27/04/2022
When I (Dave) identify myself as a theist in the company of an atheist, I often find myself confronted with a demand to present evidence in favor of God's existence. Now as an apologist and an evidentialist, you'd think that I would leap at the opportunity to present an evidential case for theism. And, indeed, that is exactly what I used to do. But I no longer start here and I urge other apologists not to start here either. Why?
Well when I would present my evidential case, I found that very often the atheist would reject my case out of hand. This was owing to the fact that we had very different methods of evaluating evidence.
I have found that the dialetic between theists and atheists often assumes that people just naturally know how to evaluate evidence. But I submit that this assumption is not entirely true. There are specific criteria and methods involved in evaluating and interpreting evidence. And it takes some time and effort to learn them. Most people don't spend their time honing their critical thinking skills. Most have never even taken a course in logic. So we should be wary about assuming that people are just naturally going to be able to properly make the right inferences when presented with evidence.
So how do we overcome this? Well ultimately there is no substitute for years of learning to think critically. But one can certainly help their interlocutor to ask the right questions. So, for example, when asked to provide evidence for theism, rather than jump right into the Kalam cosmological argument, it may be more helpful to ask what would count as evidence for theism. Theists will often find that atheists are only willing to admit scientific evidence. And while there may or may not be scientific evidence which supports theism, it may be more productive to show that such a standard of evidence has radically skeptical consequences. Not only will this level the dialetical playing field, but it may also open the skeptic up to all sorts of new evidence for theism which he had not yet considered.
The bottom line is this: people are not just born with the ability to make proper inferences and we should not assume that they have been trained to do so. Before ever making an evidential case for theism (or anything else) make sure that there is a common standard of evidence and an agreed-upon method for evaluating it. Without that in place, you will never be able to make progress.
