Critical Rationality Applied to There Being a Creator

Not having irrefutable proof doesn’t mean that assumptions cannot or should not be evaluated. Science does not work that way.

Critical rationality assumes there are some arguments that many or even most rational people will find convincing, even though there is no one argument that will be persuasive to everyone. Furthermore, it holds that some beliefs are more reasonable than others even though all arguments are rationally avoidable in the end. In science a theory is considered empirically verified if it organizes the evidence and explains phenomena better than any conceivable alternative theory. That is, if a theory leads us to expect with accuracy many and varied events better than any other alternative theory then it is accepted, even though not (in the strong rationalist sense) “proven.”

So let’s apply Critical Rationality to worldviews. Consider that virtually everyone has a sense that the world is not the way it ought to be. We have a sense that we are very flawed and yet very remarkable.  We have a longing for love and beauty that nothing in this world can fulfill.  We have a deep need to know meaning and purpose.  Which worldview best accounts for these things?

There are no proofs for God that will convince all rational persons. However, there are many very good arguments for the existence of God.  And there are more clues that point to the existence of God than otherwise. So even if we cannot provide definitive proof of God’s existence, nonetheless belief in a creator is justified the same way science justifies using convincing though "unproven" theories. That is, through the use of Critical Rationality.

Next Time: Clues left by a creator.  In Christ...