The Existence of God

Beginning with a discussion of Bayes' Probability Theorem, inductive reasoning, and the nature and justification of explanation, Swinburne goes on to posit the intrinsic probability of theism as being the explanation for life, the universe, and everything. He does this by distinguishing between scientific and personal explanations and finding no satisfactory scientific explanation for the universe. He then applies Ockham's Razor to the personal explanations, and finds the God of Judaism, Christianity,and Islam to be the most intrisically probable personal explanation. From the beginning of intrinsic probability, Swinburne then considers and assesses the values of various arguments to theism. He dismisses some out of hand, such as Pascal's Wager and the argument from morality, and assigns weight to the other arguments. He finds good cosmological and teleological arguments, as well as good arguments from consciousness and providence. He then addresses the strongest argument against theism: the Problem of Evil, and concludes the study with arguments from history, miracles, and religious experience. The balance of probability is that it is somewhat more likely that God exists than otherwise. Swinburne's dismissal of morality as a good argument to the existence of God is somewhat out of tune with his endorsement of the beauty of the universe as a good argument to the existence of God. Morality, understood as spiritual beauty, is at least as good (or bad) an argument to God as physical beauty. Swinburne's argument against the Problem of Evil is probably the weakest portion of the book. Spiritual evil is easily handled. If you're going to give humans free choice, then some of them are going to choose evil. But the argument that natural evil (in the form of earthquakes, etc.) is necessary so that humans can display their good character is, to say the least, weak. A better explanation seems to be that a universe of good without evil is a logical impossibility (like a square circle or a four-sided triangle), and that even an omnipotent God cannot create a logical impossibility. The Appendices speak to the Trinity, the argument to design, and Plantinga's critique of evolution. The validity of the doctrine of the Trinity should not be judged solely on Swinburne's abbreviated explanation. He wrote a complete book on the subject, "The Christian God," which should be consulted before dismissing the arguments he makes here. Having said that, his short discussion of the Trinity is not as intellectually satisfying as other portions of the book, and it sounds very much like the position of Michael Servetus, who got himself burned at the stake for voicing similar views during the Reformation. Swinburne's analysis of Plantinga's critique of evolution is interesting. Plantinga seemingly argues that evolution is impossible without the directing hand of God, a position similar to Bergson's position in "Creative Evolution." (Bergson argued for

Swinburne is perhaps the leading figure in contemporary natural theology and _The Existence of God_ is his most important work. In it, he employs the tools of modern confirmation theory to develop a sustained argument for theism.Swinburne views himself as part of the long tradition of Christian evidentialism that seeks to give rational reasons for belief in God. However, unlike, say, Anselm, Aquinas, or Paley, Swinburne thinks that every deductive argument for theism rests on premises that could rationally be rejected by the skeptic. Thus his arguments are inductive; he treats theism as a large-scale explanatory theory on a par with, say, quantum theory or Newton's theory of motion. He takes several classical arguments (the cosmological and teleological arguments, the argument from religious experience, etc.) and recasts them in terms of Bayesian probability theory, arguing that each of them confirms God's existence, i.e. raises the probability that He exists.This is, I think, a brilliant strategy: it means that Swinburne's case does not rest on the cogency of any one argument and that none of his arguments depends on such controversial grounds as the principle of sufficient reaon or the claim that existence is a "real predicate." Rather, his premises generally reflect obvious features of the world (such as its existence and complexity) together with a set of widely accepted principles of scientific reasoning. Moreover, he establishes a rational framework applicable to any inductive arguments for theism, making it easier for other philosophers of religion to offer their own inductive arguments. (I'm surprised more of them have not done so!)Of course, the book is open to criticism. Many of Swinburne's claims are idiosyncratic, for instance, his claim that at every moment God chooses to exist at the subsequent moment. But nothing critical rests on these oddities. More vexing is the dreaded "problem of the priors" besetting Bayesian reasoning in general. His assignment of probabilities to certain propositions might be unsatisfying to the skeptic, to say the least. But here Swinburne is aided by the modesty of his goal: he merely aims to show that it is more likely that God exists than that He does not. His assigments of priors, I think, almost always errs on the side of caution. Presuppositionalists, Wittgensteinians, fundamentalists, and other fideists will hate this book, as will knee-jerk atheists. Thinking atheists and theists who value reason will appreciate it, even when they do not accept its conclusions. All should read it.

this is by far the best collection of arguments for the existence of God put forward by one author in one volume. swinburne is absolutely fair; perhaps too fair. if anything, he understates his case. at any rate, his careful and absolutely rigorous analytic assesment of various arguments for and against the existence of God is a treat for the reader.but the book does have a severe flaw: it gives no attention to an aesthetic appeal to the existence of God. you almost feel, after you've read this book, like saying 'okay, there is good reason to believe in God, but so what?'...almost as though the existence or non-existence of God has no existential implications. (mark wynn's GOD AND GOODNESS is helpful in this area). yet this shouldn't detract from the overall value of the book. i simply wish for it to be noted that swinburne's arguments are more persuasive, atleast for me, when placed alongside an existential and aesthetic approach. but such an approach cannot stand without a rigorous analytic assesment of the classical issues, and it is not likely that a better such assesment can be found than in what swinburne here offers. an absolutely essential addition to any philosophy of religion bookshelf and any comprehensive argument for the existence of God, i highly recommend it to the atheist, seeker, and theist. enjoy the book.

Swinburne's book adopts the strategy of defending theism as the best explanation for a wide range of phenomena. By doing so, Swinburne brings to the philosophy of religion a new and innovative epistemology, one which focuses on the importance explanation plays in our quest for knowledge. As a result, his defense of theism is clearly the best out there. Much of _The Existence of God_ is devoted to the topic of explanation, making this book a key text not only for those working in philosophy of religion but in epistemology and philosophy of science as well. Swinburne's methodology is, I think, clearly on the right track; and as a result there is little doubt that his arguments for theism are powerful and deserve serious consideration. I do not, however, find Swinburne's defense of theism to be successful. Swinburne focuses too much on simplicity as what determines the best explanation. If we take into consideration other elements of good explanations, such as explanatory depth, Swinburne may not be able to make many of the arguments he does. Also, many of Swinburne's arguments are based on what God has *reasons* to bring about; a consideration which may simply beg the question against the atheist. Swinburne's main critic, J.L. Mackie, says nothing about explanation in his response, _The Miracle of Theism_, and thus lets Swinburne get away without being challenged at the heart of his defense. However, despite its flaws, Swinburne's book is the most powerful use to date of the new explanationist methodology applied to the question of God's existence. No one interested in this issue can afford to pass this work up.

This book is the second volume in a trilogy that began with _The Coherence of Theism_ (1977) and was concluded with _Faith and Reason_ (1981). In this work, Swinburne attempts to construct a series of inductive arguments for the existence of God. His arguments, which are somewhat tendentious and rely upon the imputation of late 20th century western Christian values and aesthetics to a God which is supposedly as simple as can be conceived, were decisively rejected in Mackie's _The Miracle of Theism_. In the revised edition of _The Existence of God_, Swinburne attempts to rebut Mackie. The best defense of theism available