Are Design Beliefs Safe?
Recently, Del Ratzsch proposed a new version of the design argument. He argues that belief in a designer is often formed non-inferentially, much like perceptual beliefs, rather than formed by explicit reasoning. Ratzsch traces his argument back to Thomas Reid (1710-1796) who argues that beliefs form...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sciendo
2019-02-01
|
| Series: | Studia Humana |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.2478/sh-2019-0005 |
| _version_ | 1818355974759514112 |
|---|---|
| author | Van Eyghen Hans |
| author_facet | Van Eyghen Hans |
| author_sort | Van Eyghen Hans |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Recently, Del Ratzsch proposed a new version of the design argument. He argues that belief in a designer is often formed non-inferentially, much like perceptual beliefs, rather than formed by explicit reasoning. Ratzsch traces his argument back to Thomas Reid (1710-1796) who argues that beliefs formed in this way are also justified. In this paper, I investigate whether design beliefs that are formed in this way can be regarded as knowledge. For this purpose, I look closer to recent scientific study of how design beliefs are formed. I argue that the science strongly suggest that people easily form false beliefs. As a result, design beliefs can only constitute knowledge if subjects have additional reasons or evidence for design. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T19:49:51Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-bf6d4784a77248dd8c381909f672fe5c |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2299-0518 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T19:49:51Z |
| publishDate | 2019-02-01 |
| publisher | Sciendo |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Studia Humana |
| spelling | doaj.art-bf6d4784a77248dd8c381909f672fe5c2022-12-21T23:33:28ZengSciendoStudia Humana2299-05182019-02-0181758310.2478/sh-2019-0005sh-2019-0005Are Design Beliefs Safe?Van Eyghen Hans0VUAmsterdam, The NetherlandsRecently, Del Ratzsch proposed a new version of the design argument. He argues that belief in a designer is often formed non-inferentially, much like perceptual beliefs, rather than formed by explicit reasoning. Ratzsch traces his argument back to Thomas Reid (1710-1796) who argues that beliefs formed in this way are also justified. In this paper, I investigate whether design beliefs that are formed in this way can be regarded as knowledge. For this purpose, I look closer to recent scientific study of how design beliefs are formed. I argue that the science strongly suggest that people easily form false beliefs. As a result, design beliefs can only constitute knowledge if subjects have additional reasons or evidence for design.https://doi.org/10.2478/sh-2019-0005design argumentcognitive science of religionsafety condition for knowledge |
| spellingShingle | Van Eyghen Hans Are Design Beliefs Safe? Studia Humana design argument cognitive science of religion safety condition for knowledge |
| title | Are Design Beliefs Safe? |
| title_full | Are Design Beliefs Safe? |
| title_fullStr | Are Design Beliefs Safe? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Are Design Beliefs Safe? |
| title_short | Are Design Beliefs Safe? |
| title_sort | are design beliefs safe |
| topic | design argument cognitive science of religion safety condition for knowledge |
| url | https://doi.org/10.2478/sh-2019-0005 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT vaneyghenhans aredesignbeliefssafe |