Plantinga’s discussion considers science as a quasi-religion and justifies his assertion by observing that the former performs the cognitive function of the latter. In this regard, he argues that an individual’s beliefs regarding the world cannot be explained through natural selection unless such views affect their behavior. Plantinga advances three premises against science, one of which is that humans are incapable of making reliable beliefs. He also claims that natural selection has no ability to form true beliefs because it favors superior behaviors. Accordingly, he suggests that natural selection does not favor true non-adaptive beliefs over the beliefs that are false but adaptive. In this regard, Plantinga believes that the pressures of natural selection diminish the reliability of individual beliefs regarding the world.
As a naturalist, one can criticize Plantinga’s perspectives regarding science by considering the flaws in his premises and by concluding that the arguments that inform those premises are not valid. A look at the three premises that Plantinga presents reveals that they are true, but the discussion leading to the premises is faulty. First, Plantinga argues that God created human beings in his image. However, other than the assertions made in the biblical accounts, there is no verifiable way to ascertain the authenticity of those claims. There is no reason to believe that indeed humans are created in the image of God. Even if one was to assume that they have been created in the image of God, there is no reason to believe that the “image of God” automatically gives one the ability to form beliefs that are reliable. In this regard, it is impossible for a naturalist to believe Plantinga’s second premise with regard to the formation of reliable beliefs about the world.
In the absence of any justification regarding the existence of God or that people are created in his image, Plantinga’s premises are based on conjecture rather than evidence that one can rely on. On the other hand, natural selection is a phenomenon that biologists can prove to be one of the mechanisms through which some things in the biological word came into existence. Subsequently, there is nothing prohibiting one from arguing that natural selection is the only reliable way that people can evolve and have the ability to form reliable beliefs about the world.
The first premise by Plantinga which suggest that there is low probability that humans are capable of forming reliable beliefs about the world seem to be based on personal biases rather than evidence. The provision of probability must be based on some statistical data, which is conspicuously missing from Plantinga’s assertions. As such, one can rightly point out that the initial premise is based on Plantinga’s quest to impose his subjective beliefs in a bid to resolve the gap between religion and science. With regard to the foregoing, a naturalist has no option but to reject Plantinga’s assertions altogether.
References
Plantinga, A. (2007). “Religion and Science”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
