Reasonable Faith Podcast
Swinburne vs. Dawkins on the Mystery of Existence Part Two
Sep 18, 2023
Debate continues on whether a scientifically minded person would believe in God as the ultimate cause. They discuss the misconception about simplicity as the sole criterion for evaluating theory. Swinburne argues that objects with partial understanding in science can be an analogy for the existence of God. The debate explores whether God's simplicity is compatible with His ability to read billions of people's thoughts at the same time.
26:07
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- Simplicity is not the most important criterion in scientific explanation, rather explanatory power and other virtues like explanatory scope and plausibility hold more significance.
- God can be considered a remarkably simple entity as an unembodied mind with no parts, and an entity can still be simple despite having complex effects, just like subatomic particles.
Deep dives
The Importance of Explanatory Power
Dawkins wrongly assumes that simplicity is the most important criterion in scientific explanation. Explanatory power is more significant, as scientists consider other virtues like explanatory scope, plausibility, and ad hocness. Swinburne focuses on explanatory power and provides examples of subatomic particles as simple entities with complex effects.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
