Reformed epistemology
In the philosophy of religion, Reformed epistemology is a school of philosophical thought concerning the nature of knowledge (epistemology) as it applies to religious beliefs. The central proposition of Reformed epistemology is that beliefs can be justified by more than evidence alone, contrary to the positions of evidentialism, which argues that while non-evidential belief may be beneficial, it violates some epistemic duty. Central to Reformed epistemology is the proposition that belief in God may be “properly basic” and not need to be inferred from other truths to be rationally warranted. William Lane Craig describes Reformed epistemology as “One of the most significant developments in contemporary religious epistemology … which directly assaults the evidentialist construal of rationality.”
Reformed epistemology was so named because it represents a continuation of the 16th-century Reformed theology of John Calvin, who postulated a sensus divinitatis, an innate divine awareness of God’s presence. More recent influences on Reformed epistemology are found in philosopher Nicholas Wolterstorff’s Reason within the Bounds of Religion, published in 1976, and Alvin Plantinga’s “Reason and Belief in God”, published in 1983.
Although Plantinga’s Reformed epistemology developed over three decades, it was not fully articulated until 1993 with the publication of two books in an eventual trilogy: Warrant: The Current Debate, and Warrant and Proper Function. The third in the series was Warranted Christian Belief, published in 2000. Other prominent defenders of Reformed epistemology include William Lane Craig, William Alston, Michael C. Rea, and Michael Bergmann.
The argument from a proper basis is an ontological argument for the existence of God related to fideism. Alvin Plantinga argued that belief in God is a properly basic belief, and so no basis for belief in God is necessary.
Reformed epistemology is a philosophical approach arguing that religious belief, particularly belief in God, can be rational and justified even without relying on evidence or arguments. It posits that religious belief can be “properly basic,” meaning it can be accepted without needing to be inferred from other beliefs. This contrasts with evidentialism, which holds that a belief is justified only if it’s supported by sufficient evidence.
Key Concepts:
- Properly Basic Beliefs: Reformed epistemology suggests that some beliefs are foundational and don’t require further justification. In the context of religious belief, this means that belief in God can be rationally held without needing to be proven by evidence or arguments.
- Sensus Divinitatis: This term, central to reformed epistemology, refers to an innate capacity or sense that allows humans to be aware of God’s presence.
- Proper Functioning of Cognitive Faculties: Reformed epistemology suggests that if one’s cognitive faculties (like perception and reason) are functioning properly and aimed at truth, then belief formed through these faculties, including religious belief, can be rational.
Historical Context:
- Reformed epistemology draws inspiration from the Reformed theological tradition, particularly the work of John Calvin and his concept of the “sensus divinitatis”.
- Modern proponents include philosophers like Alvin Plantinga and Nicholas Wolterstorff.
How it works:
Reformed epistemology suggests that a belief in God can be warranted in the same way that other beliefs, like beliefs about the external world or the existence of other minds, are warranted. If a person’s cognitive faculties are functioning properly and aimed at truth when they form a belief in God, then that belief is considered rational, even if it’s not based on evidence or arguments.
Example:
Imagine someone standing in a beautiful natural landscape and experiencing a sense of awe and wonder. If they then form the belief that God created this beauty, reformed epistemology suggests that this belief could be rational, even without further evidence or argument, as long as the person’s cognitive faculties are functioning properly in that situation.
Criticisms:
Reformed epistemology has faced criticism, including:
- The Great Pumpkin Objection: This objection questions whether reformed epistemology allows for the possibility of holding any belief as properly basic, including false or irrational ones.
- The need for independent confirmation: Some argue that even if a belief is properly basic, it still needs some kind of external confirmation to be considered justified.
- Religious disagreement: The existence of widespread religious disagreement raises questions about the reliability of the “sensus divinitatis” and the rationality of holding conflicting religious beliefs.
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://iep.utm.edu/ref-epis/
[2] https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phc3.12361
[3] https://emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2019/09/28/reformed-epistemology/
[4] https://capturingchristianity.com/the-great-pumpkin-objection-to-reformed-epistemology/
[5] wikipedia/en/Reformed_epistemology
[6] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21692327.2020.1753095