason," which attempts to show God exists, and the "Argument From Evil," which attempts to show God does not exist. I hereby advance for the first time the "Argument From Ignorance," which is short for the "Argument From Human Ignorance." Hitchiking and expanding on the arguments found in J.L. Schellenberg's book The Wisdom to Doubt: A Justification of Religious Skepticism, I will attempt to show that religious skepticism is justified based upon the fact that human beings are ignorant, and we are ignorant because we are profoundly limited and immature as human beings. [This might take a few posts to do so]. Let me begin with a summary of the argument found in Part One of Schellenberg's book.

In Part One Schellenberg argues for religious skepticism based on four distinct categories of thought called "modes," which he later combines into one. In the "Subject Mode" the author argues that human beings are limited in understanding. There is available evidence that is neglected and/or inaccessible to us. There is unrecognized evidence that is undiscovered and undiscoverable by all of us. In the "Object Mode" the author argues that it's probably beyond finite humans beings to understand Ultimate reality, since it must be "something infinitely profound." (p. 51) As such, we may have inadequate and incoherent conceptions of it.

In the "Retrospective Mode" the author considers the human past with regard to religious claims. The human past is too brief, ("only a few thousand years old") and we have been occupied by other things for us to conclude we have arrived at a final understanding. There have been moral, psychological and social factors which were actively against religious improvements to our understanding. There has been hubris (or self-importance) and greed, jealously and envy, which taken together led to dogmatism, hostility and rivalry among people of different understandings. "Because religious belief is wrapped up with this ultimate concern, it has tended to go hand in hand with a rather fierce loyalty. Nothing less than complete devotion is appropriate where such a reality is involved." "How, for example, can one remain loyal to God if one allows oneself to be seduced by objections to the belief that there is a God?...she is likely rather to become stubborn and intransigent, because of a well-intentional but misplaced loyalty." "When they notice that others disagree, they tend not to think of this as an opportunity for dialogue and growth toward deeper understanding, but rather feel impelled to insist on fundamental error in the opposing views." (p. 76-78). Furthermore, "the more attached one becomes to one's beliefs, the more difficult it is to remain open to their falsity and to engage in investigations that might show them to be false" (p. 84), which in turn has been "inimical to creative and critical thinking" about the Ultimate.

In the "Prospective Mode" the author "considers what may lie ahead rather than what lies behind us." (p. 91). If we survive on this planet we have 1 billion years to come up with better solutions to understanding the Ultimate, especially since we've just entered an era of unprecedented access to digital information that may all be categorized and placed into a hand held iPod someday. Science will progress into the future as well. People will increasingly be forced to get to know others who have a different religious perspective with a global economy and travel, and we will learn from each other and become more tolerant and assimilating of these views with a healthy exchange of information.

The author finally combines these four into one called "The Presumption Mode," which builds on everything he said before. He argues that "human beings are both profoundly limited and profoundly immature." (p. 117). Lacking any pragmatic reasons to counter his truth-oriented arguments, he concludes that "religious skepticism is positively justified." (p. 129).

3 comments:

ChuckB said...

First of all you can not argue that creation had to have a creator, inteligent design, things fit too perfectly to have happened by chance, Big Bang Theory, evolution!
Evolution evidence has been proven a fraud everyTime, Dr. Johannson found a Skull, and a jaw bone 50 miles apart in the desert and called it the missing link, piltdown man, nebraska man all frauds, to build a entire species from a tooth found that was later proven to be a 50 year old tooth from a pig!
Darwin even denounced evolution in his book orgin of species, he spent his life trying to proove God did not exist, in the end he admitted he was wrong.
These theories are nothing more than people refusing to accept God, the very one you will answer too, but it will be too late if you stay in denial.
Humor me, just say Hell is for real, if you are wrong and God exist, and you reject him, Hell is where your going for eternity, is that where you want to be, read the scriptures just once with a whole heart, just try it, if your reading everything to dis prove, you need to know what it is you going against.
Beleiving in God is not ignorance, there have been men who claimed to be of God who have harmed repability such as Jim Jones, and David Koeresch, others who use the name of God to collect money, they will answer to God, but do not base your beleives on false men of faith, and there are many and it is sad!
I am someone who cares, I mean you no ill will or insult,
May God bless you

David B. Ellis said...

Chuck, meaning no insult, but you dont know what you're talking about concerning evolution. Yes, there have been some fraud (which evolutionary scientists themselves have shown to be fraudulent). Science, unlike religion, has a habit of correcting its errors. That hardly constitutes a flaw. The evidence for evolution has nothing to do with those errors and frauds you mentioned. Do some research and address the actual evidence for evolution if you're interested in criticizing evolutionary theory.


These theories are nothing more than people refusing to accept God, the very one you will answer too, but it will be too late if you stay in denial.


In the USA about 90% (give or take) is theist. About half the population believes evolution is a fact (if I recall correctly, feel free to double-check---I could be misremembering the statistics on that---but I think thats pretty close to the right number).

If that's the case then it necessarily follows that at least 80% of people who believe in evolution are theists.

Therefore, it is obviously false to claim people believe in evolution because they want to be atheists.


Humor me, just say Hell is for real, if you are wrong and God exist, and you reject him, Hell is where your going for eternity, is that where you want to be,


Threats are no substitute for evidence. They are, rather, a telling admission of the irrationality and baselessness of your beliefs.


read the scriptures just once with a whole heart, just try it, if your reading everything to dis prove, you need to know what it is you going against.


Most of us are ex-believers, who did exactly that, who did not want to deconvert and struggled hard against our intellectual objections to christianity---but could see, try as we might not to, how utterly irrational the whole edifice of christian beliefs is.

Anonymous said...

The authors Retrospective mode, I think, has overlooked the fact that spirituality goes back as far as cro magnon, which is more than a couple thousand years, it is a couple of tens of thousands of years. Religions started with icons of what people need to eat. Animals, blood, the difference between life and death, crops, rain, water, chaos order.

It seems there was confusion of correlation and cause. In small minded humans that hadn't figured out how to reason correctly, its no wonder they mistook chance for the supernatural.

The "international" trade that went on between the cultures in greece, egypt, turkey, (using todays names for clarity) saudi arabia and pakistan (where the harrabbas had already developed the beginnings of hinduism [they had animals in their religion too]), not only spread copper, bronze, gold, frakensence and myrr, spices, etc, it spread Ideas, using ships, in the mediterranean, the the persian gulf, the red sea, and the arabian sea and the monsoon winds in the indian ocean. All this well before 2000 bc. The levant and mesopotamia was grand central station for the ancient world.

the authors retrospective mode also contains a description similar to cognitive dissonance, or self-justification theory. When people place a high value on an ideal, they will support inconsistent beliefs relevant to it, and then when faced with a challenge will do or say anything that will allow them to internally discredit the opposition, support their view to themselves.

An argument from ignorance can be reduced in scope. Just like the God of the Gaps argument.

God did everything, but as science shakes off poor reasoning schemes and insulates against confusion of correlation a cause, god has retreated. He retreated from walking around the garden of eden, retreated from walking around the camps, retreated from living in the mountains, retreated from living in the clouds, retread from living among the stars, and now lives in us and in another dimension.

With the advances made in neuroscience, he is going to be shown not to live in us, or interact with us physically (as i have drawn out from some christians in my biological bases for behavior articles) the only domain he will have left is outside of reality. Where he began, and where he belongs. He started as some shaman caveman drawings of animals on the wall thingking they were stealing thier life force or drawing them closer, to blood, rain, to crops, to fertility, etc.

He always has been and always will be a means to manage uncertainty.