Predicting Divine Action.

Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel) Pub Date : 2018-01-01 Epub Date: 2018-02-15 DOI:10.1007/s11406-018-9947-z
Hugh Burling
{"title":"Predicting Divine Action.","authors":"Hugh Burling","doi":"10.1007/s11406-018-9947-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article sets out a formal procedure for determining the probability that God would do a specified action, using our moral knowledge and understanding God as a perfect being. To motivate developing the procedure I show how natural theology - design arguments, the problems of evil and divine hiddenness, and the treatment of miracles and religious experiences as evidence for claims about God - routinely appeals to judgments involving these probabilities. To set out the procedure, I describe a decision-theoretic model for practical reasoning which is deontological so as to appeal to theists, but is designed not to presuppose any substantive moral commitments, and to accommodate normative and non-normative uncertainty. Then I explain how judgments about what we probably ought to do can be transformed into judgments about what God would probably do. Then I show the usefulness of the procedure by describing how it can help structure discussions in natural theology and a-theology, and how it offers an attractive alternative to 'skeptical theism'.</p>","PeriodicalId":74436,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","volume":"46 4","pages":"785-801"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11406-018-9947-z","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-018-9947-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article sets out a formal procedure for determining the probability that God would do a specified action, using our moral knowledge and understanding God as a perfect being. To motivate developing the procedure I show how natural theology - design arguments, the problems of evil and divine hiddenness, and the treatment of miracles and religious experiences as evidence for claims about God - routinely appeals to judgments involving these probabilities. To set out the procedure, I describe a decision-theoretic model for practical reasoning which is deontological so as to appeal to theists, but is designed not to presuppose any substantive moral commitments, and to accommodate normative and non-normative uncertainty. Then I explain how judgments about what we probably ought to do can be transformed into judgments about what God would probably do. Then I show the usefulness of the procedure by describing how it can help structure discussions in natural theology and a-theology, and how it offers an attractive alternative to 'skeptical theism'.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预言神的行动。
这篇文章列出了一个正式的程序来确定上帝会做一个特定行为的概率,使用我们的道德知识和理解上帝是一个完美的存在。为了推动这个过程的发展,我展示了自然神学——设计论证,邪恶和神性隐藏的问题,以及将奇迹和宗教经历作为关于上帝的主张的证据——是如何习惯性地诉诸于涉及这些可能性的判断的。为了阐明这个过程,我描述了一个实践推理的决策理论模型,它是义务论的,以吸引有神论者,但它的设计不预设任何实质性的道德承诺,并适应规范性和非规范性的不确定性。然后我解释了,关于我们可能应该做什么的判断,如何转化为关于上帝可能会做什么的判断。然后,我通过描述它如何帮助构建自然神学和a-神学的讨论,以及它如何为“怀疑有神论”提供一个有吸引力的替代方案,来展示这个过程的有用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How AI Systems Can Be Blameworthy. W. Matthews Grant's Dual Sources Account and Ultimate Responsibility. Taxation in the COVID-19 Pandemic: to Pay or Not to Pay. The Value of Knowledge and Other Epistemic Standings: A Case for Epistemic Pluralism. The Conditional Analysis of the Agentive Modals: a Reply to Mandelkern et al.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1