Proof That Presuppositional Apologetics Cannot Produce Valid Arguments

Presuppositional apologists make the following two claims:

1. All valid arguments do not beg the question.

2. All knowledge presupposes the existence of God.

Atheism may here be defined as any explicit or implicit denial of the existence of God.

Thus, if one presupposes the existence of God in an argument, one begs the question against atheism.

Now consider that all valid arguments presuppose knowledge.

Combining this with the second claim above, we find that all valid arguments presuppose the existence of God.

Therefore, all valid arguments beg the question against atheism.

Therefore, all valid arguments beg the question.

This contradicts the first claim. Therefore, at least one of the two claims is invalid.

To avoid contradiction, presuppositional apologists must abandon one of their two claims. They must either claim that valid arguments can beg the question, or they must claim that there is knowledge which does not presuppose the existence of God.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Argument For Compatibilism

Sam Harris and the Moral Realism/Moral Relativism Myth

Luke Skywalker and Rey: Comparing Character Arcs