Transcendental argument for the existence of God

The Transcendental Argument for the existence of God (TAG) is a transcendental argument that attempts to prove the existence of God, i. e. it attempts to prove the necessary conditions for the possibility of something (e. g. knowledge) contradict with the proposition that God does not exist.

A version was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his 1763 work The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God. C. S. Lewis's argument from reason is also a kind of transcendental argument.

Most contemporary formulations of a transcendental argument for God have been developed within the framework of Christian presuppositional apologetics and the likes of Cornelius Van Til and Greg Bahnsen.

Transcendental reasoning

"Transcendental" in this case is used as an adjective specifying a type of argument, and not a noun. Transcendental arguments should not be confused with arguments for the existence of something transcendent. Rather, transcendental arguments are arguments about what is necessary for something else to be. The general form can be written as a modus tollens: P1) If Not Q, Then Not P. P2) P C3) therefore Q.

They are also sometimes said to be distinct from standard deductive and inductive forms of reasoning, although this has been disputed, for instance by Anthony Genova and Graham Bird.

The argument

The transcendental argument proceeds as follows:

1. There is knowledge.
2. The existence of God is a necessary condition for the existence of knowledge.
3. Therefore, God exists.

Therefore, the TAG differs from thomistic and evidentialist arguments, which posit the existence of God in order to avoid an infinite regress of causes or motions.

Ash'ari

Medieval Ash'ari Islamic theologians formulated a type of transcendental argument based on the notion that morality, logic, etc. cannot be fully understood apart from revelation and thereby, belief in the Quran and the Islamic truth claims were necessary in order to interpret the external world. For al-Ashari and others, it does not make sense to argue against religion using a priori assumptions about morality or scientific probabilities when these can only be understood in light of divine revelation.

Criticism

Barry Stroud has criticized transcendental arguments, distinguishing between epistemic and metaphysical transcendental arguments. The former says the belief in God (which might be false) is necessary to make sense of the world, while the latter says the existence of God is necessary to make sense of the world. Stroud argues transcendental arguments often only establish the former, but assert the latter.

Presuppositional apologetics

Internet Infidels co-founder Jeffery Jay Lowder has argued that the presuppositional apologetics' version of TAG is fatally flawed for numerous reasons. First, Bahnsen fails to defend the necessity of Christianity instead of the mere sufficiency for the rational justification of the laws of logic, the laws of science, and the laws of morality. In other words, such reasoning affirms the consequent. Second, Bahnsen conflates "atheism" with "materialism" and has really presented an argument against materialism, not an argument for Christianity. Third, Bahnsen believed that the laws of logic, laws of science, and laws of morality are abstract objects, but Christianity arguably underdetermines the relationship between God and abstract objects. Some Christian philosophers, such as Peter van Inwagen, affirm Platonism and the compatibility of God and abstract objects. But other Christian philosophers argue that Platonism is incompatible with divine aseity. William Lane Craig urges Christian philosophers to consider anti-realist theories of abstract objects.

See also

• Transcendental arguments
• Christian apologetics
• Argument from morality

References

Notes

• E. R. Geehan, ed., Jerusalem and Athens: Critical Discussions on the Philosophy and Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1980).
• Greg L. Bahnsen, Van Til's Apologetic: Readings and Analysis (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1998).
• John M. Frame, Cornelius Van Til: An Analysis of His Thought (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1995).
• Steven M. Schlissel, ed., The Standard Bearer: A Festschrift for Greg L. Bahnsen (Nacogdoches: Covenant Media Press, 2002).
• Greg L. Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith". Robert R. Booth, ed. (Nacogdoches: Covenant Media Press, 1996).
• John M. Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God: An Introduction (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1994).
• John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1987).

External links

Articles

• Derrida, Van Til and the Metaphysics of Postmodernism An appraisal of Postmodernism, specifically Deconstruction, in light of Van Til by Jacob Gabriel Hale.

Debates

• "The Great Debate: Does God Exist?" Audio (listen/download format) of a formal debate between Christian Greg Bahnsen and skeptic Gordon Stein from the University of California, Irvine.
• "The Verdict Is In: Assessment of the 1985 Bahnsen-Stein Debate, 'Does God Exist?'" Video (watch/download format) of the Bahnsen-Stein debate, beginning with a technical and rhetorical assessment of Bahnsen's opening statement in which he defends his transcendental argument for God's existence.
• The Martin-Frame Debate A written debate between skeptic Michael Martin and Christian John Frame about the transcendental argument for the existence of God.
• The Drange-Wilson Debate A written debate between skeptic Theodore Drange and Christian Douglas Wilson.
• "Is Non-Christian Thought Futile?" A written debate between Christian Doug Jones and skeptics Keith Parsons and Michael Martin in Antithesis magazine (vol. 2, no. 4).