Author(s)

Randall S. Firestone

Department of Philosophy, El Camino College, Torrance, CA, USA.

The article critiques the seven major arguments supporting a belief in God. The arguments are presented as Inferences to the Best Explanation with the use of charts. The charts graphically demonstrate that naturalistic explanations are being ignored by the theist, who favors inherently unverifiable supernatural explanations over naturalistic ones. The paper also discusses why metaphysical beliefs should not be trusted, and how such beliefs differ from scientific beliefs. The paper concludes that the arguments for the existence of God fail because the naturalistic explanations are the best explanations and should be accepted over the supernatural explanation of God. To the extent that the charting of all seven arguments is new, it should be a helpful explanatory tool, especially for students.

God, Religion, Inference to the Best Explanation, Arguments for God, Problems with Arguments for God, Naturalistic Explanations, Supernatural Explanations, Philosophy of Religion, Cosmological Argument, Teleological Argument, Fine-Tuning Argument, Reliability of Scripture, Miracles, Religious Experience, Ontological Argument

Firestone, R. (2014) Naturalistic vs Supernatural Explanations: “Charting” a Course away from a Belief in God by Utilizing Inference to the Best Explanation. Open Journal of Philosophy, 4, 281-302. doi: 10.4236/ojpp.2014.43034.