2. ANNOUNCEMENTS Dr. Tim McGrew Historicity of the Gospels Nov 11 th Leadership Positions Available MSC Tabling Positions Available

4. CONNECT WITH US ~facebook.com/RatioChristiTAMU ~facebook.com/RatioChristiTAMU ~http://RC.tamu.edu ~http://RC.tamu.edu ~@RC_TAMU ~@RC_TAMU Visit Us OnlineVisit Us Online

6. THE EVOLUTIONARY ARGUMENT AGAINST NATURALISM Ratio Christi Texas A&M

7. BACKGROUND Various formulations by various peopleVarious formulations by various people C.S. Lewis, MiraclesC.S. Lewis, Miracles Richard Taylor, MetaphysicsRichard Taylor, MetaphysicsOthers Formulated by Alvin Plantinga in 1993, Warrant and Proper Function

8. DEFINITIONS Defeater Belief that entails the falsity of another beliefBelief that entails the falsity of another belief Reliability of Cognitive Faculties (R)Reliability of Cognitive Faculties (R) The trustworthiness of human thinking to arrive at truthThe trustworthiness of human thinking to arrive at truth Naturalism (N)Naturalism (N) The natural universe is all that existsThe natural universe is all that exists Evolution (E)Evolution (E) The diversity of life is attributed to genetic mutation and change over time

9. IMPORTANT NOTES This is not an argument against evolutionThis is not an argument against evolution Presupposes the truth of naturalism and evolution, then points out a self-contradiction of sorts

10. ARGUMENT 1) The probability of R given N and E is low 1) Believing N and E and seeing the truth of (1) produces a defeater for R 1) A defeater for R is a universal defeater i.e. something that can defeat all beliefs (including N&E) 1) Therefore holding N and E is self defeating R – reliability of cognitionR – reliability of cognition N – naturalismN – naturalism E – evolutionE – evolution

11. PREMISE #1 The probability of R given N and E is lowThe probability of R given N and E is low This means that evolution and naturalism are not likely to produce reliable cognitive faculties Evolution produces positive results, not truthEvolution produces positive results, not truth The Problem of the Four FsThe Problem of the Four Fs R – reliability of cognitionR – reliability of cognition N – naturalismN – naturalism E – evolutionE – evolution

12. THE 4 “F”S Evolution selects for what benefits the 4FsEvolution selects for what benefits the 4FsFeedingFightingFleeingFertilizing R – reliability of cognitionR – reliability of cognition N – naturalismN – naturalism E – evolutionE – evolution

13. PREMISE #2 Believing N and E produces a defeater for RBelieving N and E produces a defeater for R Since R is not likely given N and E, we have a good reason to disbelieve R R – reliability of cognitionR – reliability of cognition N – naturalismN – naturalism E – evolutionE – evolution

14. PREMISE #3 A defeater for R is a universal defeaterA defeater for R is a universal defeater If we cannot trust our cognitive faculties, we cannot reliably reason our way to true conclusions Therefore any belief that causes us to doubt R should also cause us to doubt all other beliefs, including Evolution and Naturalism R – reliability of cognitionR – reliability of cognition N – naturalismN – naturalism E – evolutionE – evolution

15. CONCLUSION Therefore holding N and E is self defeatingTherefore holding N and E is self defeating If the result of N and E is that we doubt everything we know, we have good reason to disbelieve either N or E R – reliability of cognitionR – reliability of cognition N – naturalismN – naturalism E – evolutionE – evolution

16. IMPLICATIONS Again, not an argument against evolutionAgain, not an argument against evolution The Christian is free to attribute diversity of life to direct creation by God or evolution or some mixture The Naturalist does not have the explanatory resources to support Reliable Cognitive Faculties

17. DARWIN’S DOUBT Darwin recognized the problem with cognitive faculties given naturalism and evolution. But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind? — Charles Darwin, to William Graham 3 July 1881

18. QUESTIONS?