Abstract:
Alvin Plantinga is an influential philosopher of religion and a contemporary thinker who was raised in the tradition of analytic philosophy and is considered one of the founders of 'Reformed Epistemology'. In the field of the relationship between science and religion, by accepting the model of complementarity and the direct interaction of science and religion, Plantinga has proposed the interesting and thought-provoking theory of 'Augustinian Science'. In this article, we examine the theory of evolution from the perspective of Professor Plantinga. By rejecting the view of specialists who believe that the theory of evolution is certain based on empirical evidence, Plantinga believes that although parts of Darwinian biological evolution are weak, this theory is epistemologically possible; however, the a priori probability of this theory is high based on naturalism and low based on Christian theism and empirical evidence. Plantinga believes that the theory of evolution in itself is not incompatible with order, although the combination of this theory with naturalism entails such a result. He claims that there is a warranted entailment between evolution and naturalism. Therefore, naturalists who need Darwinism to provide a causal explanation attempt to make evolution appear as the only acceptable scientific theory, while the link between evolution and naturalism itself is contradictory and irrational. In Plantinga's view, a traditional believer may affirm some forms of evolution, but accepts only that form which is guided and coordinated by God.
Machine summary:
By rejecting the view of specialists who believe that the theory of evolution is certain given the empirical evidence, Plantinga believes that Darwinian biological evolution is epistemologically possible, even though some parts of it are weak (Plantinga, 1997), and the a priori probability of this theory based on naturalism is high, while based on Christian theism and empirical evidence, it is low.
In response to those who claim that the theory of evolution shows or at least supports the view that humanity is not the product of a rational order and is not pre-designed, Plantinga says that these specialists have reached this conclusion by embracing philosophical naturalism.
Because when philosophical naturalism is accompanied by the claim that our cognitive faculties through the function Plantinga believes that the reason that exists for hypothetical beings is also true for us, and when we apply this reason to ourselves and our cognitive faculties, suppose that we have accepted naturalism and evolution and we have no way to determine the probability (R, the reliability of cognitive faculties).
, 4) Therefore, belief in naturalism and evolution()EN is irrational; because the probability that our cognitive faculties are reliable is low or mysterious, and whoever accepts()EN has a defeater for R and any other belief like B that they might believe in, but B itself might be()EN, so whoever accepts()EN has a defeater for()EN, a reason to doubt it or to be agnostic about it.
(
, 
, 
)
