Argumentacja w dyskusji teistyczno-ateistycznej
Abstract
Argumentation within the Theism – Atheism Discussion
The goal of this paper is to find answers to two questions: What are the limitations of argumentation and what is the role of argumentation within a theistic (or respectively atheistic) discussion, in a broader sense, within a worldview discussion? The worldview is construed as the set of the most prominent human beliefs concerning the problem of the existence of God, the importance of religion, the justification of fundamental moral rules, etc.
Two kinds of scheme can be distinguished:
(1) S gets to know an amount of valuable argumentations within worldview discussions concerning the existence of God etc. During the discussions theists deliver correct argumentations for their doctrine and persuade atheists. S concludes that religious faith (i.e. faith that God exists etc.) is rational. S starts to believe in God or – if S already believes in God – then the faith of S is reinforced by the argumentation.
(2) S gets to know an amount of valuable argumentations within worldview discussions concerning the existence of God etc. In the discussions atheists correctly criticise theistic argumentations and persuade theists. S concludes that a religious faith is not rational. S does not reach any satisfactory conception to believe in God or – if S already believes in God – then S stops believing.
Such discussions seem to be based on the scheme of an inductive inference (reasoning). In consequence a theistic (or respectively atheistic) worldview can be acknowledged as true only with some confidence, but not with a complete degree of it. If someone acquired his/her worldview according to such an inductive scheme, then that person’s worldview would not be relatively stable. But, in fact, a theistic worldview (a religious attitude) is relatively stable. So it means that such a view (attitude) generally is not acquired by the inductive scheme of argumentation, but in a different way.
The role of argumentation within a worldview discussion is to persuade someone about the importance of that worldview. If someone already accepts such a worldview, then the role of argumentation is to reinforce that belief. The use of a rational argumentation within a worldview discussion helps also to avoid fideism.
Keywords: faith, belief, truth, justification, inference (reasoning), argumentation, persuasion, discussion, worldview.
The goal of this paper is to find answers to two questions: What are the limitations of argumentation and what is the role of argumentation within a theistic (or respectively atheistic) discussion, in a broader sense, within a worldview discussion? The worldview is construed as the set of the most prominent human beliefs concerning the problem of the existence of God, the importance of religion, the justification of fundamental moral rules, etc.
Two kinds of scheme can be distinguished:
(1) S gets to know an amount of valuable argumentations within worldview discussions concerning the existence of God etc. During the discussions theists deliver correct argumentations for their doctrine and persuade atheists. S concludes that religious faith (i.e. faith that God exists etc.) is rational. S starts to believe in God or – if S already believes in God – then the faith of S is reinforced by the argumentation.
(2) S gets to know an amount of valuable argumentations within worldview discussions concerning the existence of God etc. In the discussions atheists correctly criticise theistic argumentations and persuade theists. S concludes that a religious faith is not rational. S does not reach any satisfactory conception to believe in God or – if S already believes in God – then S stops believing.
Such discussions seem to be based on the scheme of an inductive inference (reasoning). In consequence a theistic (or respectively atheistic) worldview can be acknowledged as true only with some confidence, but not with a complete degree of it. If someone acquired his/her worldview according to such an inductive scheme, then that person’s worldview would not be relatively stable. But, in fact, a theistic worldview (a religious attitude) is relatively stable. So it means that such a view (attitude) generally is not acquired by the inductive scheme of argumentation, but in a different way.
The role of argumentation within a worldview discussion is to persuade someone about the importance of that worldview. If someone already accepts such a worldview, then the role of argumentation is to reinforce that belief. The use of a rational argumentation within a worldview discussion helps also to avoid fideism.
Keywords: faith, belief, truth, justification, inference (reasoning), argumentation, persuasion, discussion, worldview.
Pełny tekst:
PDFAdministracja Cytowania | Strony czasopism