The problem of theistic induction

The problem of induction is a problem for all (or for none) of us. But a theist's belief in miracles poses an extra threat for his ability to trust inductive inferences.

This vid includes a summary of a discussion of this subject between myself antipelagian, paleocrat, danmill23 and others.

Following the summary is my long overdue answer to Antipelagian's defense of the reliability of induction in a theistic world.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• theism
• induction
• knowledge
• antipelagian
• paleocrat
• hume
• presuppositionalism

[ChristianPhilosophy]

Bitbutter, you are desperately trying to create a problem where there is none. The Christian knows who God is and who they are by divine revelation, the testimony of the Holy Spirit. They know how God runs the universe because He has revealed Himself to them. And the appeal to "not knowing everything about God's plan" doesn't help you in the least. The Christian knows enough about God's plan and His relationship to them, to know that He will not leave them unable to reason.

[bitbutter]

Sorry CP, that answer doesn't get you in the clear. Whatever 'revelation' means, you're still in a position where you have to use induction to predict how God will behave in the future.

Further, you have the extra problem of a miracle working being present in your world. Even if miracles happen rarely, that puts you in a worse position than the naturalist when it comes to being able to trust any particular inductive inference.

[ChristianPhilosophy]

Thank you for your comment bitbutter, but what you have done is ignored my statement, which refutes your claim, and restated your initial position. Saying "Whatever 'revelation' means," doesn't get you in the clear. You know exactly what revelation means, it means to make known. God makes known to people, who He is/ His character/ how He behaves. The Christian is not using induction to predict how God will behave in the future, as I said, He has made these things known by divine revelation.

[bitbutter]

"The Christian is not using induction to predict how God will behave in the future, as I said, He has made these things known by divine revelation."

If he has made something known he has imparted information in the past. To predict how he will behave in the future inductive inference is required.

[OccamKant]

Excellent vid.

While watching, it occurred to me that I can't think of any place in the bible where God didn't answer a prayer right away, in exactly the manner asked.

Read up on Elisha, for example. God is totally acting at Elisha's command - killing kids with bears, blinding the enemy, unblinding the enemy. God IS a genie for elisha.

Where do Christians get the idea that God will answer their prayers "later"? Where does it ever say that in the bible?

[bitbutter]

Thanks OccamKant. That's an interesting detail, i don't know how Christians justify that belief. (sorry for the very late reply!)

[InvaderLupus]

I'm curious about what you have to say regarding the general problem of induction, that to go from a set of particular observations, such as no observed swans are blue, to a general rule, such as no swans are blue, relies on a principle many call the uniformity of nature, which states that the nature of reality is consistent throughout space and time. This belief can only be justified by appealing to the past, which can only be justified by the principle of uniformity, which is circular.

[Redfingers]

Moreover, go to "whywontgodhealamputees" website (if you want a solid case) and learn why the Bible supports the idea that what you pray for earnestly and in accordance with the few caveats explicitly mentioned by Jesus, you can get WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT.

You can also move mountains and heal the sick. WHERE'S YOUR INDUCTION NOW, PUNKASS.

Moreover, you've still got faith healers. Where'd they come from if not your psychotic scripture's adherence to the idea of miracles?

[Redfingers]

Also, the fact of the matter is that there is no scriptural guarantee that there will be no miracles. The idea that the age of miracles is over is fucking psychotic. Go read revelations, Christians. Read it and weep over your insane ballistic apocalypse story.

Nothing about atheism posits a giant monster enslaving the human race and a superbattle between Jesus and demons on earth with a rapturous ascent into heaven for all his followers, SORRY, that's your "revelation."

[Redfingers]

By the way, the fantastic thing about that argument I was having is that there are two separate translations for the word "eunouchizo" that can be found in Bibles, incidentally, the person I was arguing with was using the "New International Version" translation and I was using the King James Version.

King James translates it to "make themselves eunuchs," NIV translates it figuratively into "abstain from marriage."

WTF.

You're using translations, and they're different, CP.

[Redfingers]

God can operate outside of reason. Part of the TAG argument is that reason is contingent upon God. God CAN throw you willy nilly. God can do whatever the fuck he wants, that is, if he's omnipotent.

That's part of the definition, isn't it?

But then again, since when did you even establish anything outside of a transcendent mind with TAG? TAG doesn't end in the conclusion of the Judeo-Christian God YHWH, it ends in the conclusionof a transcendent mind.

Explain, or it's a non-sequitor fallacy.

[Redfingers]

This argument is absolutely precious. CP, if atheists KNEW by means of revelation that scripture was the revealed word of God and absolute truth, do you think we'd be arguing over THIS shit?

I'd like to remind you of the thousands of world religions and the thousands of separate Christian denominations that bicker incessantly on matters of theology and interpretation. I recently had an argument over whether the original Greek word "eunouchizo" translates to "castrate."

[RebelRay]

When the Israelites were made slaves by Pharaoh king of Egypt, they cried out to God for hundreds of years before God delivered them using Moses.