Abstract:For many centuries, philosophers have debated this question: ‘Does God exist?’ Surprisingly, they have paid rather less attention to this distinct – but also very important – question: ‘Would God's existence be a good thing?’ The latter is an axiological question about the difference in value that God's existence would make (or does make) in the actual world. Perhaps the most natural position to take, whether or not one believes in God, is to hold that it would be a very good thing if such a being were to exis… Show more
“…Both of these positions can be subdivided to account for the value impact of God's existence on a particular person (personal scope), or all persons more generally (impersonal scope). Further subdivisions can be made to account for things that would be better in some particular respect (narrow scope), or overall (wide scope) (Kraay & Dragos ) . It has been noted that these categories ‘cut across each other, and generate four varieties of anti‐theism [and also of pro‐theism]’ (Kraay & Dragos, , p. 159): Wide Impersonal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse overall if God exists than if God does not.Wide Impersonal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better overall if God exists than if God does not.Wide Personal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse overall for me if God exists than if God does not.Wide Personal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better overall for me if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Impersonal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse in certain respects if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Impersonal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better in certain respects if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Personal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse in certain respects, for me , if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Personal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better in certain respects, for me , if God exists than if God does not …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Two other possible stances are agnosticism and indifference but I will not discuss these here (Kraay & Dragos, , p. 159).…”
Philosophers have recently wondered whether the value impact of the existence of God on the world would be positive, negative, or neutral.Thus far discussions have distinguished between the value God's impact would have overall, in certain respects, and/or for particular individuals. A commonality amongst the various positions that have been taken up is to focus on the goods and drawbacks associated with both theism and atheism. Goods associated with atheism include things like privacy, independence, and autonomy. I argue that it is better overall and for everyone to prefer a hidden God to no God. This is because it is possible to experience many of the goods attributed to atheism if God is hidden even if they do not really obtain, while also gaining many of the additional goods connected to theism. This amounts to a new solution to the problem of divine hiddenness: God might hide in order to increase or maximize the axiological value of the world. K E Y W O R D S axiology of theism, divine hiddenness, pro-theism
“…Both of these positions can be subdivided to account for the value impact of God's existence on a particular person (personal scope), or all persons more generally (impersonal scope). Further subdivisions can be made to account for things that would be better in some particular respect (narrow scope), or overall (wide scope) (Kraay & Dragos ) . It has been noted that these categories ‘cut across each other, and generate four varieties of anti‐theism [and also of pro‐theism]’ (Kraay & Dragos, , p. 159): Wide Impersonal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse overall if God exists than if God does not.Wide Impersonal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better overall if God exists than if God does not.Wide Personal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse overall for me if God exists than if God does not.Wide Personal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better overall for me if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Impersonal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse in certain respects if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Impersonal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better in certain respects if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Personal Anti‐Theism: It would be far worse in certain respects, for me , if God exists than if God does not.Narrow Personal Pro‐Theism: It would be far better in certain respects, for me , if God exists than if God does not …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Two other possible stances are agnosticism and indifference but I will not discuss these here (Kraay & Dragos, , p. 159).…”
Philosophers have recently wondered whether the value impact of the existence of God on the world would be positive, negative, or neutral.Thus far discussions have distinguished between the value God's impact would have overall, in certain respects, and/or for particular individuals. A commonality amongst the various positions that have been taken up is to focus on the goods and drawbacks associated with both theism and atheism. Goods associated with atheism include things like privacy, independence, and autonomy. I argue that it is better overall and for everyone to prefer a hidden God to no God. This is because it is possible to experience many of the goods attributed to atheism if God is hidden even if they do not really obtain, while also gaining many of the additional goods connected to theism. This amounts to a new solution to the problem of divine hiddenness: God might hide in order to increase or maximize the axiological value of the world. K E Y W O R D S axiology of theism, divine hiddenness, pro-theism
“…As Kraay and Dragos (2013) point out, it is a logical truth that God cannot allow any gratuitous evil. An all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good creator would not and could not create a world with senseless or avoidable suffering.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is a world where we are the subordinates of a moral superior, a superior that deserves our allegiance and worship…The idea is that God's existence is logically incompatible with the full realization of certain values. Thus a world in which God exists is a world where we would not be the moral equals of all other rational beings-equal members of a kingdom of ends 1 For work on this issue, see Kahane (2011); Kahane (2012); Kraay and Dragos (2013);and Mawson (2012). 2 Russell and Camus are two Non-Theists who suggested that the world might be better at least in certain respects if God existed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A more recent example is Tooley (2009: 311): "I also think that it would be very good if it turned out, contrary to all probability, that God did exist, for while the existence of such a deity would not entail that this was the best of all possible worlds, it would ensure that the world was very good indeed." 3 See Kraay and Dragos (2013) for a taxonomy of the different positions one might take on the axiological question.…”
Abstract:Some recent work in philosophy of religion addresses what can be called the "axiological question," i.e., regardless of whether God exists, would it be good or bad if God exists? Would the existence of God make the world a better or a worse place? Call the view that the existence of God would make the world a better place "Pro-Theism." We argue that Pro-Theism is not implausible, and moreover, many Theists, at least, (often implicitly) think that it is true. That is, many Theists think that various good outcomes would arise if Theism is true. We then discuss work in cognitive science concerning human cognitive bias, before discussing two noteworthy attempts to show that at least some religious beliefs arise because of cognitive bias: Hume's, and Draper's and Nichols's. We then argue that, as a result of certain cognitive biases that result when good outcomes might be at stake, Pro-Theism causes many Theists to inflate the epistemic probability that God exists, and as a result, Theists should lower the probability they assign to God's existence. Finally, based our arguments, we develop a novel objection to Pascal's wager.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
