A Refinement of Bertrand Russell’s Celestial Teacup Analogy and Richard Dawkins’ “Spectrum of Theistic Probabilities”
- 1 Independent Researcher, Pulaski, VA, USA
Abstract
In this paper the theological views of both Richard Dawkins and Bertrand Russell are refined to make them more precise and consistent. Russell points famously to an example of a celestial teacup as an analogy for the existence of God. More specifically the analogy is used to argue against attempts to shift the burden of proof against the sceptic. In his book The God Delusion, Dawkins picks up on this example and uses it as a foundation to argue against agnosticism. While Dawkins’ larger framework for considering the existence of God may or may not be appropriate, it is important that the refinements are emphasized to make the arguments clear. In short his “ Spectrum of Theistic Probabilities ” , as introduced in his book The God Delusion, is adapted to include the consideration of infinite sets. This consideration makes Dawkins’ own expressions of his viewpoint, and the teacup analogy more consistent—as Dawkins’ categorization of his own views seem to push the use of the spectrum to its limit. For example, he claims his views don’t fall precisely onto one of the 7 milestones of his spectrum. The author offers a correction of this by categorizing Dawkins’ own views neatly onto one of the refined milestones.
- Bingham, J. (2012). Richard Dawkins: I Can’t Be Sure God Does Not Exist. The Telegraph, 24 February 2012, London.
- Bury, J. B. (1913). Freedom of Thought and the Forces against It. In History of Freedom of Thought (p. 20). London: Williams & Norgate. (Illustrated Edition, published 2014 by Lulu Press, Inc.).
- Came, D. (2011). Richard Dawkins’s Refusal to Debate Is Cynical and Anti-Intellectualist—Daniel Came. 22 October 2011. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/oct/22/richard-dawkins-refusal-debate-william-lane-craig
- Comte, A. (1842). The Positive Philosophy. Book Two, Chapter 1.
- Daley, D. (2015). Camille Paglia Takes on Jon Stewart, Trump, Sanders: “Liberals Think of Themselves as Very Open-Minded, but That’s Simply Not True!”. Salon, 29 July 2015.
- Dauben, J. (1977). Georg Cantor and Pope Leo XIII: Mathematics, Theology, and the Infinite. Journal of the History of Ideas, 38, 85-108. https://doi.org/10.2307/2708842
- Dawkins, R. (1996). The Blind Watchmaker. New York and London: W.W. Norton Company.
- Dawkins, R. (2006). The God Delusion. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
- Gutting, G. (2014). Is Atheism Irrational? The New York Times, 9 February 2014.
- Lane, C. (2012). Why Does Richard Dawkins Take Issue with Agnosticism? Psychology Today, 2 February 2012.
- McGrath, A. (2008). Dawkins’ God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life (p. 81). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.
- Oppy, G. (1990). On Rescher on Pascal’s Wager. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 30, 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00161636
- Ruse, M. (2009). Dawkins et al. Bring Us into Disrepute. The Guardian, 2 November 2009, London.
- Ruse, M. (2012). Why Richard Dawkins’ Humanists Remind Me of a Religion. The Guardian, 2 October 2012, London.
- Russell, B. (1952). Is There a God. (Repr. in Russell, 1997)
- Sagan, C. (1995). The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. New York: Random House.
- Scruton, R. (2006). Dawkins Is Wrong about God. The Spectator, 14 January 2006.
- The CTHAEH (2019). Not All Zero Probabilities Are Created Equal. https://www.probabilisticworld.com/not-all-zero-probabilities/