As a prelude to my Encyclopedia of Apologetics series, I shall explain my subsequent classification of critiques of a given worldview as Internal, External, and Natural.
An internal critique relies upon the assumptions of the worldview itself to challenge the worldview, whether by rendering it incoherent, implausible, or otherwise problematic. For example, one might argue that Christianity is committed to the inerrancy of Scripture, which contains contradictions; therefore, Christianity is incoherent.
An external critique relies upon assumptions that would be denied by the worldview; this sort of critique is not meant to persuade someone who accepts the worldview, but to enhance the reasons for objecting to a worldview already rejected. For example, one might argue that it is plausible that Christian Scriptures were assembled through purely natural processes riddled with human errors, which do not clearly evince divine guidance. (In fact, this sort of critique is in part a positive account given by some other worldview of the worldview being critiqued: an error theory, will be part of a positive theory of the world.)
A natural critique is one that tests the assumptions of the worldview against the basic, universal principles of human reason; any worldview contrary to these principles is irrational. For example, someone might argue that there are no basic, universal principles of human reason, and that reality is incoherent, and the mind absurd, and that nothing is stateable or knowable; but this is contrary to the basic, universal principles of human reason, and so is irrational. A worldview which asserted such things would not be in the running for acceptance by rational people.
No comments:
Post a Comment