1 of 1- Johannes
- Member
Offline - Registered: 7/11/2015
- Posts: 240
What weight has physical explicability had for your holding PSR?
What relative weight would you say that the fact that observable reality is inherently rationally explainable at the physical level (*) has had as basis for your holding that reality is ultimately rationally explainable, i.e. the PSR?
Possible options (there may be more, so feel free to add yours):
A. Null, zero, nada.
B. Marginal.
C. Important.
D. Decisive.
(*) As shown by e.g. these facts:
- the Standard Model led to infer the existence of the Higgs field and boson, the latter being observed by the LHC in 2012.
- General Relativity led to infer the occurrence of gravitational waves, observed by the LIGO and Virgo interferometers in 2016.
- Miguel
- Member
Offline
- Registered: 12/02/2017
- Posts: 379
Re: What weight has physical explicability had for your holding PSR?
I would say it's at least important, and when coupled with other empirical arguments for PSR is decisiveI think the way reality is constantly shown to be explainable is a powerful reason for holding PSR, or at least making it the default position. The only issue would be objections such as Van Inwagen's, Hume's, some QM etc but these are easily refutable in themselves or by small tweaks to PSR. I think "brute fact atheism" should be pretty much dead; as Craig says, it's worse than magic. It shouldn't ever have gotten the attention it did; thinking something can occur or exist with no explanation whatsoever, for no reason whatever, is just irrational, magical thinking.
Last edited by Miguel (3/12/2018 12:51 pm)