 |
|
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
 |
||
Toulmin, God and Optimism Posted March 27, 1997 on UUS-L Hi. I'm Bill Bekkenhuis. I am a
Christian who has very recently joined a UU church in Bethlehem, PA. I've participated, of and on, in talk.atheism over the last year and a half and have often heard Christians (and others) present so-called proofs
for the existence of God. I don't have much more regard for those proofs than the atheists on the lists. But a line of thought struck me recently that, while not a proof for God, MIGHT be an argument that someone who
takes an overall optimistic stance towards life might - explicitly or implicitly - need some EQUALLY non-provable reality to ground that optimism. And I can't think of a better place to subject such an argument to
reality checking from a great variety of perspectives than a UU discussion list! This argument is based on Stephen Toulman's model for informal argument. In this model, the data (that which we all agree on) is
connected to the claim (that which is being argued for) by means of a warrant (the mediating bridge between the data and the claim). So, for example, let's say we all agree that Sarah Jones is a Superior Court Judge
in PA. My claim is that Sarah Jones has a law degree and has been admitted to the bar. My warrant is a PA law that says that only those with law degrees who have been admitted to the bar may be Superior Court judges.
Now, my argument. First, the data. I'm going to offer the following statements about life. I do not believe they would be controversial, but I suppose some might disagree:
1. Most people's lives are characterized, to different degrees, by pleasure and suffering. 2. An individual's life is inherently uncertain and temporary. 3. An individual's death is inherently certain and
final (as far as we can know from observation).
Now, my claim. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances (e.g., living with an excruciating and terminal illness, life imprisonment in solitary confinement, and similar no-win, no-escape situations), it is
worthwhile to optimistically engage in the chosen projects of one's life. I guess the crux of the question I am asking is, "how does one warrant this claim given the data?" How does one ground this overall
positive valuation of life? I see only three alternatives. The first is a nihilistic stance that says one CAN'T warrant the claim because the claim is, in fact, not true. The second alternative is the Christian /
Theistic one of warranting the claim via reference to some reality which transcends what we can know from our data. I.e., a claim in some way, shape or form for revelation. Now, while to an atheist or agnostic this
might rank right up there with "no warrant at all", it may not be that easy to dismiss. For example, this warrant might possibly, IMHO, be couched in secular terms which do not make use of the word
"god". For that matter, the warrant may be completely implicit. Yet, to the extent that the warrant is SEPARATE from the data (which is, basically, the totality of our life experience) I would claim it is
similar (at least functionally) to the religious claim for revelation. The third alternative is that one may say the claim is self-evident. That is, it is not a claim at all, it is data. Aside from my own personal
doubts regarding the viability of such a stance, it would have to deal with the issue of otherwise healthy people committing suicide. The claim would certainly not be self-evident to them. Any thoughts? Return to top of page.Return to Apologetics page. Return to Return to The Inclusive Christian |
||
Return to top of page. |
||