Today:

1
Today

• Reading Quiz 2
• Objections to Plantinga Kretzmann
• Refutation of evidentialism?
• 14 Year Old Theist
• Alternative to evidentialism?

2
Assessing Plantinga Kretzmann

• Two questions
• Has Plantinga successfully refuted
  evidentialism?
• Has Plantinga offered a viable alternative to
  evidentialism?
• Kretzmann thinks the answer to both of these
  questions is NO!

3
Kretzmann

• Kretzmann is an evidentialist. He agrees with the
  Evidentialist Credo
• One ought not believe something upon
  insufficient evidence.
• In fact, Kretzmann thinks that the evidentialist
  credo is an obvious and trivial canon of
  rationality.

4
Refutation of Evidentialism?

• Plantinga claims to have refuted evidentialism.
• His argument was that
• 1. Evidentialism is based on Classical
  Foundationalism.
• 2. Classical Foundationalism should be rejected.
• --------------------------------------------------
  --------
• C. Therefore, Evidentialism should be rejected.

5
Kretzmanns Response

• Kretzmann disagrees with Plantingas claim that
  Evidentialism is based on Classical
  Foundationalism
• First, Plantinga has given no argument for this
  claim.
• Second, it seems, intuitively, as if Plantinga
  has the issue completely reversed.

6
The 14-Year-Old Theist

• Even if Plantingas official refutation of
  evidentialism fails, we might still think
  Plantinga gives us additional reasons to reject
  evidentialism.
• One such reason is contained in Plantingas
  discussion of the 14-year-old theist.
• In this example, it looks as if the 14-year-olds
  belief in God is completely reasonable, even
  though it is based on no evidence whatsoever.

7
Kretzmanns Response

• Kretzmann claims that the 14-year-old theist does
  not present an objection to evidentialism.
• Kretzmann claims that the 14-year-old does have
  evidence (which is sufficient relative to his
  situation) in support of his belief.
• According to Kretzmann, Plantinga has
  misinterpreted the evidentialist credo.

8
Plantingas Misinterpretation

• Kretzman claims that Plantinga misinterprets the
  evidentialist credo in a number of ways.
• Most importantly, Kretzmann thinks that Plantinga
  has interpreted evidence too narrowly.
• According to Kretzmann, Plantinga takes
  evidence to be
• Ulterior evidence, and
• Propositional evidence.

9
Ulterior Propositional

• Propositional Evidence for a belief is another
  fully formed belief you have (that such and such
  is the case).
• Ulterior Evidence for a belief goes beyond the
  belief itself to some other stuff (that such and
  such is the case).

10
Assessing Plantinga

• Two questions
• Has Plantinga successfully refuted
  evidentialism?
• Or, failing that, has Plantinga offered a viable
  alternative to evidentialism?

11
Plantingas Alternative to Evidentialism?

• Kretzmann thinks that Plantinga has failed to
  present a viable alternative to evidentialism.
• This is because Plantinga hasnt presented any
  alternative at all.
• Kretzmann thinks that the grounds that
  Plantinga points to in support of belief in God
  are just another kind of evidence that the
  evidentialist is interested in assessing.