I've just read a 2005 account of religious "anti-realism" by Cambridge University philosopher of science Peter Lipton (of Best Explanation fame). I very much appreciate his writings in the philosophy of science, but this has me baffled.
He tries to adopt Bas van Fraassen's anti-realism right over into religion. (Bas is Catholic, but as far as I know not anti-realist in matters religious, he saves that for his science as far as I'm aware.)
He describes himself as a “progressive Jew” but he avows:
“I myself cannot believe that the miracles in the Bible occurred, whatever their supposed causes and even if described in purely observable terms.”
And later: “it is not just that I don’t believe them [miracle-claims] true, I believe them false. Where they contradict scientific theories I believe, I have no choice;”
The irony of it all is that he rejects a view “selectionism” because “it would leave far too many holes in the religious text [of Scripture].”
One would think God would leave a rather gaping hole in the text of Scripture.
However, Lipton assures us that “On the immersion view [his own view], by contrast, we have the text to use in its full, unexpurgated form, the form in which I believe it can do us the most good as a tool for thinking and for living.” Well, with *only* the supernatural purged at any rate.
Any of you who've attended Plantinga's "deist bashing" lectures will see how well this connects with his argument.
Trent,
I'm curious about which lectures of Plantinga you're referring to (about deist-bashing). Was this from a book?
Is the Lipton essay published, or available in any format?
Andrew, it's from some lectures that P. has been doing for the last year and a half. I've got a hard copy, but not an electronic copy.
Steve, it's on his website.