Atheists often pose the question, “Why do you only believe the miraculous accounts of your own religion?” The implication is that I have no more reason to believe in the biblical miracles than those described in the Koran or the Gospels. But the question fails to appreciate how the religious personally approaches his faith. I didn’t sit down one day, consider whether or not God split the sea, and decide to believe it. If I did, the question would be a good one. Rather, I consider the theological explanation of the world presented by the Bible and the rabbinic tradition and conclude that the story it tells is compelling. If miraculous events are part of that story, then I accept them as well because of the role they play in the general theological account. It is this theological account that I believe best explains the world and humanity’s interaction with it.
Plantinga on Falsifiability and Intelligent Design
Alvin Plantinga rips into Judge John Jones’ decision in Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District (via Mr. Grouchypants). One of the things I find most annoying about the ID debate is the argument that ID isn’t science because the claims it makes aren’t testable and falsifiable. To which Plantinga responds:
For example, the statement “God has designed 800-pound rabbits that live in Cleveland” is clearly testable, clearly falsifiable and indeed clearly false. Testability can’t be taken as a criterion for distinguishing scientific from nonscientific statements. That is because in the typical case individual statements are not verifiable or falsifiable.
As another example, the statement “There is at least one electron” is surely scientific, but it isn’t by itself verifiable or falsifiable. What is verifiable or falsifiable are whole theories involving electrons. These theories make verifiable or falsifiable predictions, but the sole statement “There is at least one electron” does not. In the same way, whole theories involving intelligent designers also make verifiable or falsifiable predictions, even if the bare statement that life has been intelligently designed does not.