- Title Pages
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- Introduction
- (A) The Argument from Intentionality (or Aboutness)
- (B) The Argument from Collections
- (C) The Argument from (Natural) Numbers
- (D) The Argument from Counterfactuals
- (E) The Argument from Physical Constants
- (F) The Naïve Teleological Argument
- (H) The Ontological Argument
- (I) Why Is There Anything at All?
- (J) The Argument from Positive Epistemic Status
- (K) The Argument from the Confluence of Proper Function and Reliability
- (L) The Argument from Simplicity and (M) The Argument from Induction
- (N) The Putnamian Argument (the Argument from the Rejection of Global Skepticism) [also, (O) The Argument from Reference, and (K) The Argument from the Confluence of Proper Function and Reliability]
- (N) The Putnamian Argument, (O) The Argument from Reference, and (P) The Kripke-Wittgenstein Argument from Plus and Quus
- (Q) The General Argument from Intuition
- (R) Moral Arguments (actually R1 to Rn)
- (R*)The Argument from Evil
- (S) The Argument from Colors and Flavors
- (T) The Argument from Love and (Y) The Argument from the Meaning of Life
- (U) The Mozart Argument and (V) The Argument from Play and Enjoyment
- (W) Arguments from Providence and from Miracles
- (X) C.S. Lewis’s Argument from Nostalgia
- (Z) The Argument from (A) to (Y)
- The <i>Kalam</i> Cosmological Argument
- The Argument from Possibility
- The Necessity of Sufficiency
- Afterword*
- Appendix Plantinga’s Original “Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Arguments”
- Index
The Argument from (A) to (Y)
The Argument from (A) to (Y)
The Argument from So Many Arguments
- Chapter:
- (Z) The Argument from (A) to (Y)
- Source:
- Two Dozen (or so) Arguments for God
- Author(s):
Ted Poston
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
This chapter provides a Bayesian model of strength of evidence in cases in which there are multiple items of independent evidence. The author uses this Bayesian model to evaluate the strength of evidence for theism if, as Plantinga claims, there are two dozen or so arguments for theism. The model turns questions of the overall strength of multiple arguments into a simple summation problem. Moreover, it provides a clear framework for advancing questions about how relationships between the arguments bear on the overall strength of evidence for theism. The Bayesian model developed in this chapter has a wide-range of applications for modeling strength of evidence in cumulative case arguments.
Keywords: Bayesian, cumulative case arguments, theism, evidence, Plantinga
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
- Title Pages
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- Introduction
- (A) The Argument from Intentionality (or Aboutness)
- (B) The Argument from Collections
- (C) The Argument from (Natural) Numbers
- (D) The Argument from Counterfactuals
- (E) The Argument from Physical Constants
- (F) The Naïve Teleological Argument
- (H) The Ontological Argument
- (I) Why Is There Anything at All?
- (J) The Argument from Positive Epistemic Status
- (K) The Argument from the Confluence of Proper Function and Reliability
- (L) The Argument from Simplicity and (M) The Argument from Induction
- (N) The Putnamian Argument (the Argument from the Rejection of Global Skepticism) [also, (O) The Argument from Reference, and (K) The Argument from the Confluence of Proper Function and Reliability]
- (N) The Putnamian Argument, (O) The Argument from Reference, and (P) The Kripke-Wittgenstein Argument from Plus and Quus
- (Q) The General Argument from Intuition
- (R) Moral Arguments (actually R1 to Rn)
- (R*)The Argument from Evil
- (S) The Argument from Colors and Flavors
- (T) The Argument from Love and (Y) The Argument from the Meaning of Life
- (U) The Mozart Argument and (V) The Argument from Play and Enjoyment
- (W) Arguments from Providence and from Miracles
- (X) C.S. Lewis’s Argument from Nostalgia
- (Z) The Argument from (A) to (Y)
- The <i>Kalam</i> Cosmological Argument
- The Argument from Possibility
- The Necessity of Sufficiency
- Afterword*
- Appendix Plantinga’s Original “Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Arguments”
- Index
