For those who are unfamiliar with the argument, philosopher Paul Gould has written a very accessible post on the AFR that can be found here. In the post, Gould presents the argument as follows:
(1) If the natural world is intelligible, then God exists.
(2) The natural world is intelligible.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
This is a great introduction to the argument. Checkout how Gould argues for each premise here.
For those who want to take a more in-depth look at the argument and its rich history, I recommend Victor Reppert's book C.S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason. Our review is here.
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Footnote:
1. For those interested, Dickinson's formation of the AFR is as follows:
(1) If God does not exist, then either logical principles do not exist (naturalism) or they exist as brute abstract objects (Platonism).
(2) It's not the case that logical principles do not exist because this is self-defeating.
(3) It's not the case that they exist as brute abstract objects since this is ad hoc.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
He unpacks the argument in Chapter 4 of his book, p. 77-100.
Comments