Anyone who has been following my debate and discussions with “Nick the Christian” over on Theology Web has seen how Christian apologists frequently attempt to use Philosophy to support the claim that their belief in the supernatural is reasonable and logical. But is it? This kind of thinking was certainly held in high esteem in western society in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, but how about today in the twenty-first century?
I suggest not.
If someone were to walk up to you on the street and ask you the following question, what would be your reaction:
“Excuse me, Sir or Ma’am, but how do you know that you exist? How do you know for sure, that what you believe is ‘you’ is not just a figment of someone else’s imagination?”
Or, let’s say you are at a dinner party, and after a few drinks someone staggers to his feet and pronounces with a snobbish tone, “I think…therefore I am!” and then launches into a lofty, mind-numbing, sleep-inducing, twenty minute philosophical treatise on the nature of human existence and consciousness.
Would you be impressed by the profoundness of these statements? Would they send you into a long, deep period of internal contemplation regarding the reality of…reality??
I don’t think so. I will bet that you would think that both of these people are nut cases and you would avoid future social encounters with them at all costs.
People today are not impressed with philosophers. Philosophy is a dying field. So for theists to use Philosophy to prop up their ancient, superstitious, supernatural religious claims—such as the reanimation of the dead, decomposing flesh of a first century Jewish prophet—appears to me, at least, a very, very bad strategy.