Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Existence of God

The existence of God is the foundational question in metaphysics and concerning whether an eternal, necessary being—conceived as the ultimate source of , , and value in —objectively exists apart from contingent or cultural constructs. This , unresolved after millennia of scrutiny, pits theistic inferences from the universe's , apparent in biological and physical systems, and the foundations of against naturalistic explanations attributing all observed phenomena to unguided material processes without need for agency. Key theistic arguments include the cosmological, reasoning from the universe's finite temporal origin to a timeless initiator beyond physical laws, and the teleological, emphasizing improbably precise calibrations in constants like the that enable atomic stability and life. Countervailing considerations highlight the evidential inadequacy of in averting widespread and human atrocities, alongside the failure of laboratory or astronomical observations to detect non-contingent intelligence amid expanding empirical knowledge of cosmic . No experiment has yielded repeatable data confirming or excluding a transcendent cause, rendering the issue philosophically contentious rather than scientifically settled, with materialist paradigms dominating academic discourse despite counterexamples from and that strain purely accounts. Globally, belief in God or a supreme power prevails, with surveys of over 90,000 respondents across 85 countries in 2025 finding eight in ten affirming such conviction, though academic philosophers lean heavily atheistic at roughly two-thirds, a skew less pronounced among specialists in . This disparity underscores tensions between widespread intuitive and institutionalized , where empirical gaps persist but first-cause reasoning and improbability calculations continue to challenge reductive .

Conceptual Foundations

Defining God Across Traditions

In Abrahamic traditions—Judaism, , and — is conceived as a singular, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and incorporeal creator of the universe, distinct from creation and possessing attributes of holiness, justice, and mercy. emphasizes strict , portraying (Yahweh or ) as the transcendent sovereign who entered a covenant with Israel, as articulated in texts like the , without internal divisions. maintains monotheism but introduces the —Father, Son, and —as three co-eternal persons in one essence, a doctrine formalized at the in 325 CE, distinguishing it from unitarian views while affirming God's unity. Islam's is absolutely one (), incomparable to anything created, self-sufficient, and the sole originator of existence, rejecting any anthropomorphic or triune interpretations as shirk (associationism). In , the concept of God manifests primarily as , the ultimate, unchanging, infinite reality that underlies and pervades the cosmos, serving as both the impersonal ground of being and, in personal forms (e.g., , ), the object of devotion. is described in the (circa 800–200 BCE) as sat-chit-ananda (existence-consciousness-bliss), beyond attributes yet manifesting through maya (illusion) to create, sustain, and dissolve the universe, with individual souls () ultimately identical to it in non-dualistic schools like . This contrasts with Abrahamic transcendence by emphasizing and unity, though devotional () traditions personalize deities as with qualities like compassion and power. Ancient Greek philosophy transitioned from polytheistic anthropomorphic gods—immortal beings with human-like forms and flaws, as in Homer's (circa 8th century BCE)—to more abstract conceptions. Pre-Socratics like critiqued , positing a single, non-anthropomorphic divine principle, while envisioned the as a benevolent craftsman ordering chaos toward the Good, subordinate to eternal Forms. 's , an eternal, purely actual intellect contemplating itself, serves as the final cause of motion without direct creation or intervention, influencing later theistic arguments. These ideas prefigure monotheistic but retain metaphysical distance from personal seen in Abrahamic faiths.

Standards of Evidence and Burden of Proof

In philosophical inquiry into the existence of God, standards of evidence delineate the epistemological criteria required for rational belief, emphasizing the need for justification proportionate to the claim's scope and implications. , a prominent standard, posits that beliefs must be supported by adequate to avoid intellectual irresponsibility, as formulated by W.K. Clifford in his 1877 essay "The Ethics of Belief," where he asserts that "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient ." This view demands empirical, logical, or probabilistic support for , rejecting faith-based acceptance absent such grounding. Contrasting evidentialism, , developed by , contends that belief in God can possess —defined as the property that turns true belief into —without evidential support if formed by properly functioning cognitive faculties designed for truth-tracking in an appropriate environment. In Warrant and Proper Function (1993), Plantinga argues that a "," an innate faculty for perceiving divine reality, renders theistic belief properly basic, akin to perceptual beliefs about the external world, thereby exempting it from evidentialist demands for inferential justification. This approach challenges strict evidential thresholds by prioritizing reliable belief formation over accumulated arguments, provided theism aligns with the design plan of human noetic faculties. The burden of proof in the God debate typically falls on the , as the party advancing the positive existential claim, mirroring principles in logic and law where affirmants must substantiate assertions rather than negators disprove them. Bertrand Russell's 1952 analogy of the "celestial teapot"—an undetectable orbiting object whose existence cannot be falsified yet requires no disproof—illustrates this, implying that extraordinary claims like divine demand commensurate evidence. However, theists like counter via a cumulative case in The Existence of God (2004 revised edition), aggregating inductive arguments from cosmology, , and consciousness to probabilistically favor over on Bayesian grounds, thereby distributing evidential weight and questioning atheism's presumption of sufficiency without alternative explanatory power. Critics of evidentialism note its potential bias toward methodological naturalism, prevalent in secular academia, which may undervalue non-empirical warrants or properly basic intuitions, as these conflict with materialist priors that dismiss supernatural hypotheses a priori. Plantinga further argues in Warranted Christian Belief (2000) that if naturalism is true, evolutionary processes undermine cognitive reliability, creating a "defeater" for atheistic worldviews that rely on unaided reason. Thus, standards diverge: evidentialists insist on overt proof to overcome default skepticism, while proper functionalists and cumulativists advocate holistic assessment where belief's rationality emerges from integrated faculties and converging probabilities, not isolated demonstrations. This tension underscores that no universal consensus governs evidentiary norms, with choices reflecting deeper metaphysical commitments.

Distinction Between Supernatural and Natural Explanations

Natural explanations invoke causes and mechanisms operating within the physical , governed by empirically verifiable laws such as those of physics, chemistry, and , which are testable through , experimentation, and . These explanations prioritize material processes and avoid positing entities or events outside the causal chain of and matter-energy interactions. In contrast, supernatural explanations propose origins or influences from non-physical agents or realms that transcend laws, such as an immaterial intelligence capable of initiating or suspending physical processes without being bound by them. This distinction is ontological, separating the immanent operations of nature from transcendent causal interventions. In scientific methodology, methodological naturalism mandates restricting inquiry to natural explanations, assuming that phenomena can be accounted for by natural causes alone, even if this approach provisionally brackets possibilities. This practice, formalized in modern since the , enables repeatable empirical progress but differs from , which asserts that only natural entities exist and dismisses claims outright. Philosophers like have critiqued strict methodological naturalism for potentially smuggling in metaphysical assumptions, arguing that it evaluates hypotheses unfairly by excluding alternatives a priori, thus undermining neutral assessment of explanatory adequacy. The distinction bears on debates over ultimate causation, where natural explanations often terminate in contingencies like quantum fluctuations or speculations, which themselves require further natural accounting and risk without addressing why contingent reality exists at all. explanations, by contrast, offer a non-contingent ground—such as a necessary being—capable of originating the natural order without invoking prior natural preconditions. Empirical data, including the universe's finite age estimated at 13.8 billion years from measurements, underscores limits to purely natural backward extrapolation, as pre-Big Bang conditions evade direct observation and testability. While naturalists contend that posits lack and thus explanatory value, proponents counter that inferring agency from or causal discontinuities aligns with , akin to inferring agency in from irreducible artifacts. This tension highlights that the distinction is not merely semantic but epistemic, influencing whether phenomena like the universe's absolute beginning demand invocation or can be deferred to undemonstrated natural extensions.

Empirical Arguments For Existence

Cosmological Evidence from Universe Origins

The standard model posits that the expanded from an extremely hot and dense state approximately 13.8 billion years ago, marking the onset of as described by and supported by multiple lines of empirical observation. This finite age is inferred from the (CMB) radiation, discovered in 1965 and measured precisely by satellites like COBE (1989–1993) and Planck (2009–2013), which reveal a uniform blackbody spectrum at 2.725 K consistent with in the early . Additional corroboration comes from the observed Hubble expansion, where galaxies recede with velocities proportional to distance (Hubble constant ≈ 70 km/s/Mpc), implying traceback to a singularity-like origin, and from predictions matching the observed abundances of light elements like (≈24% by mass) and . Theoretical advancements reinforce the empirical case against a past-eternal universe. The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin (BGV) , published in , proves that any cosmological model with an average expansion rate greater than zero—applicable to the observed and many inflationary scenarios—must have a past geodesic incompleteness, meaning timelines cannot extend infinitely backward without encountering a boundary or singularity. This result holds under assumptions without requiring a zero expansion phase or specific matter content, challenging models of or cyclic bounces that attempt to evade a beginning. Empirical , including CMB anisotropies and large-scale , align with positive expansion since early epochs, thus implying the universe's history is finite rather than infinite. These findings underpin the second premise of the , which states that the universe began to exist, as articulated by philosopher : an actual of past events is metaphysically impossible, and the scientific evidence precludes an eternal past. The first premise—that whatever begins to exist has a cause—draws from observed causal principles in physics, where uncaused events violate conservation laws and quantum indeterminacy still operates within pre-existing fields. The argument concludes that the universe's cause must transcend (to avoid ), possess immense power to instantiate matter-energy from nothing, and exhibit agency to initiate change from timelessness, attributes aligning with a personal, immaterial creator. Counterproposals like quantum fluctuations or multiverses lack direct empirical verification and often presuppose existent frameworks, failing to resolve the causal regress without invoking similar transcendent conditions.

Fine-Tuning of Physical Constants

The of physical constants constitutes an empirical observation in and that the numerical values of fundamental parameters in the laws of nature fall within extremely narrow ranges conducive to the formation of stable matter, atomic structures, stellar systems, and ultimately . These constants, such as coupling strengths of fundamental forces and ratios of particle masses, lack derivation from deeper theories and appear as brute facts in the and . Variations as small as 1% in many cases would render the inhospitable to complex chemistry or astrophysical processes necessary for . This phenomenon, quantified through computational simulations of altered parameters, underscores a sensitivity where life-permitting outcomes occupy a minuscule fraction of possible parameter space, estimated in some models as low as 1 in 10^{229} for multidimensional tuning. Prominent examples include the ratio of electromagnetic to gravitational forces between protons, approximately 10^{36}, which enables lightweight electrons to orbit nuclei without collapsing while allowing sufficient gravitational clumping for galaxies and stars; a factor-of-two decrease would preclude stable atoms, while an increase would accelerate stellar beyond viability. The strong constant, responsible for binding quarks into protons and s, requires tuning to within 50%: enhancement fuses prematurely in , yielding no free protons for or organics, whereas reduction destabilizes all nuclei beyond , eliminating heavier like carbon and oxygen essential for biochemistry. Similarly, the weak nuclear force governs neutron-proton interconversions; weakening it by a factor of 10 produces neutron excess, curtailing stellar longevity and of heavy . The cosmological constant, representing vacuum energy density at roughly 10^{-3} eV per cubic meter, exemplifies extreme precision, tuned to 1 part in 10^{120} relative to quantum field theory expectations (which predict values 10^{50} to 10^{123} larger); positive deviations accelerate cosmic expansion too rapidly for gravitational bound structures like galaxies, while negative values induce premature recollapse. Astrophysicist Martin Rees delineates six such dimensionless numbers—encompassing force ratios, nuclear binding efficiency (ε ≈ 0.007 for 7% mass-to-energy conversion in fusion), density parameter Ω ≈ 1, cosmological constant Λ, fluctuation amplitude Q ≈ 10^{-5}, and spatial dimensions D = 3—whose convergence yields a "recipe" for a life-supporting cosmos, with deviations disrupting hierarchical structure from atoms to clusters. Physicists including Rees and Paul Davies, despite naturalistic commitments, concede this tuning's improbability under single-universe models, prompting alternatives like multiverses, though these invoke unobservable entities without direct empirical falsification. Proponents infer intelligent causation from the causal adequacy of such precision, analogous to calibrated engineering tolerances exceeding random assembly probabilities.

Origin of Life and Biological Information

The origin of life remains one of the most intractable problems in modern , with no experimentally verified pathway from non-living chemicals to a functional, self-replicating despite over six decades of since the Miller-Urey experiment, which produced trace under simulated conditions but failed to yield polymers or informational molecules. Fundamental hurdles include the prebiotic synthesis of stable like proteins and nucleic acids, the emergence of —where biological molecules exhibit uniform left- or right-handedness, as random mixtures produce racemic (50/50) distributions—and the encapsulation of metabolic and replicative systems within protocells, all requiring precise sequencing and environmental isolation improbable under geochemical realism. Recent analyses highlight "formidable entropic and informational barriers" that render scenarios, even if theoretically possible, of "unreasonable likelihood" without invoking extraordinary hypotheses to multiply probabilistic opportunities. At the core of these difficulties lies the generation of biological information, particularly the digitally encoded sequences in DNA and RNA that specify functional proteins via the genetic code—a system of 64 codons mapping to 20 amino acids and stop signals, exhibiting arbitrary yet universal conventions akin to human-engineered codes. This information manifests as specified complexity: patterns that are both highly improbable (complex) and functionally required (specified), such as the precise folding of a 150-amino-acid protein, with odds estimated at 1 in 10^77 under random assembly, exceeding the probabilistic resources of the observable universe (roughly 10^80 atoms across 10^17 seconds of existence). Materialistic models, including the RNA World hypothesis positing self-replicating RNA as a precursor, presuppose the very informational specificity they seek to explain, as no known chemical affinities dictate nucleotide sequences for catalytic or replicative function; instead, viability demands trial-and-error search spaces vastly larger than accessible in prebiotic soups. Proponents of , drawing on , argue that functions as a design filter: observed in human artifacts like software but absent in outputs of undirected processes, which produce either simple regularity (e.g., crystals) or unspecifiable randomness, never functional without intelligence. In this view, the causal adequacy of naturalistic mechanisms falters empirically, as laboratory simulations of yield no transition to coded , whereas analogies from and demonstrate minds as the sole known source of such semiotic systems. This evidentiary gap supports theistic inference: a purposeful , capable of transcending material constraints, best explains life's informational foundation, consistent with causal realism prioritizing observed regularities in information origins over speculative chemical .

Consciousness as Non-Reductive Phenomenon

The phenomenon of consciousness, encompassing subjective experiences such as —the raw feels of pain, color perception, or emotional states—resists full reduction to physical brain processes, despite extensive neuroscientific correlations between neural activity and conscious reports. This "hard problem," as articulated by philosopher in his 1995 analysis, questions why physical processes in the brain give rise to any phenomenal experience at all, rather than merely functional behaviors without inner awareness. Empirical studies, including functional MRI scans linking specific brain regions to sensory processing, demonstrate reliable correlations but fail to bridge the from objective mechanisms to subjective "what-it-is-like" aspects of . Non-reductive accounts of , which deny that mental states are identical to or fully supervenient on physical states without remainder, gain support from critiques of reductive . Philosophers like argue in his 2012 work that materialist explanations overlook the irreducibly perspectival nature of subjective experience, which cannot be captured by third-person scientific descriptions alone. Similarly, property dualism posits that while consciousness may emerge from physical bases, its intrinsic properties are non-physical, challenging purely naturalistic ontologies. Attempts within non-reductive to treat mental properties as higher-level emergents still confront the issue of in physics, where all events are determined by prior physical states, leaving no room for genuinely novel mental causation without violating conservation laws. In the context of theistic arguments, the existence of irreducible favors a divine mind as its ultimate source over unguided naturalistic processes. Theist contends that finite conscious substances, being simple and immaterial, align with a substance dualist view where , as an infinite mind, grounds the origin and instantiation of such substances in the universe. struggles to explain how non-conscious matter could produce without invoking unexplained brute emergence, whereas posits that minds arise from a primordial Mind, avoiding or ad hoc posits. This inference draws on : among competing explanations, better accounts for the and unity of , as mindless evolutionary selection pressures target survival functions but not subjective phenomenology. Critics of , including some neuroscientists, note that despite advances like (IIT), which quantifies via causal integration (e.g., Φ values in neural networks), these models explain structure but not why integration yields experience. Theistic proponents extend this to argue that 's —its grasp of truth, , and values—implies a rational divine , as purely material substrates lack intrinsic for such faculties. While non-theistic dualisms exist, the cosmological scale—requiring to originate from the Big Bang's quantum fluctuations 13.8 billion years ago—renders theism's unified explanatory power superior, integrating with other fine-tuned features of reality.

Logical and Metaphysical Arguments For Existence

Ontological and Modal Arguments

The , first articulated by in his composed between 1077 and 1078, seeks to demonstrate 's existence through a priori reasoning from the concept of alone. Anselm defines as "a being than which none greater can be conceived." He argues that if such a being exists merely in the understanding, then one greater—existing both in the understanding and in reality—can be conceived, leading to a . Therefore, must exist in reality. Anselm further extends this to necessary existence, asserting that a being whose non-existence is possible is not the greatest conceivable, so exists necessarily. René presented a variant in the Fifth Meditation of , published in 1641. Descartes posits that the idea of as a supremely perfect being includes as a , akin to how the essence of a necessitates its three . Denying to would render the concept defective, contradicting 's ; thus, pertains to 's . Immanuel Kant critiqued these arguments in his Critique of Pure Reason (1781), contending that existence is not a real predicate adding to a concept's content. For instance, the concept of 100 thalers possesses the same properties whether the thalers exist in reality or merely in thought; existence merely posits the instantiation of the concept without enriching it. This objection undermines the claim that existence follows analytically from God's definition. Modal ontological arguments, employing possible worlds semantics and , were formalized in the 20th century. sketched a version in the , using axioms about "positive properties": a God-like being possesses all positive properties, and necessary is positive; thus, a God-like being necessarily exists. Gödel's proof, leveraging higher-order , derives the necessary of such a being from the coherence of the divine essence. Alvin Plantinga refined the modal approach in The Nature of Necessity (1974), defining maximal greatness as a being's possession of maximal excellence—omnipotence, omniscience, and moral perfection—in every possible world. The argument proceeds: (1) It is possible that a maximally great being exists; (2) If possible, it exists in at least one possible world with necessary existence (per S5 modal logic, where possibility of necessity implies necessity); (3) Therefore, it exists in the actual world. Plantinga contends the key premise of possibility is epistemically accessible, as maximal greatness involves no evident contradiction, shifting the burden to atheists to demonstrate impossibility. These arguments achieve formal validity within axiomatic systems but face contention over premises like the possibility of necessary divine . Surveys of professional philosophers, such as the 2020 PhilPapers survey, indicate low acceptance, with ontological arguments rarely deemed persuasive even among theists, often due to perceived on or failure to bridge conceptual possibility to actuality without empirical warrant.

Moral Realism and Objective Values

The moral argument for God's existence contends that the reality of objective values and duties necessitates a transcendent moral lawgiver, as or cannot adequately ground such objectivity. Formulated syllogistically by philosopher , the argument states: (1) if God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist; (2) objective moral values and duties do exist; therefore, (3) God exists. Objective moral values refer to states of affairs that are good or bad independent of any human opinion, preference, or evolutionary utility, such as the intrinsic wrongness of torturing innocent children for sport. Premise (1) holds that without a whose nature constitutes the standard of goodness, moral values reduce to subjective human constructs, cultural conventions, or biological imperatives shaped by , none of which possess the binding authority implied by . On a naturalistic , himself acknowledged the potential for to dissolve into mere instinct, undermining claims of genuine obligation: "A man who struggled long to do what was right but did not... would be more apt to suffer from or dejected than any other man." Atheistic , which posits brute moral facts without further explanation, struggles to account for their motivational force or universality, as abstract platonic entities lack causal efficacy to impose duties. Theists respond to the —whether is good because commands it or commands it because it is good—by asserting that 's morally perfect nature grounds objective values, making them neither arbitrary nor external to divine essence. Premise (2) draws support from widespread human intuitions of moral objectivity, corroborated by empirical surveys indicating that a across cultures affirm moral truths as of personal or societal approval; for instance, a 2017 study found 72% of respondents endorsing the existence of objective moral truths. , in developing an earlier version, argued from the universal "law of "—a of oughtness transcending self-interest and instinct—that points to a rational source beyond nature, as mere survival instincts fail to explain why humans condemn deviations from fairness even when advantageous. near-universals, such as prohibitions against gratuitous cruelty, further suggest an objective moral order not fully explicable by relativistic or adaptive accounts. Critics of the argument, including some secular ethicists, challenge premise (2) by proposing non-theistic , such as moral facts emerging from rational principles or human flourishing, though these face difficulties in deriving "is" from "ought" without a foundational . Others deny premise (1), arguing can confer apparent objectivity via benefits, yet this conflates descriptive facts about behavior with prescriptive norms, as survival utility does not entail bindingness. The argument's strength lies in its explanatory power: integrates with a ground that accounts for both the existence and knowability of duties, whereas atheistic alternatives often revert to or error theory, incompatible with everyday discourse.

Argument from Reason and Rationality

The argument from reason maintains that the capacity for reliable rational inference cannot be adequately explained under metaphysical naturalism, which posits that all phenomena, including cognition, arise solely from non-rational physical processes, thereby rendering naturalism self-undermining and favoring theistic explanations where a divine intellect designs human minds for truth-seeking. C.S. Lewis articulated an initial form of this argument in his 1947 book Miracles, contending that if naturalism holds, every thought, including those purporting to justify naturalism itself, is fully determined by antecedent non-rational causes such as neural firings, leaving no causal space for thoughts to be "valid" inferences grounded in logical relations rather than mere physical necessity. Lewis further argued that rational thought involves a distinction between grounds (logical relations) and causes (physical events), and naturalism conflates or subordinates the former to the latter, making it impossible to trust any inference—including the inference to naturalism—as more than a survival-adaptive illusion. Alvin Plantinga refined and formalized the argument in his 1993 paper "An Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism," later expanded in Warrant and Proper Function (1993) and Where the Conflict Really Lies (2011), by combining with unguided Darwinian to show their conjunction (N&E) is rationally self-defeating. Plantinga defines reliable (R) as the propensity of one's cognitive faculties to produce mostly true beliefs, and estimates the probability P(R|N&E) as low (less than 0.5), since selects behaviors enhancing and , not necessarily truth-tracking beliefs; for instance, false beliefs correlated with adaptive actions (e.g., fearing tigers regardless of accurate ) could suffice for without requiring veridical . Under N&E, a person aware of this low probability has a defeater for trusting any belief, including the belief in N&E itself, because their faculties lack warrant for reliability; thus, rational acceptance of N&E requires rejecting N&E, rendering it irrational. The argument supports by noting that under theism, has a reason to create creatures with truth-aimed —such as fulfilling humans as rational beings in relationship with a rational Creator—yielding high P(R|T& E), where T is theism and E (possibly guided). This does not entail 's existence deductively but establishes that belief in avoids the self-defeat of , providing epistemic for theistic ; Plantinga quantifies this by contrasting the naturalistic scenario's improbability with theism's of and . Empirical considerations, such as the of human reasoning with abstract logical laws independent of physical causation, further bolster the case, as struggles to explain why non-physical truths reliably guide evolved brains without invoking undemonstrated mechanisms like computationalism, which Plantinga critiques for presupposing the very reliability it seeks to explain. Critics like have countered that could indirectly favor truth via adaptive advantages, but Plantinga responds that such claims beg the question by assuming reliability without addressing the base-rate probability of semi-reliable faculties under blind selection, where maladaptive but survival-neutral falsehoods proliferate. The argument's strength lies in its transcendental form: it challenges any undermining reason's foundation, privileging as preserving causal space for intentional rational design over probabilistic flukes.

Cumulative Case Integration

The cumulative case approach in synthesizes multiple independent lines of evidence—spanning cosmological origins, physical , biological complexity, , ontological necessities, moral objectivity, and rational faculties—to argue that provides a superior explanatory framework compared to naturalistic alternatives. Unlike deductive proofs aiming for certainty, this method employs , assessing how well the totality of data fits under the hypothesis of an omnipotent, omniscient designer versus undirected processes. Proponents contend that while no single may compel assent, their convergence elevates the probability of God's beyond mere plausibility, often framing it as an to the best . Richard Swinburne, in his Bayesian analysis, formalizes this integration by calculating the of given cumulative evidence, starting with a modest for a simple hypothesis and updating it via likelihood ratios for each datum. For instance, the universe's origin from a low-entropy state and its precise calibration for yield high likelihoods under (e.g., a intentionally setting parameters) but low ones under (requiring improbable chance or speculation), incrementally boosting the overall odds. Swinburne estimates that, incorporating teleological, cosmological, and experiential evidences, the probability of exceeds 50%, as unifies disparate phenomena under one entity whereas demands multiplicity. This integration extends to metaphysical arguments: ontological considerations of maximal greatness imply a necessary being whose is possible in some world, rendering it actual across all; posits objective values grounded in a transcendent source, as struggles to account for their binding force without reducing them to subjective preferences; and the argument from reason highlights how naturalistic undermines reliable , favoring a theistic guarantor of . Collectively, these evade isolated critiques—e.g., fine-tuning's multiverse counter is probabilistically strained without evidence, while evil's problem is contextualized within broader goods like —yielding a holistic case where theism's surpasses rivals by orders of magnitude in scope and parsimony. Alvin Plantinga reinforces this by cataloging over two dozen theistic arguments, not as isolated proofs but as convergent indicators that bolster warranted belief in , particularly when naturalism's self-defeating implications (e.g., unguided yielding defeaters for its own tenets) are factored in. The cumulative strength lies in : even if one strand weakens, others sustain the web, mirroring scientific practice where theories endure via interlocking confirmations rather than singular tests. Critics may dismiss components, yet the integrated model's predictive successes—e.g., anticipating consciousness's irreducibility or morality's universality—underscore theism's empirical and logical edge.

Arguments Against Existence

Problem of Evil and Suffering

The problem of evil constitutes a central argument against the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, positing that such a deity's attributes are incompatible with or render improbable the observed reality of evil and suffering in the world. This challenge traces back to the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (341–270 BCE), who questioned divine providence by highlighting the apparent contradiction: if God possesses the power and desire to eliminate evil, its persistence implies a failure in one or both capacities, undermining the traditional conception of divinity. Philosophers distinguish between the logical and evidential formulations of the problem. The logical version, advanced by J.L. Mackie in his 1955 paper "Evil and Omnipotence," maintains that the three propositions—God is omnipotent, God is wholly good, and evil exists—form an inherently contradictory set, as an omnipotent good being could and would prevent all evil without logical impossibility. Mackie contended that proposed resolutions, such as the free will defense (which attributes moral evil to human liberty), falter because omnipotence entails the ability to actualize a world with free beings who invariably choose good, or because natural evils (unrelated to human agency, like earthquakes or predation) remain unaddressed by such appeals. In contrast, the evidential version, articulated by in "The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of " (1979), concedes logical compatibility but argues that the sheer quantity and intensity of apparently gratuitous —evils serving no discernible greater purpose—provide strong inductive against God's existence. illustrated this with instances of "pointless" , such as a fawn enduring prolonged agony from burns in a forest fire before dying, where no compensating moral or spiritual benefit is evident to observers. Such cases, argued, outweigh theistic hypotheses unless defenders can demonstrate that all evils contribute to goods outweighing them, a burden unmet by empirical . Evil divides into moral and natural categories. Moral evils stem from deliberate human actions, including and ; for instance, systematic genocides like the Nazi extermination of approximately six million during exemplify intentional harm incompatible with divine prevention if holds. Natural evils encompass from non-anthropogenic sources, such as tectonic disasters or biological afflictions, where diseases like cancer claim millions of lives annually without apparent justification tied to human choice. Gratuitous evils, a emphasized in evidential arguments, are those instances of —particularly animal pain predating human or isolated human agonies—lacking any observable rationale, amplifying the probabilistic case against a benevolent overseer. Critics of , drawing on these distinctions, contend that causal chains of (e.g., predation in ecosystems or random geophysical events) reveal a world governed by indifferent natural laws rather than purposeful design.

Divine Hiddenness and Non-Belief

The argument from divine hiddenness posits that the existence of a loving, is incompatible with the prevalence of reasonable non- in such a . Formulated prominently by philosopher J. L. Schellenberg in his 1993 book Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason, the core claim is that if exists and desires personal relationships with created beings capable of freely responding, divine evidence would be sufficient to enable without resistant doubt for all non-resistant individuals. Schellenberg argues that a perfectly loving would not permit non-resistant non-, as it precludes the relational goods ostensibly seeks, yet such non- is empirically observable, rendering 's existence improbable. Empirical data supports the existence of widespread non-belief. In the United States, surveys from 2023 to 2025 indicate that 28-29% of adults are religiously unaffiliated, comprising 5% atheists, 6% , and 19% identifying as "nothing in particular," with many citing lack of compelling evidence for God as a factor in disbelief. Globally, non-belief varies but is significant in secular regions, such as where surveys show or exceeding 20% in countries like and the , often among those reporting no personal resistance to theistic claims. Proponents like Schellenberg contend this pattern of "reasonable non-belief"—where individuals seek truth but find insufficient evidence—challenges theistic assumptions about divine benevolence, as causal realism suggests a relational would prioritize evidential clarity to foster voluntary belief. Theistic responses emphasize that hiddenness may serve greater purposes aligned with human freedom and moral development. Philosophers such as argue that God remains partially hidden to allow genuine , as overwhelming evidence could coerce belief and undermine authentic choice, a value potentially outweighing universal persuasion. Others, including responses critiquing Schellenberg, question the premise that non-resistant non-belief exists independently of cognitive or volitional factors; for instance, empirical studies in suggest unconscious biases or incomplete seeking may explain apparent non-resistance, rather than divine withholding. C. S. Lewis, in works like (1940), proposed that divine hiddenness fosters a "soul-making" process, where ambiguity encourages virtues like and , drawing from first-principles reasoning that relational depth requires risk and effort rather than certainty. Critiques of the hiddenness argument highlight its reliance on unproven assumptions about divine priorities. It presumes that evidential sufficiency for all would not compromise other goods, such as epistemic distance necessary for moral agency, yet no empirical or logical necessity dictates that a loving God must override human interpretive variability. Moreover, the argument overlooks available theistic evidences—like cosmological fine-tuning or consciousness origins—that, while not coercive, provide rational grounds for belief, suggesting hiddenness is partial rather than absolute; surveys show even among nones, 45% in the U.S. retain some belief in God or higher power, indicating non-belief is not uniformly resistant. From a causal realist perspective, non-belief may reflect naturalistic worldview commitments or institutional biases in academia favoring atheism, rather than divine absence, as peer-reviewed analyses note systemic underrepresentation of theistic interpretations in secular scholarship. Thus, while hiddenness poses an evidential challenge, it does not deductively refute theism, as theistic models accommodate ambiguity as instrumentally valuable for human flourishing.

Naturalistic Alternatives to Theistic Explanations

Naturalistic explanations seek to account for phenomena traditionally attributed to divine causation through unguided physical, chemical, and biological processes governed by natural laws. In cosmology, the model posits that the expanded from a hot, dense state approximately 13.8 billion years ago, supported by radiation data from satellites like Planck. However, this framework describes post-singularity evolution rather than the origin of the singularity itself, leaving the initial conditions unexplained by empirical mechanisms alone. Proposals such as or quantum fluctuations in a pre-existing aim to circumvent a true beginning, suggesting the could emerge spontaneously from quantum indeterminacy, though these remain mathematically speculative without direct observational confirmation. Regarding the apparent of physical constants—such as the tuned to within 1 part in 10^120 for and life—naturalistic responses invoke the , positing an ensemble of universes with varying constants where ours is a rare selection permitting observers via the . This view, advanced in landscapes predicting up to 10^500 possible vacua, avoids design by diluting improbability across infinite realizations, but it lacks falsifiable predictions and introduces explanatory regress, as the mechanism generating multiverses requires its own fine-tuning. Critics note that such models prioritize theoretical elegance over empirical testability, with no detected evidence of other universes as of 2025. For the origin of life, theories propose that self-replicating systems arose from prebiotic chemistry on around 4.2 billion years ago, potentially via hydrothermal vents or RNA-world scenarios where polymerize into functional molecules. Laboratory progress includes synthesis of ribozymes and protocells, with 2024 studies demonstrating accelerated pathways under wet-dry cycling conditions, yet no experiment has produced a fully autonomous, evolving from inorganic precursors under plausible prebiotic constraints. Challenges persist, such as the instability of sugars like in prebiotic soups, as evidenced by 2025 research overturning the formose reaction's viability for precursors, underscoring gaps between chemical plausibility and informational complexity required for replication. Consciousness is often framed naturalistically as an emergent property of neural complexity, with theories like global workspace positing that integrated information across networks—spanning billions of synapses—generates subjective experience without non-physical substrates. correlates qualia with thalamocortical loops, as in quantifying consciousness via phi (Φ) metrics of causal irreducibility in systems. Nonetheless, the "hard problem" endures: why physical processes yield first-person phenomenology remains unbridged, with discrepancies like split-brain patients exhibiting divided awareness challenging strict reduction to local states, and no consensus model fully accounting for binding or . Evolutionary biology offers accounts for moral intuitions through kin selection and reciprocal altruism, where behaviors like cooperation enhanced survival in social primates, as modeled in game theory with tit-for-tat strategies yielding stable equilibria in iterated prisoner's dilemmas. Fossil and genetic evidence traces prosocial traits to hominid ancestors, with oxytocin-linked empathy circuits fostering group cohesion, explaining moral universals like fairness prohibitions without invoking transcendent grounds. Such mechanisms describe adaptive heuristics, but they presuppose the veridicality of perceptions like objective harm's wrongness, raising questions about grounding non-arbitrary oughts in is-statements of fitness maximization, as evolutionary debunking arguments highlight potential illusion in moral realism under naturalism.

Critiques of Theistic Arguments' Validity

Critics of ontological arguments, exemplified by Anselm's formulation, contend that the inference from conceptual perfection to actual existence commits a category error. , in his (1781/1787), argued that existence is not a real predicate or perfection that augments a concept's content; rather, it merely indicates that an object corresponds to the concept in reality, rendering the argument's leap from definition to existence invalid. This critique implies that predicating "necessary existence" of the greatest conceivable being begs the question by assuming what it seeks to prove, as the concept alone does not entail instantiation. Gaunilo of Marmoutiers, a near-contemporary of Anselm (c. 1033–1109), parodied the argument by applying it to a perfect , suggesting that if the logic holds, such an island must exist, yet empirical absence demonstrates the flaw in equating maximal excellence with necessary reality. Philosophical objections to cosmological arguments, such as those positing a first cause or necessary being, highlight issues in extrapolating intra-universal causality to the universe's origin. David Hume, in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (published 1779), challenged the principle that everything requires a cause by questioning its application beyond observed events: the universe as a singular whole may not conform to the same causal necessities as its parts, allowing for possibilities like an infinite regress of causes without a terminator. Hume further noted that even granting a first cause, it need not resemble the monotheistic God, as the argument fails to specify attributes like omnipotence or benevolence. Kant critiqued the argument's validity in Critique of Pure Reason by linking it to the flawed ontological form, asserting that identifying a necessary being relies on illicitly transferring predicates from contingent experience to a transcendent entity, while his antinomies demonstrate reason's inability to resolve cosmological origins definitively. Teleological arguments, inferring design from apparent order in nature, face critiques for overlooking naturalistic mechanisms that generate complexity without intentional agency. Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859) introduced natural selection as a cumulative process where variations favoring survival propagate, explaining biological adaptations—like the eye's structure—through blind variation and environmental filtering rather than premeditated arrangement, thus invalidating design inferences based on pre-evolutionary observations. Hume anticipated this by arguing in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion that analogies to human artifacts falter, as the universe's uniformity suggests an internal generative principle akin to organic growth, not external craftsmanship, and imperfections (e.g., vestigial organs) undermine claims of optimal intelligence. The moral argument, positing objective values as evidence of a divine ground, encounters the , originating in Plato's (c. 399–395 BCE), which questions whether moral goodness is commanded by because it is inherently good (rendering superfluous to morality's foundation) or good solely because commanded (implying arbitrariness, as divine whim could endorse atrocities). This dichotomy challenges the argument's validity by suggesting does not logically necessitate a personal ; secular accounts, such as or rational contractarianism, can ground obligations without supernatural arbitration, while the dilemma exposes tensions in theistic ethics where 's nature is invoked to evade horns but risks conflating essence with commands. Critiques of the argument from reason, advanced by figures like , assert that naturalistic evolution undermines cognitive reliability, target flaws in probabilistic assumptions about belief formation. Opponents argue that natural selection reliably produces truth-tracking faculties because accurate perceptions and inferences enhance fitness—e.g., mistaking predators for non-threats reduces survival odds—thus defeating self-defeat claims without invoking . Plantinga's low probability estimate for true beliefs under + evolution (said to be less than 50%) is contested as unsubstantiated, ignoring evidence from that adaptive behaviors correlate with veridical representations, rendering the argument's conditional defeat of logically uncompelling. Cumulative cases integrating these arguments are faulted for lacking deductive rigor, relying instead on inductive weighting prone to and alternative explanations like hypotheses or emergent properties from physical laws, which parsimoniously account for without additional entities. Such syntheses, while amplifying perceived probability, fail validity tests by not excluding non-theistic causal chains supported by empirical cosmology, such as quantum vacuum fluctuations initiating the circa 13.8 billion years ago.

Responses to Atheistic and Agnostic Positions

Rebuttals to Positive Atheism's Claims

Positive atheism, which asserts that God definitively does not exist, encounters significant epistemological hurdles, as demonstrating a universal negative—such as the absence of a transcendent being—requires comprehensive evidence that no such entity exists in any possible form or location, a standard unattainable through empirical or logical means alone. Philosophers like argue that positive atheism demands justification akin to any affirmative claim, rejecting analogies like Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot, which presuppose a burden unfairly shifted from theism; instead, theism provides warrant through proper basicality of belief in God, similar to belief in other minds, without needing extraordinary evidence. A core rebuttal stems from Plantinga's (EAAN), which posits that if 's naturalistic worldview and unguided are true, human cognitive faculties evolved solely for survival, not truth-tracking, rendering beliefs—including atheistic ones—unreliable with a probability low enough to defeat naturalism's rationality. This self-defeating aspect undermines positive 's claim to rational superiority, as naturalistic erodes confidence in the very reasoning used to affirm it, whereas posits cognitive design oriented toward truth. Critiques of atheistic assertions often target the presumption of atheism, which William Lane Craig counters by noting that while atheism may claim simplicity, theistic explanations better account for the universe's origin, fine-tuning, and objective morality without invoking ad hoc multiverses or relativism. Positive atheists' reliance on divine incoherence fails against coherent formulations of omnipotence and omniscience, avoiding paradoxes like the stone dilemma through logical possibility distinctions. Moreover, empirical data from cosmology, such as the universe's precise constants enabling life (e.g., the cosmological constant tuned to 1 part in 10^120), challenges atheistic dismissals of design evidence as mere ignorance. In sum, positive atheism's bold negation lacks the evidentiary closure it demands of theism, often resting on unproven assumptions about naturalism's sufficiency, which falter under scrutiny from probability, , and favoring theistic posits.

Addressing Naturalistic Failures

Naturalism, the view that only natural laws and forces operate in the without agency, faces profound challenges in explaining key aspects of reality, rendering it an inadequate comprehensive . Proponents of contend that these explanatory gaps—spanning , , , , and —collectively undermine naturalistic accounts and favor a divine cause. Empirical data and reveal persistent failures, as naturalistic mechanisms either lack evidential support or lead to self-undermining conclusions. In cosmology, the of fundamental constants poses a core difficulty; for instance, the must be precise to within 1 part in 10^120 for a life-permitting , a level of specificity unattainable by chance under unguided processes. hypotheses, invoked to evade design inferences, themselves require fine-tuned laws to produce life-supporting universes and remain untestable, thus failing by positing infinite unobservables. Biologically, abiogenesis—the spontaneous origin of from non-living matter—remains unresolved despite extensive research; as of 2025, prebiotic chemistry experiments encounter insurmountable entropic and informational barriers, with no demonstrated pathway from simple molecules to self-replicating systems under plausible conditions. A 2025 analysis underscores the "mind-bending" improbability, estimating odds so low as to challenge naturalistic timelines for life's emergence within Earth's 4.5-billion-year history. The further eludes reduction to physical processes; argues that while explains functions like reportability, it fails to account for why brain states accompany phenomenal experience or , leaving subjective "what it is like" aspects brute and unexplained by naturalistic causal chains. Materialist identity theories collapse into or eliminativism, both incompatible with evident introspective access to conscious states. Alvin Plantinga's (EAAN) targets the reliability of : under unguided conjoined with (N&E), beliefs are shaped for , not truth-tracking, yielding a probability P(R|N&E) below 0.5 that our faculties produce mostly true beliefs, including N&E itself—thus self-defeating for any reflective naturalist. Responses invoking selection for truth via utility falter, as maladaptive true beliefs or adaptive false ones could equally confer survival advantages, diluting reliability claims. On morality, naturalism reduces values to evolutionary byproducts or subjective sentiments, undermining objective bindingness; evolutionary ethics explains moral is (behavioral dispositions) but not moral ought, committing the naturalistic fallacy by deriving imperatives from descriptive facts. Apparent moral intuitions, such as the wrongness of gratuitous torture, lack grounding without a transcendent source, reducing ethics to power dynamics or cultural relativism, which contradicts cross-cultural prohibitions on acts like child rape. These interconnected deficits—exacerbated by institutional biases favoring in despite evidential shortcomings—suggest that a theistic framework, positing a rational, intentional , resolves them parsimoniously by integrating , , and from first causes. Naturalism's persistence owes more to presuppositional commitment than cumulative .

Agnosticism's Epistemic Limits

maintains that the existence or non-existence of cannot be known or is currently unknown, often suspending judgment due to insufficient . This epistemic stance, however, faces limitations when evaluated against standards of beyond strict . Strong , which asserts the inherent unknowability of divine existence, commits to a positive claim about the boundaries of that demands its own justification, potentially rendering it dogmatic if compelling theistic arguments exist. Philosophers in the tradition, notably , challenge the agnostic presumption that rational belief in requires propositional evidence. Plantinga contends that theistic belief can be properly basic—rationally held without inferential support from other beliefs—when produced by cognitive faculties functioning reliably in appropriate conditions, analogous to everyday beliefs like the reliability of or . This undermines evidentialist critiques implicit in , as the absence of knockdown arguments does not entail epistemic neutrality or suspension. The epistemic limits of agnosticism become evident in its potential incompatibility with warranted theistic belief. If belief in God meets criteria for proper basicality, agnostic withholding may itself lack warrant, especially amid cumulative philosophical arguments for theism such as contingency or . Weak agnosticism, while more modest in claiming mere current uncertainty, risks intellectual inertia by not proportionally updating in light of non-evidential sources of warrant, such as posited by Plantinga. Thus, agnosticism's commitment to evidential thresholds overlooks broader epistemological possibilities, constraining its ability to decisively counter the rationality of .

Apatheism and Ignosticism Evaluations

Apatheism, the attitude of indifference toward the existence or non-existence of deities on the grounds that such matters bear no practical consequence for , fails as a substantive response to theistic arguments. Proponents, such as those characterizing it as a rejection of existential insecurity driving belief, overlook the causal implications of a divine being as the foundational cause of the , which would entail objective moral standards, purposeful in natural laws, and potential beyond temporal existence. Empirical observations, including correlations between theistic belief and reported in longitudinal studies like the 2019 analysis of global religiosity, suggest that indifference may correlate with diminished purpose rather than neutrality, undermining claims of pragmatic irrelevance. Moreover, apatheism evades rational engagement with evidence, such as the of physical constants (e.g., the tuned to 1 part in 10^120), which demands and implicates a transcendent intelligence rather than dismissible apathy. Philosophers critiquing apatheism argue it exemplifies intellectual laziness, prioritizing subjective utility over objective truth-seeking, as the unexamined assumption that divine existence lacks impact ignores first-order dependencies like the origin of rationality itself. William Lane Craig notes that apatheists offer no refutation of cumulative cases for theism, rendering the position epistemically inert and vulnerable to the same evidential pressures as atheism, such as the inadequacy of multiverse hypotheses to account for low-entropy initial conditions without teleological bias. In causal realist terms, indifference cannot negate the regress problem in naturalistic cosmologies, where an uncaused divine necessity resolves infinite causal chains more parsimoniously than brute contingencies. Thus, apatheism, while avoiding dogmatic commitment, surrenders the pursuit of maximally explanatory frameworks, prioritizing comfort over comprehensive understanding. Ignosticism, positing that assertions about God's existence are cognitively meaningless absent a univocal, unambiguous definition of "God," similarly falters under scrutiny by presupposing definitional incoherence across all theistic conceptions. Classical and contemporary theism, however, employs precise characterizations—such as Thomas Aquinas's ipsum esse subsistens (self-subsistent act of being) or Alvin Plantinga's maximally excellent being with necessary existence—enabling falsifiable predictions like the uniformity of causal laws derivable from . These definitions facilitate empirical adjudication; for instance, the cosmological argument's premise of an eternal, immaterial cause aligns with cosmology's temporal finitude (circa 13.8 billion years ago, per Planck satellite data), rendering ignostic dismissal a category error rather than a stance. Critiques from theistic philosophers highlight that 's demand for exhaustive consensus mirrors verificationist errors critiqued by , as philosophical progress occurs through stipulated definitions tested against evidence, not withheld pending semantic purity. While acknowledging vagueness in folk conceptions (e.g., anthropomorphic deities), ignores robust analytic frameworks, such as Richard Swinburne's probabilistic Bayesian approach, where God's existence maximizes given data like conscious experience's irreducibility to (supported by 2020s neuroscientific failures to localize ). Ultimately, by stalling inquiry into coherent hypotheses, abdicates epistemic responsibility, allowing naturalistic defaults to evade equivalent definitional rigor despite their own ambiguities, such as "" in models lacking empirical demonstration since Miller-Urey's 1953 partial successes.

Historical and Cross-Cultural Perspectives

Western Philosophical Developments

Western philosophical inquiry into the existence of God originated in , where (c. 428–348 BCE) described a in Timaeus as an intelligent craftsman ordering pre-existing matter into a cosmos exhibiting purpose and harmony, inferring divine agency from the universe's structured beauty. (384–322 BCE), in Metaphysics Book XII, posited an as the eternal, purely actual substance serving as the final cause for all cosmic motion and change, arguing that an of movers is impossible and requires a first, self-sufficient principle. During the medieval period, (1033–1109) advanced the in (1078), defining God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" and contending that such a being must exist in reality, as existence in the mind alone would render it less than maximal. (1225–1274), synthesizing Aristotelian causality with in (1265–1274), outlined five ways: from motion (requiring a first ), efficient causes (demanding a first cause), contingency (necessitating a necessary being), degrees of (implying a maximal source), and teleological order (pointing to an intelligent director). In the early modern era, (1596–1650) in (1641) revived ontological reasoning by asserting that the innate idea of a perfect God cannot derive from an imperfect finite mind, thus requiring God as its cause, and extended this to a where God's guarantees truth. (1646–1716) bolstered the by demonstrating that perfections are compatible and that the concept of a necessary being is possible, concluding its actual existence if conceivable without contradiction. Critiques intensified with (1711–1776), who in (published 1779) challenged analogical design arguments by emphasizing empirical limits on causation and the inadequacy of inferring a singular, perfect from finite observations, while questioning why observed order necessitates a divine origin over natural processes. (1724–1804), in (1781), refuted ontological arguments by arguing existence is not a real predicate adding to a concept's content, rendering definitions insufficient for proof, and exposed cosmological arguments to antinomies where reason equally supports or a necessary cause, limiting pure reason's scope to phenomena rather than noumena like God. Twentieth-century analytic philosophy saw revivals amid logical positivism's initial dismissal of metaphysics as unverifiable. Alvin Plantinga (born 1932) formulated a modal ontological argument in The Nature of Necessity (1974), using S5 modal logic to assert that if a maximally great being is possible in some world, it exists necessarily in all worlds, including the actual one, provided maximal excellence includes necessary existence. Richard Swinburne (born 1934), in The Existence of God (1979, revised 2004), constructed a cumulative inductive case, weighing Bayesian probabilities from cosmological origins, fine-tuned laws enabling life, consciousness, and moral order as more probable under theism than atheism, arguing the hypothesis of a simple, omnipotent creator best explains these data. These developments highlight persistent logical and probabilistic defenses against empirical and epistemological objections, though academic consensus remains divided, with theistic arguments often critiqued for assuming unproven premises amid naturalistic alternatives.

Eastern and Non-Abrahamic Views

In , views on the existence of a supreme being, often termed Īśvara, vary across schools, with some providing inferential arguments akin to design reasoning. The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika tradition, for instance, posits Īśvara as an eternal, intelligent agent necessary to explain the ordered assembly of atoms into complex structures like the , arguing that non-intelligent causes alone cannot account for purposeful design without an initiating consciousness. This inference draws from observed in nature, such as the interdependence of elements for life-sustaining systems, postulating Īśvara as the uncaused cause coordinating eternal substances. Conversely, Advaita Vedānta interprets as Brahman, an impersonal, non-dual consciousness underlying all phenomena, where personal deities represent lower, illusory manifestations rather than an independent creator. Buddhist doctrine operates as non-theistic, rejecting a as irrelevant to the core of ending suffering through insight into impermanence, no-self (), and dependent origination. The critiqued theistic views in texts like the , dismissing eternalist gods as products of ignorance, with any supramundane beings (devas) depicted as impermanent and subject to karma, not omnipotent architects of reality. This stance aligns with causal realism, as phenomena arise from interdependent conditions without requiring a transcendent , emphasizing empirical verification via over metaphysical posits. Jainism denies a singular , asserting an eternal, uncreated governed by immutable laws of karma and soul-matter interaction, where cycles of cosmic expansion and contraction occur without . Liberated (siddhas) achieve god-like and bliss but lack creative , rendering the tradition atheistic toward anthropomorphic deities while affirming eternal ethical principles. Sikhism affirms strict , with as the formless, timeless, self-existent creator sustaining the through divine will (), as articulated in the . This God is both transcendent and immanent, rejecting or in favor of direct realization via meditation and ethical living. Taoist philosophy centers on the as an impersonal, ineffable principle of natural harmony and , from which the emerges without deliberate creation or personal volition. Unlike a theistic God, the lacks agency or judgment, guiding through (non-action), with folk deities secondary to this foundational flux. Confucianism remains non-theistic, prioritizing human ethics, ritual propriety (li), and social harmony over divine ontology, with Tian (Heaven) denoting cosmic moral order rather than a personal deity demanding worship. Confucius focused on cultivable virtues like ren (benevolence), viewing supernatural concerns as secondary to observable human relations.

Scientific Revolutions' Impact on Debate

The Copernican revolution, initiated by Nicolaus Copernicus's De revolutionibus orbium coelestium published in 1543, shifted astronomical models from geocentric to heliocentric frameworks, prompting theological reinterpretations of scriptural passages implying Earth-centered cosmology, such as Joshua 10:12-13. While some viewed this as diminishing human centrality and thus divine purpose, Copernicus himself dedicated his work to Pope Paul III and framed the solar system as evidence of God's rational design, avoiding direct conflict with theism. The revolution did not refute God's existence but encouraged distinctions between phenomenological biblical language and scientific descriptions, fostering accommodation theories where scripture conveys theological truths rather than empirical mechanics. Isaac Newton's (1687) formalized laws of motion and universal gravitation, portraying the universe as a mechanistic system governed by predictable mathematical principles, which inspired deistic conceptions of God as a "watchmaker" who initiates but does not intervene in cosmic operations. Newton, however, rejected strict , arguing in (1704) that divine sustenance was necessary to prevent gravitational perturbations from destabilizing planetary orbits, thus integrating with empirical laws as manifestations of intelligent causation rather than mere artifacts. This framework bolstered teleological arguments by highlighting order and stability as improbable without purposeful , though it also narrowed divine action to foundational laws, reducing appeals to ongoing miracles. Charles Darwin's (1859) introduced as a mechanism for biological diversity, providing a non-teleological explanation for apparent design in organisms and eroding reliance on for species origins. The theory challenged literal readings of but permitted , where God employs secondary causes like variation and selection; Darwin's own views shifted toward , yet contemporaries like reconciled it with . Critics of theistic interpretations argue it exemplifies the "God of the gaps" fallacy, where divine explanations retreat as science advances, but proponents counter that addresses , not ultimate origins of or , preserving metaphysical arguments for a first cause. Twentieth-century cosmology, particularly Georges Lemaître's model proposed in 1927 and supported by Edwin Hubble's 1929 observations of galactic recession, evidenced a finite universe originating from a approximately 13.8 billion years ago, aligning with kalām cosmological arguments positing that whatever begins to exist has a cause beyond . Lemaître, a Catholic priest, viewed it as compatible with creation ex nihilo, countering steady-state alternatives and refuting eternal universe models once favored by atheists like Friedrich Hoyle. Contemporary observations, such as the precise values of constants like the (measured at 10^{-120} in ), suggest life-permitting conditions require exact calibration improbable under random variation, reviving inferences not vulnerable to gap-filling critiques since they target the universe's foundational parameters rather than unexplained phenomena. These developments illustrate how scientific revolutions, while expanding naturalistic accounts, often reveal contingencies—beginnings, improbabilities—that sustain rather than resolve theistic debates, emphasizing causal over materialist assumptions.

Recent Trends Post-2020

Post-2020, empirical surveys in the United States reveal a deceleration in the long-term decline of religious identification, with the proportion of religiously unaffiliated adults stabilizing around 28% as of , down marginally from 2021 peaks and suggesting the rapid rise of "nones" may have concluded. Similarly, data from 2025 indicate the share of self-identified has held steady since 2019, contrasting earlier accelerated drops, while attendance at religious services remains at approximately 50% for monthly participants. Gallup polls corroborate this pattern, recording belief in at a record low of 45% in 2022 but noting in 2025 that 34% of adults perceive as gaining societal influence, up from 20% the prior year. Among younger demographics, certain theistic convictions show upticks; Barna Group's 2025 State of the Church research reports rising commitment to Jesus Christ over the prior four years, particularly driven by adults under 40, amid broader stability in core theological views per Lifeway Research's annual State of Theology survey of over 3,000 U.S. adults. However, George Barna's concurrent findings highlight a countervailing trend, with only 40% of affirming God's active and in 2025, reflecting persistent minimization of divine in daily life. Intellectually, the movement, prominent in the 2000s, has fragmented post-2020 due to internal divisions, scandals involving key figures, and failure to sustain a viable alternative worldview beyond critique of , leading analysts to declare its effective collapse by 2023. This vacuum coincides with observations of halted in Western societies; a 2025 analysis posits that after decades of eroding —e.g., U.S. atheists, agnostics, and "nones" surging from 5% in 1990 to 30% by 2019—recent data indicate stabilization or reversal, attributed partly to cultural pushback against perceived excesses of progressive ideologies. In , theistic positions continue to predominate among specialists, with ongoing debates emphasizing probabilistic arguments from and rather than novel proofs, though public discourse increasingly integrates these via podcasts and online forums amid declining institutional . Globally, Pew's 2025 findings underscore heightened tensions, with 58% of U.S. adults reporting conflict between religious beliefs and mainstream culture, up 10 points since prior measures, signaling resilient theistic adherence despite secular pressures. These patterns suggest a post-pandemic recalibration, where existential challenges like prompted temporary surges in and seeking, though long-term shifts hinge on broader causal factors including demographic changes and reevaluations of naturalistic explanations' sufficiency.

Experiential and Psychological Dimensions

Religious Experiences and Veridical Perceptions

Religious experiences encompass subjective encounters interpreted as direct awareness of or the divine, often described with qualities of vividness, noetic certainty, and transformative impact. When considered veridical—accurately corresponding to an objective divine reality—these experiences form a key evidential basis for theistic , analogous to sensory perceptions justifying beliefs about the physical world. Philosophers contend that dismissing them wholesale requires prior commitment to , which lacks independent justification. Richard Swinburne articulates the argument through the principle of credulity, asserting that it is rational to trust experiential seemings unless specific evidence indicates deception, applying equally to religious perceptions of . In the absence of counterevidence, widespread reports of sensing God's presence or intervention cumulatively support the hypothesis of divine reality over alternatives like collective . Swinburne's probabilistic approach weighs these experiences as Bayesian evidence favoring , given their prevalence and consistency across cultures. William Alston develops a perceptual in Perceiving God, defending "M-experiences" (mystical perceptions) as a reliable doxastic for forming beliefs about , comparable to sense perception despite lacking public verifiability. Alston argues that the 's internal coherence and lack of known unreliability justify acceptance, rebutting demands for external validation that would undermine all basic perceptual beliefs. Alvin Plantinga integrates religious experiences into , positing that theistic beliefs elicited by such experiences can be properly basic—warranted without inferential support from arguments or evidence—when produced by cognitive faculties functioning reliably in an appropriate environment designed by . This framework challenges evidentialist critiques by analogizing divine perception to memory or perceptual beliefs, which are not defeated absent specific defeaters. Empirical data underscores the phenomenon's scope: a 2009 Pew survey found 49% of U.S. adults reporting a religious or mystical experience, while 22% in a 2023 Pew study described monthly sensations of a transcendent presence. Near-death experiences occasionally include veridical perceptions, such as blind individuals reporting accurate visual details impossible via normal means, suggesting non-physical . Studies on transformative effects reveal lasting psychological benefits, including heightened purpose, reduced , and enhanced , correlating with the experiences' reported noetic content of divine . These outcomes, observed longitudinally, indicate causal efficacy beyond mere psychological , as they persist independently of prior beliefs and resist naturalistic reduction without explanatory loss. Neuroscientific correlates, while present, parallel those in veridical sensory states and do not entail illusory status, particularly given academia's prevalent naturalistic presuppositions that skew interpretive neutrality.

Cognitive Biases in Belief Formation

Cognitive biases shape the formation of beliefs about God's existence by predisposing humans to infer , , and in the , often favoring theistic interpretations as intuitive defaults. These biases, studied in the of , arise from evolutionary adaptations for survival, such as detecting threats or patterns, but can generate false positives leading to supernatural attributions. Empirical research indicates that children exhibit stronger such biases than adults, suggesting an innate tilt towards that analytic reasoning may modulate, though causal evidence for suppression remains inconsistent. The hyperactive agency detection device (HADD) hypothesis posits that human cognition overdetects intentional agents in ambiguous events, attributing causes to minds rather than chance or natural forces, which may underpin belief in gods as hidden agents. Coined by Justin Barrett, HADD is theorized to confer survival benefits by erring on the side of caution—e.g., interpreting rustling bushes as predatory intent rather than —but critics note scarce direct tying it specifically to religious belief formation, with agency detection appearing reliable rather than systematically hyperactive in controlled tests. Promiscuous teleology represents another key bias, wherein individuals intuitively explain natural phenomena via purpose or function, even absent evidence of design. In Kelemen's 1999 experiments with children aged 6-10 (N=64), participants preferred teleological explanations for nonliving natural features—like "rocks are pointy to keep animals from falling off"—at rates of 57-75% for first and second graders, dropping to 44% for fourth graders after exposure to non-teleological alternatives, while adults endorsed them only 11% of the time. This childhood tendency correlates with creationist views, as teleological reasoning extends to inferring a cosmic designer, persisting subtly in adults under . Confirmation bias further entrenches theistic beliefs by selectively attending to evidence aligning with prior convictions, such as interpreting coincidences as divine signs while discounting counterexamples. A 2024 study found that greater deliberation and negative emotional responses to opposing arguments amplified this bias in religious domains, with participants (N unspecified in abstract) showing heightened adherence to faith-based interpretations. Such bias operates bidirectionally, affecting skeptics who dismiss theistic arguments as illusory, but empirical patterns suggest it sustains default intuitions favoring supernatural explanations in unreflective states. Efforts to override these biases via analytic thinking highlight their intuitive primacy. Gervais and Norenzayan's 2012 experiments (N=57-179 across studies) reported that priming analytic cognition—via images like Rodin's or disfluent fonts—reduced self-reported belief in (effect sizes d=0.31-0.60, p<0.05), implying disbelief requires effortful override of heuristics. However, a 2017 direct replication with N=941 participants across multiple sites found no significant effect (d=0.07, p=0.38), attributing the original results to potential overestimation or weak manipulation validity, thus questioning causal claims while preserving correlational links between analytical traits and lower religiosity. This underscores that theistic belief formation leverages cognitive shortcuts, with suppression demanding sustained reflection.

Sociological Patterns in Theistic Belief

Belief in God exhibits pronounced sociological patterns, with higher prevalence in less economically developed regions and among certain demographic groups. Globally, surveys indicate that while theistic belief remains widespread, it correlates inversely with societal modernization in many contexts. For instance, in and , over 90% of respondents affirm belief in God or a , compared to under 50% in and , reflecting patterns tied to cultural traditions and economic conditions rather than uniform . These regional disparities persist in data, where traditional societies in the Global South score higher on indices than secular-rational ones in the Global North. Demographic factors further delineate these patterns. Women consistently report higher rates of firm belief in God across cultures; in a 2024 analysis of international surveys, 55% of women expressed without doubts versus 43% of men, a gap attributed to differences in and social roles rather than doctrinal variance. Age shows an inverse relationship, with younger cohorts displaying lower theistic adherence worldwide; Pew Research analysis of over 100 countries found that adults under 40 are less likely to pray daily or attend services than those over 60, a trend evident from to the . Socioeconomic status introduces nuance, often linking lower income and levels to elevated , though remains debated. In the United States, Pew's 2023-24 Religious Landscape Study reveals that college graduates are twice as likely to identify as religiously unaffiliated compared to those with high school or less, suggesting exposure to secular worldviews influences . Globally, lower socioeconomic groups report stronger doctrinal adherence and devotional practices, as documented in longitudinal studies, potentially serving adaptive functions in resource-scarce environments. However, this correlation weakens or reverses in highly gender-egalitarian societies, where men's declines more sharply. Temporal trends underscore these patterns' dynamism. From 2005 to 2024, global self-identified declined from 68% to 56%, driven by and education gains in emerging economies, per Gallup International. Yet, countercurrents exist; in the U.S., 90% of adults affirm belief in or a as of , with recent stabilization in Christian identification after prior declines. These shifts highlight how sociological forces—, policy, and —interact with individual predispositions, rather than deterministic decline. European patterns exemplify regional variation, with belief in below 30% in but exceeding 70% in parts of , per aggregated survey data.

Empirical Studies on Persuadability and Shifts

Empirical investigations into the persuadability of beliefs about God's existence reveal high to change, with rational arguments exerting minimal on core convictions. Surveys of professional philosophers, for instance, demonstrate that prior religious affiliation strongly predicts evaluations of natural theological arguments, such as the cosmological or design arguments; theists rate these as significantly more sound and persuasive than atheists, who dismiss them despite equivalent exposure, indicative of motivated reasoning where preexisting beliefs shape perceived validity rather than objective assessment. Similar patterns emerge in broader populations, where exposure to counterarguments fails to produce measurable shifts in theistic commitment, as individuals selectively interpret evidence to align with identity-protective . Longitudinal and experimental data further underscore belief stability. A 2023 study analyzing personality inventories before and after or deconversion found only modest changes, primarily in (effect size d ≈ 0.2-0.3), with no evidence of dramatic rational reevaluation driving transitions; instead, shifts correlated more with life stressors or social influences than argumentative persuasion. Experimental priming techniques, such as inducing analytic thinking via tasks like the , temporarily reduce implicit religiosity by 10-15% in lab settings, but effects dissipate quickly and do not translate to enduring disbelief in . Deconversion rates remain low—approximately 14% of those raised religious in the U.S. become unaffiliated—predominantly attributed to personal doubts, moral disagreements, or disaffection rather than philosophical rebuttals. These findings align with broader research, where religious beliefs function as deeply entrenched worldviews resistant to dissonance reduction through alone. Meta-analyses of experiments show that identity-relevant topics like yield backfire effects, wherein strong disconfirming arguments reinforce prior positions via selective scrutiny. While niche interventions, such as exposure to religious anti- norms, can modestly alter peripheral attitudes (e.g., reducing support for by 0.2 standard deviations), they fail to sway foundational theistic . Thus, suggests that persuadability on God's existence is constrained by cognitive and motivational barriers, with shifts more attributable to holistic experiential or social cascades than isolated rational appeals.

References

  1. [1]
    What Scientific Proof Do We Have That There Is a God?
    Aug 1, 2024 · There is powerful scientific evidence that points to God's existence, and we'll discuss two lines of this evidence below.
  2. [2]
    My 5 Favorite Arguments for God's Existence | Free Thinking Ministries
    Dec 28, 2017 · The five arguments are: The Kalam Cosmological Argument, The Fine-Tuning Argument, The Local Fine-Tuning Argument, The Moral Argument, and The ...Argument 1: The Kalam... · Argument 2: The Cosmic... · Argument 5: The Ontological...
  3. [3]
    Twenty Arguments God's Existence - Peter Kreeft
    The arguments include: Change, Efficient Causality, Time and Contingency, Degrees of Perfection, Design, Kalam, Contingency, World as a Whole, Miracles, ...5. The Design Argument · 15. The Argument From... · 16. The Argument From Desire
  4. [4]
    Divine Hiddenness Argument against God's Existence
    The Divine Hiddenness Argument suggests that if God existed, His existence would be more obvious, and since it's not, God likely does not exist.Responses to the Arguments... · Greater Goods and Other...
  5. [5]
    Does science disprove the existence of God?
    Science cannot prove or disprove God's existence, as it studies the natural world, while God is considered supernatural. Science and religion use different ...
  6. [6]
    Survey: Eight in 10 people globally believe in God - CathNews NZ
    Jul 8, 2025 · Most people on the planet believe in God or a higher power, according to a survey of 90,000 people in 85 countries and areas.
  7. [7]
    Abrahamic Religions: Comparing 3 Major World Religions (CHART)
    Jan 9, 2025 · Strict monotheism; God is one, incorporeal, and eternal. Monotheism within the concept of Trinity. Strict monotheism; Allah is one, incomparable ...
  8. [8]
    Brahman, The Highest God Of Hinduism - Hinduwebsite.com
    Brahman the Absolute God of Hindus, is a very mysterious Being. In Hinduism He occupies the highest place, as the creator and enjoyer of all creation.
  9. [9]
    Brahman: The ultimate reality in Hindu philosophy
    Jan 2, 2025 · In Hindu philosophy, Brahman is the foundational metaphysical concept representing the ultimate, unchanging, and infinite reality that ...
  10. [10]
    Ancient Greek Philosophy
    Epicurus, like Xenophanes, claimed that the mass of people is impious, since the people conceive of the gods as little more than superhumans, even though human ...
  11. [11]
    God, religion and society in ancient thought: from early Greek ...
    Jun 14, 2024 · God is a metaphysical principle and is described as an entity that regulates the cosmos by being the object of longing; indeed, this principle ...
  12. [12]
    Religious Epistemology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    The evidentialist objection may be formalized as follows: (1) Belief in God is rational only if there is sufficient evidence for the existence of God. (2) ...
  13. [13]
    Warrant and Proper Function - Plantinga, Alvin: Books - Amazon.com
    In this companion volume to Warrant: The Current Debate, Alvin Plantinga develops an original approach to the question of epistemic warrant.
  14. [14]
    The Epistemology of Religion - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Apr 23, 1997 · An influential contemporary rejection of evidentialism is reformed epistemology, due to Wolterstorff (1976) and Plantinga (1983). As Plantinga ...Natural theology · Reformed Epistemology · Religious Experience... · BibliographyMissing: critique | Show results with:critique<|separator|>
  15. [15]
    Religious Experience and the Burden of Proof - Oxford Academic
    An analysis of three problems for Richard Swinburne's Bayesian cumulative case strategy in natural theology shows why he needs to shift the burden of proof ...
  16. [16]
    WARRANTED CHRISTIAN BELIEF, by Alvin Plantinga
    Oct 22, 2015 · In Warranted Christian Belief, Plantinga applies his notion of proper function to Christian belief to argue that belief in the great things of the gospel is in ...
  17. [17]
    Naturalism - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Feb 22, 2007 · In this sense, “methodological naturalism” is the view that religious commitments have no relevance within science: natural science itself ...Moral Naturalism · Moral Non-Naturalism · 12
  18. [18]
    Cosmological Argument - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Jul 13, 2004 · The cosmological argument is part of classical natural theology, whose goal is to provide evidence for the claim that God exists.
  19. [19]
    Investigating the roots of the natural/supernatural dichotomy - Aeon
    Feb 4, 2025 · ' Clarke concluded that there really is no distinction between natural and supernatural since events that we typically regard as purely natural ...
  20. [20]
    https://answersingenesis.org/what-is-science/must-science-exclude-the-supernatural/
  21. [21]
    More Evidence for Supernatural Creation and Design of the Universe
    Jan 4, 2009 · With their analysis of the additional measurements, the SCP published improved constraints on a number of important cosmological parameters.Missing: arguments | Show results with:arguments
  22. [22]
    When Natural and Super-Natural Explanations Work Hand in Hand
    Dec 4, 2023 · Methodological naturalism is the idea that scientists may only invoke unintelligent causes for nature's history. In Part 1, Keas explores ...
  23. [23]
    Scientists Confirm Age of Universe is 13.8 Billion Years
    Jul 15, 2020 · The universe is about 13.8 billion years old, according to new research published in a series of papers by an international team of astrophysicists.
  24. [24]
    It all started with a Big Bang – the quest to unravel the mystery ...
    Oct 30, 2024 · The 14 billion year story of our universe begins with a cataclysmic explosion everywhere in space, which we call the Big Bang.
  25. [25]
    The Universe Began with a Bang, Not a Bounce, New Studies Find
    May 24, 2023 · New research pokes holes in the idea that the cosmos expanded and then contracted before beginning again.
  26. [26]
    https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/could-universe-expand-forever/
  27. [27]
    The Kalam Cosmological Argument | Popular Writings
    What properties must this cause of the universe possess? This cause must be itself uncaused because we've seen that an infinite series of causes is impossible.
  28. [28]
    The Scientific Kalam Cosmological Argument | Reasonable Faith
    In this lecture at Georgia Tech Dr. Craig focuses on the scientific evidence for the premises of the kalam cosmological argument for a Personal Creator of the ...
  29. [29]
    Fine-Tuning - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Aug 22, 2017 · The term “fine-tuning” is used to characterize sensitive dependences of facts or properties on the values of certain parameters.
  30. [30]
    List of Fine-Tuning Parameters | Discovery Institute
    Jan 14, 2015 · Cosmic Constants · Gravitational force constant · Electromagnetic force constant · Strong nuclear force constant · Weak nuclear force constant ...
  31. [31]
    Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces that Shape the Universe by ...
    Jun 8, 2012 · The astronomer royal addresses the cosmic coincidence that six numbers in physics are just right for the emergence of galaxies, stars, chemistry and people.
  32. [32]
    The origin of life: what we know, what we can know and what we will ...
    The origin of life (OOL) problem remains one of the more challenging scientific questions of all time. In this essay, we propose that following recent ...
  33. [33]
    Abiogenesis: the Carter argument reconsidered
    Sep 23, 2022 · The observation of life on Earth is commonly believed to be uninformative regarding the probability of abiogenesis on other Earth-like planets.
  34. [34]
    Secular Paper Admits ''Unreasonable Likelihood'' of Abiogenesis
    Sep 4, 2025 · A study suggests abiogenesis is possible but "mind-bending" with "formidable entropic and informational barriers," and evolutionists have no ...
  35. [35]
    The meaning of biological information - Journals
    Mar 13, 2016 · Biological information encoded in genomes is fundamentally different from and effectively orthogonal to Shannon entropy.
  36. [36]
    Review of Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer - Sites at Penn State
    Nov 3, 2022 · Meyer argues that the chance hypothesis is not reasonable because the probability of forming even a single protein or nucleic acid by chance is ...Missing: key arguments<|separator|>
  37. [37]
    The Argument from Specified Complexity - Faithful Science
    A related argument for design involves a different kind of complexity known as specified complexity , also called complex specified information or functional ...
  38. [38]
    Specified Complexity Made Simple - Bill Dembski
    Feb 26, 2024 · Specified complexity is a creationist argument introduced by William Dembski, used by advocates to promote the pseudoscience of intelligent design.Historical Backdrop · Shannon And Kolmogorov... · Specified Complexity As A...
  39. [39]
    DNA & Specified Complexity: An Introduction by Jeremy Blatchford
    Apr 1, 2018 · DNA and its sister molecules RNA and proteins are carriers of what we call “complex specified information.”
  40. [40]
    [PDF] The Argument from Consciousness | 123philosophy
    It must be confessed, moreover, that perception, and that which depends on it are inexplicable by mechanical cause, that is by figures and motions.
  41. [41]
    [PDF] Arguing to Theism from Consciousness
    Jul 1, 2020 · I provide an argument from consciousness for God's existence. I first consider a version of the argument which is ultimately difficult to ...
  42. [42]
    From Consciousness to God | Sophia
    Aug 26, 2025 · The argument from consciousness was divided into two distinct arguments: AC1 (only theism can solve the mind-body problem) and AC2 (only theism ...
  43. [43]
    Anselm: Ontological Argument for the God's Existence
    Ontological arguments attempt to show that we can deduce God's existence from, so to speak, the very definition of God.
  44. [44]
    Kant's Objection to the Ontological Argument - Scandalon
    Kant's objection to the ontological argument is that existence is not a property that can be attributed to beings like we can attribute other properties.
  45. [45]
    [PDF] Godel's Ontological Argument
    Godel's god must be unique across all worlds, since the object in representing god in each world has the property G, which entails identical properties in all ...
  46. [46]
    Plantinga's ontological argument - Edward Feser
    Dec 1, 2010 · Alvin Plantinga famously defends a version of the ontological argument that makes use of the notion of possible worlds.
  47. [47]
    [PDF] Plantinga's Ontological Argument - PhilArchive
    May 1, 2017 · Plantinga developed his modal version of the ontological argument for the existence of God in his two controversial books, The Nature of ...
  48. [48]
    design, moral, ontological, pragmatic, or cosmological?
    This is a survey of professional philosophers in the English-speaking world and others concerning their views on some central philosophical questions, ...
  49. [49]
    The Moral Argument for God | Reasonable Faith
    Dec 23, 2013 · 1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. 2. Objective moral values do exist. 3. Therefore, God exists.
  50. [50]
    Moral Argument (part 1) | Defenders - Reasonable Faith
    1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. 2. Objective moral values do exist. 3. Therefore, God exist.
  51. [51]
    Moral Argument (part 2) | Defenders: 1 | Reasonable Faith
    On Atheistic Moral Realism, moral values are not grounded in God. Rather, they just exist as sort of abstract entities. Moral values don't have any further ...<|separator|>
  52. [52]
    Moral Arguments for the Existence of God
    Jun 12, 2014 · Moral arguments for God's existence form a diverse family of arguments that reason from some feature of morality or the moral life to the ...
  53. [53]
    Revisiting Folk Moral Realism - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH
    Moral realists believe that there are objective moral truths. According to one of the most prominent arguments in favour of this view, ordinary people ...
  54. [54]
    Mere Christianity and the Moral Argument for the Existence of God
    CS Lewis's moral argument for the existence of God from Mere Christianity has been called the “most widely-convincing apologetic argument of the twentieth ...
  55. [55]
    The Moral Argument for God's Existence - Apologetics
    Mar 30, 2016 · I will argue that if objective moral values exist, then God exists; objective moral values do exist; therefore, God exists.
  56. [56]
    C. S. Lewis's Argument from Reason - Credo Magazine
    Jul 18, 2023 · Reason—the reason of God—is older than Nature, and from it the orderliness of Nature, which alone enables us to know her, is derived ...
  57. [57]
    Reason - CS Lewis Society of California
    The Argument from Reason ... There are various phenomena that believers in the existence of God can appeal to to support the claim that God exists. One can look ...
  58. [58]
    [PDF] An Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism - AWS
    According to Plantinga, blind evolution is not likely to lead to reliable cognitive faculties, which means that naturalists who recognize this cannot rationally ...
  59. [59]
    Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism
    Nov 8, 2020 · Plantinga argues that naturalism is self-defeating because if our cognitive faculties have evolved by naturalistic processes, they are aimed, ...
  60. [60]
    An Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism - Bethinking
    In a complex, but important philosophical argument, he argues that it is not rational to accept belief in naturalism and evolution.
  61. [61]
    Terminology Tuesday: Cumulative Case Arguments - Apologetics 315
    Cumulative Case Arguments: Arguments for the existence of God (or some other complex claim) that do not consist of a single decisive argument but rather try ...<|separator|>
  62. [62]
    A Cumulative Case | The Evidential Force of Religious Experience
    In The Existence of God, Swinburne argues not only that it is rational to maintain a current religious belief but also that 'theism is more probable than not'.
  63. [63]
    [PDF] CUMULATIVE CASE APOLOGETICS | RE:quest
    PROFESSOR RICHARD SWINBURNE. Professor of Philosophy at Oxford University ... 'Cumulative case apologetics is the best argument for God's existence.' Do ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Plantinga, Alvin. "Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Arguments"
    What follows are notes for a lecture on theistic arguments given in a sum- mer seminar in philosophy of religion in Bellingham, Washington, in 1986.
  65. [65]
    Rapid Response: “What Makes the Cumulative Case for God So ...
    Aug 5, 2022 · The evidence in the universe, based on this cumulative case, points to a divine intruder, a cosmic creator, an all-powerful, all-knowing God.
  66. [66]
    [PDF] Plantinga, "Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Argument" - Appeared-to-Blogly
    I've been arguing that theistic belief does not (in general) need argument either for deontological justification, or for positive epistemic status, ...
  67. [67]
    22. Reasons for Hope: Integrating Diverse Arguments in Apologetics
    Mar 3, 2006 · The evidentialist responds that evil does not make God's existence unlikely because it cannot counterbalance the significant evidence for God.
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Evil and Omnipotence JL Mackie Mind, New Series, Vol. 64, No. 254 ...
    Jan 1, 2008 · In. Hume's rather half-hearted presentation of the problem of evil, the evils that he stresses are pain and disease. and those who reply to him ...
  69. [69]
    [PDF] The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism
    In the final part of the paper I discuss and defend the position of friendly atheism. Before we consider the argument from evil, we need to distinguish ...
  70. [70]
    hiddenness of God - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Apr 23, 2016 · Schellenberg argues that a person cannot even “get started” in a personal relationship—specifically, a conscious, reciprocal, positively ...The argument from... · Other assessments of the... · The argument from the...
  71. [71]
    Religious 'Nones' in America: Who They Are and What They Believe
    Jan 24, 2024 · 28% of US adults are religiously unaffiliated, describing themselves as atheists, agnostics or “nothing in particular” when asked about their religion.Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence
  72. [72]
    [PDF] Divine Hiddenness and Human Philosophy - J. L. Schellenberg
    Arguments against the existence of such a being have of course also emerged and been discussed. Now in the present climate of 'theism or naturalism,' it will ...
  73. [73]
    [PDF] C. S. Lewis on the Problem of Divine Hiddenness
    The problem of divine hiddenness questions why a loving God doesn't make his existence obvious, if many people fail to believe in him.
  74. [74]
    A New Response to the Problem of Divine Hiddenness
    Jun 4, 2019 · The argument from divine hiddenness states that if a perfectly loving God exists, then no one would non-resistantly not believe in God, but ...
  75. [75]
    Many Religious 'Nones' Around the World Hold Spiritual Beliefs
    Sep 4, 2025 · Across the countries surveyed, a median of 53% say religion mostly hurts society, while a median of 38% say it mostly helps.
  76. [76]
    The God Who Reveals: A Response to J. L. Schellenberg's ...
    Schellenberg concluded that the existence of an all-loving and personal God is incompatible with the existence of nonresistant nonbelievers.
  77. [77]
    Origin of the Universe: How Did It Begin and How Will It End?
    May 14, 2024 · The Big Bang Theory suggests that about 13.8 billion years ago, the entire universe began from a dense, extremely hot single spot according to the Center for ...
  78. [78]
    Universe's Beginning: Naturalistic Mechanisms or Creation?
    May 26, 2022 · They argue that the very claim of creation is false on the ground that its source is the Bible, and therefore lacks any scientific basis.
  79. [79]
    https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ergo/12405314.0006.042/--reasonable-little-question-a-formulation-of-the-fine-tuning
  80. [80]
    A Fatal Objection to the Fine-Tuning Argument? | Reasonable Faith
    Aug 13, 2023 · The objection comes from attempting to calculate the probability (or chance) of Fine- Tuning given naturalism.
  81. [81]
    Can Naturalism Account for the Appearance of Fine-Tuning in the ...
    Is Fine-Tuning Unrequired? Some physicists have simply denied the importance of fine-tuning by claiming life could have emerged from broader, less fine-tuned ...
  82. [82]
    Strong Evidence that Abiogenesis Is a Rapid Process on Earth ...
    We formally have strong evidence that favors the hypothesis that life rapidly emerges in Earth-like conditions (although such environments may themselves be ...
  83. [83]
    New developments in the origin of life on Earth - Math Scholar
    Aug 27, 2024 · It is certainly true that as of the above date, scientists do not yet fully understand abiogenesis (the formal term for the origin of life on Earth).
  84. [84]
    New Research Challenges 160-Year-Old Long-Standing Origin of ...
    May 11, 2025 · A study finds the formose reaction cannot produce the linear sugar ribose under prebiotic conditions, challenging its role in life's origins.
  85. [85]
    Can neuroscience solve the mystery of consciousness?
    Sep 16, 2025 · The global workspace theory is a popular theory in neuroscience, which describes what consciousness does in a perceptible way. ... This theory ...
  86. [86]
    Consciousness as an Emergent Phenomenon: A Tale of Different ...
    Consciousness may emerge from subcellular networks with quantum phenomena, not just large brain areas, and may be enhanced by quantum correlations.
  87. [87]
    What if consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain ...
    This review examines phenomena that apparently contradict the notion that consciousness is exclusively dependent on brain activity.
  88. [88]
    Theoretical Models of Consciousness: A Scoping Review - PMC
    This scoping review analyzed 68 articles that described 29 theories of consciousness. We found heterogeneous perspectives in the theories analyzed.
  89. [89]
    Morality and Evolutionary Biology
    Dec 19, 2008 · Evolutionary explanations for morality in the empirical sense are offered at various levels, and this makes for very different explanatory ...Descriptive Evolutionary Ethics... · Evolutionary Biology and...
  90. [90]
    The Evolution of Morality
    As genetic behavior, moral outcomes are explained alternately by kin selection or reciprocity. As a psychological motive or intent, morality is explained by ...
  91. [91]
    Morality: An Evolutionary Account - PubMed
    Morality originated in deferential, cooperative, and altruistic social instincts, or decision-making strategies, that enabled early humans to maximize their ...Missing: explanations | Show results with:explanations
  92. [92]
    Why Did Kant Think the Ontological Proof for God's Existence Failed?
    Aug 7, 2023 · Kant's primary objection to ontological proof is epistemological. He believes reason alone cannot confirm the existence of something, especially ...
  93. [93]
    Hume's Refutation of the Cosmological Argument - jstor
    6. Therefore, the cosmological argument does not establish that God exists. At least three of the criticisms from the Dialogues support the main premises.
  94. [94]
    [PDF] KANT'S CRITICISM OF THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
    criticism of the ontological argument itself. There are two principal forms of the cosmological argument. These are the argument from contingency.
  95. [95]
    Darwin and Design
    Darwin's work is usually viewed as undermining natural theology by replacing Paley's model of an ingeniously designed creation with a theory of functional ...
  96. [96]
    Hume and Kant's Criticism of the Cosmological Argument - Scandalon
    Hume argued that it was illegitimate to move from saying that every event in the universe has a cause to the claim that the universe has a cause. Bertrand ...
  97. [97]
    The Euthyphro Dilemma | Good God - Oxford Academic
    In nearly every ethics text, the famous Euthyphro Dilemma—is something moral because God commands it, or does God command it because it is moral?
  98. [98]
    The Euthyphro Dilemma - Christian Research Institute
    The Euthyphro dilemma is frequently being cited as a kind of silver bullet against attempts to ground morality in God.
  99. [99]
    Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted
    His argument turns crucially on the claim that, in the absence of any God-like being to guide the process, natural selection is unlikely to favour true belief.<|separator|>
  100. [100]
    6. Arguments against the Cosmological - jamesdholt.com
    The cosmological argument raises a whole host of major philosophical problems to do with motion, causality, infinity, necessity and many others.
  101. [101]
    Atheism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Positive atheism draws a stronger conclusion than any of the problems with arguments for God's existence alone could justify. Absence of evidence is not ...Missing: rebuttals | Show results with:rebuttals
  102. [102]
    Plantinga Drains Russell's Teapot - Analogical Thoughts
    Jul 15, 2016 · Alvin Plantinga on Russell's teapot, from a 2014 interview by Gary Gutting: G.G.: You say atheism requires evidence to support it.
  103. [103]
    Theistic Critiques Of Atheism | Scholarly Writings | Reasonable Faith
    A brief survey of prominent anti-theistic arguments such as the presumption of atheism, the incoherence of theism, and the problem of evil.
  104. [104]
    Plantinga on why he believes in God, dislikes the New Atheists, and ...
    Aug 14, 2012 · The man simply can't understand that evolution will instill in us representations and perceptions of the real world that are generally accurate.
  105. [105]
    The Arguments for God's Existence and Critique of the New Atheists
    1. If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist. · 2. Objective moral values and duties do exist. · 3. Therefore, God exists.
  106. [106]
    What is the evidence for/against the existence of God?
    The argument is over whether the evidence for and against the existence of God ultimately prevails.
  107. [107]
    6 Rational Arguments Against Atheism - Catholicism Coffee
    Oct 5, 2022 · Argument: Atheism leads to determinism because we have no free will. If determinism is true, our beliefs are not determined by freely ...
  108. [108]
    How Sean Carroll gets the fine-tuning argument wrong
    Jan 4, 2016 · If theism makes superior predictions, it warrants acceptance; otherwise, it fails. But the fine-tuning hypothesis doesn't merely state that God ...
  109. [109]
    Rethinking “Prebiotic Chemistry” - Wong - 2025 - AGU Journals - Wiley
    Jul 11, 2025 · That abiogenesis remains a monumental scientific problem is what draws us, along with many others, to advancing this multidisciplinary line ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  110. [110]
    What Were the Chances of Abiogenesis? - Universe Today
    Jul 31, 2025 · The research suggests that relying purely on chance and natural chemical processes may not adequately explain life's emergence within the ...
  111. [111]
    [PDF] Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness - David Chalmers
    The really hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. When we think and perceive, there is a whir of information-processing, but there is ...
  112. [112]
    Why Evolutionary Ethics Fails to Account for Objective Morality
    Apr 14, 2015 · Moral values do not fit in the ontology of naturalism. On a naturalistic view, our moral values are the result of biological evolution.
  113. [113]
    Making Sense of Morality: Problems with Naturalism 3
    Apr 19, 2021 · Nominalism undermines our core morals, as well as morality altogether. Moreover, it undermines naturalism as false.
  114. [114]
    [PDF] What is Wrong with Agnostic Belief? - PhilArchive
    being an agnostic believer is epistemically wrong. The point can be ... discussion. 70. Agnosticism. Page 25. does not sound so bad. In fact, however that ...
  115. [115]
    Agnosticism | Inters.org
    Thus the critique of agnosticism consists in casting light upon the difficulty and, in a certain way, the absurdity of the position of one who affirms that the ...
  116. [116]
    [PDF] Alvin Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology: Analysis and Critique
    In Plantinga's estimation, the upshot of Bavinck's thought is that "the believer does not need natural theology in order to achieve rationality or epistemic ...
  117. [117]
    [PDF] Reformed Epistemology and Objection to it
    Plantinga makes it clear that he understands the evidentialist challenge (as well as its epistemological framework namely, classical foundationalism) to be a ...
  118. [118]
    [PDF] A Critical Review of Alvin Plantinga's Warranted Christian Belief
    I am not sure that Plantinga is right about the extent to which atheists and agnostics claim that even if true, belief in Christianity is irrational. I think ...
  119. [119]
    Athens without a Statue to the Unknown God - The Gospel Coalition
    Apatheism is indifference and apathy toward the existence of God. In our secular age, a person adopts apatheism when they feel a sense of existential security ...
  120. [120]
    Apatheism Is More Damaging to Christianity Than Atheism and ...
    Aug 13, 2018 · The greatest threat to Christianity is found not in the arguments of the atheist but in the assumptions of the apathetic.Missing: evaluation | Show results with:evaluation
  121. [121]
    A Defense of Apatheism (Sort Of) - Strange Notions
    Oct 12, 2018 · Rauch's apatheism reflects an ignoble attitude of intellectual laziness, of mere disinterest in matters of religious significance.Missing: undermine | Show results with:undermine
  122. [122]
    On Ignosticism | The Ethical Skeptic
    May 30, 2018 · Ignosticism is the idea that any religious term or theological concept presented must be justified through coherent epistemologically derived ...
  123. [123]
    What is ignosticism? What is an ignostic? | GotQuestions.org
    Jan 4, 2022 · Ignosticism is most frequently used by those who claim religious terms such as God are vague or poorly defined and are therefore meaningless.
  124. [124]
    The Ignostic Method And The “God” Debate | by Sansu the Cat
    Aug 12, 2019 · Ignosticism basically means that any discussion regarding the existence of God is meaningless until God is properly defined.
  125. [125]
    On Igtheism - Emerson Green - WordPress.com
    May 28, 2020 · An igtheist or ignostic or theological noncognitivist, as I'm using the terms, is one who doesn't believe in god because they can't make any sense of the idea ...
  126. [126]
    God and nature (Chapter 8) - Plato
    In many places in his work, Plato writes about a God who brings the world into being. He is often envisaged as the craftsman of the universe, and is therefore ...
  127. [127]
    The Theology of Aristotle (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
    Jun 5, 2008 · The so-called Theology of Aristotle is the longest, and most famous, text to preserve an Arabic version of the Enneads of Plotinus.Historical questions · Relation to al-Kindi's circle · Philosophical ideas · Influence
  128. [128]
    Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways to Prove the Existence of God - CSULB
    1. The First Way: Motion. 2. The Second Way: Efficient Cause. 3. The Third Way: Possibility and Necessity. 4. The Fourth Way: Gradation. 5. The Fifth Way: ...
  129. [129]
    Ontological Arguments - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Feb 8, 1996 · The first, and best-known, ontological argument was proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in the eleventh century CE. In his Proslogion, Anselm ...
  130. [130]
    Introduction | The Existence of God | Oxford Academic
    The Existence of God is concerned with whether the claim is true; it is concerned to assess the weight of arguments from experience for and against this claim.
  131. [131]
    Richard Swinburne, The existence of God - PhilPapers
    Swinburne gives a rigorous and penetrating analysis of the most important arguments for theism: the cosmological argument; arguments from the existence of laws ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  132. [132]
    Hindu Philosophy
    For the major schools of Vedānta, natural reason cannot, on its own, arrive at knowledge of the existence of God (Brahman). (For a detailed criticism of the ...Stage One: Non-Systematic... · Stage Two: Systematic Hindu... · Nyāya · Vedānta
  133. [133]
    [PDF] A Classical Hindu Design Argument For The Existence Of God
    Apr 1, 2013 · Such was the basic argument for God's existence defended by Udayana, the greatest of the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philoso- phers, in his Kiraṇāvalī. Our ...
  134. [134]
    Is Buddhism Non-theistic? - The Existential Buddhist
    May 6, 2011 · The claim of Non-theism is true in the sense that there is no God in Buddhism who is a Creator, Judge, or Deity-in-Charge.
  135. [135]
    Are Buddhists non-theists or atheists – and what's the difference?
    Sep 9, 2024 · Buddhism is a non-theistic tradition, meaning that it does not involve a belief in God. The focus of Buddhism is on the nature of mind.
  136. [136]
    Jainism: God - Religions - BBC
    Sep 10, 2009 · Jainism and God - the atheistic side​​ Jains do not believe that the universe was created by God or by any other creative spirit. Jain writings ...
  137. [137]
    Understanding Sikhism's Monotheistic View of God
    Oct 21, 2023 · Sikhism is deeply monotheistic, asserting that there is only one God, a singular and infinite entity who transcends human comprehension.
  138. [138]
    Religions - Taoism: Gods and spirits - BBC
    Nov 12, 2009 · In Taoism the universe springs from the Tao, and the Tao impersonally guides things on their way. But the Tao itself is not God, nor is it a god ...
  139. [139]
    Is Confucianism Monotheistic Or Polytheistic? - Patheos
    May 10, 2024 · It is almost certainly best labeled as a “non-theistic” tradition that virtually always mingles with some theistic tradition, making it appear ...
  140. [140]
    [PDF] The impact of the Copernican Revolution on biblical interpretation
    The early Copernicans suggested that the Biblical texts are rightly understood when it is read, not as a source of knowledge about the way creation works, but ...
  141. [141]
    Science DESTROYED Faith? The Curious Case of Nicolaus ...
    Mar 22, 2023 · Copernicus had no desire to debunk Christianity. He only sought to understand the universe, which he believed was God's handiwork. But most ...
  142. [142]
    [PDF] ISAAC NEWTON AND THE MECHANICAL UNIVERSE
    Jan 23, 2018 · Its critics, however, saw Deism as having reduced God to a mere clockmaker. God wound the world up, like a clock, and then left it to run ...
  143. [143]
    Newtonian Cosmology and Religion - American Institute of Physics
    Isaac Newton was convinced that his discoveries demonstrated God's wonders. The neat design of the solar system showed God's intelligence and power.<|separator|>
  144. [144]
    The Evolution of Darwin's Religious Faith - Article - BioLogos
    Nov 3, 2016 · Evolution by natural selection, operating on “chance” variations, undermined the kind of natural theology done by William Paley, whose work ...
  145. [145]
    The "God of the Gaps" Argument: A Refutation - Apologetics Press
    Feb 1, 2024 · Certain Christian apologists and those who believe in Creation have used the “God-of-the-gaps” idea as evidence that God must exist. The process ...Missing: revolutions | Show results with:revolutions
  146. [146]
    Misunderstandings About God and the Big Bang - Reasonable Faith
    Apr 29, 2019 · My claim is that the Big Bang provides evidence for the second premise of the Kalam cosmological argument – that the universe began to exist. So ...
  147. [147]
    The Big Thing About the Big Bang | Cold Case Christianity
    But the most important aspect of the Big Bang is actually a key evidence for God's existence. Big Bang Cosmology proposes that everything in the universe came ...
  148. [148]
    Cosmological Fine-Tuning Arguments: What (If Anything) Should We ...
    Feb 3, 2020 · The argument from fine-tuning is the theistic argument most likely to earn the respect (if grudging) of atheists, although it is not the one ...
  149. [149]
    Has the rise of religious 'nones' come to an end in the US?
    Jan 24, 2024 · A line chart showing that 28% of U.S. adults are now religiously unaffiliated. That's marginally lower than our surveys indicated in 2022 and ...
  150. [150]
    Decline of Christianity in the U.S. Has Slowed, May Have Leveled Off
    Feb 26, 2025 · The share of Americans who reported attending religious services at least monthly dropped from 54% in 2007 to 50% in the 2014 Religious ...
  151. [151]
    Religion | Gallup Historical Trends
    What is your religious preference -- are you Protestant, Roman Catholic, Mormon, Jewish, Muslim, another religion or no religion?
  152. [152]
    More Americans See Religion Increasing Its Influence in U.S.
    Jun 11, 2025 · Thirty-four percent of US adults believe religion is increasing its influence in American life, similar to the 35% measured in December but up from 20% a year ...
  153. [153]
    New Research: Belief in Jesus Rises, Fueled by Younger Adults
    Apr 7, 2025 · A new Barna study as part of the State of the Church 2025 initiative shows a groundswell of commitment to Jesus over the last four years.Missing: 2020-2025 | Show results with:2020-2025<|separator|>
  154. [154]
    State of Theology Finds Stable Theology Among Americans
    Sep 22, 2025 · The State of Theology tracks Americans' beliefs about God's nature, sin, the Bible and more. The 2025 version surveyed more than 3,000 U.S. ...
  155. [155]
    Americans Minimize the Role of God in Their Life - George Barna
    Apr 3, 2025 · Americans are increasingly minimizing the role and influence of God in their lives—with a minority of only 40% who believe He exists or ...
  156. [156]
    New atheism has collapsed. The tide is turning on belief in God
    Sep 26, 2023 · The New Atheist movement itself began to experience an internal meltdown. Some were unhappy that a phalanx of old white men was leading it.Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  157. [157]
    New Atheism Is Dead. What's the New New Atheism?
    By 2015, some had begun to announce the death of New Atheism, and in 2020, 15 years after the ComRes poll, a new survey showed that only 20 percent of adults in ...
  158. [158]
    The West has stopped losing its religion - The Economist
    Jun 12, 2025 · In 1990 just 5% of Americans said they were atheists, agnostics or believed in “nothing in particular”. By 2019 some 30% ticked those boxes.
  159. [159]
    https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/10/20/growing-share-of-us-adults-say-religion-is-gaining-influence-in-american-life/
  160. [160]
    The Argument from Religious Experience | The Existence of God
    In the absence of any such evidence, any religious experience is evidence for the subject (and via his testimony, for others) of the existence of God.
  161. [161]
    Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience on JSTOR
    In Perceiving God, William P. Alston offers a clear and provocative account of the epistemology of religious experience. He argues that the "perception of God ...
  162. [162]
    [PDF] 1 Plantinga on Properly Basic Belief in God - Georgetown University
    Abstract: Plantinga famously argues against the evidentialist that belief in God can be properly basic. Consideration of the epistemology of cognitive ...
  163. [163]
    Frequency of spiritual/religious experiences - Religious Naturalism
    In a 2009 Pew survey, Religion and Public Life, nearly half of all respondents (49%) said they had a religious or mystical experience.
  164. [164]
    Americans' spiritual experiences | Pew Research Center
    Dec 7, 2023 · One-in-five Americans (22%) say they feel the presence of something from beyond this world at least monthly. That includes about three-in-ten ...
  165. [165]
    Getting Comfortable With Near-Death Experiences - NIH
    Ring 16 found that blind people who had experienced ND/OBEs also reported veridical perception in which perceptions that were impossible from the vantage point ...
  166. [166]
    The Relationship of Life-Changing Spiritual Experiences to Current ...
    Jan 3, 2024 · The results suggest that life-changing spiritual experiences fuel religious/spiritual attitudes and behaviors and that their impact may be more profound if ...
  167. [167]
    Exploring the Transformative Aftereffects of Religious Experiences ...
    Oct 8, 2024 · Pilgrims report a shift toward greater love, unity with nature, and sharing insights, as well as increased spirituality and reduced materialism.
  168. [168]
    Does Mystical Experience Give Access to Reality? - MDPI
    Mystical experiences can bring an overwhelming sense that deeper realities have been contacted or that the everyday world has been apprehended as it truly is.
  169. [169]
    Cognitive biases explain religious belief, paranormal belief, and ...
    Cognitive theories of religion have postulated several cognitive biases that predispose human minds towards religious belief.
  170. [170]
    DEBUNKING ARGUMENTS GAIN LITTLE FROM COGNITIVE ...
    Jun 1, 2021 · Cognitive science of religion (CSR) has inspired a number of debunking arguments against god‐belief. They aim to show that the belief‐forming ...
  171. [171]
    Bias in the Science and Religion Dialogue? A Critique of “Nature of ...
    Jul 5, 2021 · An aspect of confirmation bias is also the fact that we tend to explain the opinions of those who we disagree with by reference to non-rational ...
  172. [172]
    [PDF] Why Are Rocks Pointy? Children's Preference for Teleological ...
    An alternative to the idea that young children possess ST, is the proposal that from early on children possess promiscuous teleol- ogy (PT). In other words, ...
  173. [173]
    Deliberation, mood response, and the confirmation bias in the ...
    The study found that more thought and negative mood responses to opposing arguments enhance confirmation bias in religious beliefs.
  174. [174]
    [PDF] Science Will M. Gervais and Ara Norenzayan Analytic Thinking ...
    Apr 28, 2012 · Combined, these studies indicate that analytic processing is one factor (presumably among several) that promotes religious disbelief. Although ...
  175. [175]
    No evidence that analytic thinking decreases religious belief
    Feb 24, 2017 · The original finding does not seem to provide reliable or valid evidence that analytic thinking causes a decrease in religious belief.
  176. [176]
    The Global God Divide - Pew Research Center
    Jul 20, 2020 · A median of 45% across 34 surveyed countries say it is necessary to believe in God to be moral and have good values.
  177. [177]
    Inglehart–Welzel Cultural Map - World Values Survey
    Much of the variation in human values between societies boils down to two broad dimensions: a first dimension of “traditional vs. secular-rational values” and a ...
  178. [178]
    Are Women More Spiritual and Men More Religious?
    Jul 3, 2024 · A majority of female respondents in the sample say that they believe in God without any doubts - 55%. Men are much lower than that, only 43% ...
  179. [179]
    Why are Women More Religious than Men? Do Risk Preferences ...
    Apr 23, 2020 · Risk preference theory argues that the gender gap in religiosity is caused by greater female risk aversion.
  180. [180]
    Age, race, education and other demographic traits of U.S. religious ...
    Feb 26, 2025 · Many US religious groups have experienced a decline in the share of adults who identify as White, according to the 2023-24 Religious Landscape Study (RLS).Missing: global | Show results with:global
  181. [181]
    Role of Religiosity in the Lives of the Low-Income Population
    Jul 9, 2009 · Lower SES is associated with more personal devotionalism, higher rates of adherence to doctrinal beliefs, and more religious experiences (Nelson ...
  182. [182]
    [PDF] Socioeconomic Status and Beliefs about God's ... - CDC Stacks
    This study examines the differences in beliefs about God's influence in everyday life across levels of socioeconomic status (SES) and whether that ...
  183. [183]
    Men are less religious in more gender-equal countries - Journals
    Feb 2, 2022 · Although women are more religious than men in most countries, religions frequently provide asymmetrical benefits to men at the expense of women.<|separator|>
  184. [184]
    Two Decades of Change: Global Religiosity Declines While Atheism ...
    Jul 24, 2025 · The proportion of people identifying as religious declined from 68 % in 2005 to 56 % in 2024, reflecting a steady global trend toward ...Missing: 2023-2025 | Show results with:2023-2025
  185. [185]
    Americans' spiritual beliefs | Pew Research Center
    Dec 7, 2023 · About nine-in-ten US adults believe in God or another higher power, including 54% who say they believe in “God as described in the Bible” and 34% who say they ...
  186. [186]
    How the Global Religious Landscape Changed From 2010 to 2020
    Jun 9, 2025 · Collectively, 75.8% of the world's people identified with a religion as of 2020. The remaining 24.2% did not identify with any religion, making ...
  187. [187]
    Psychological change before and after religious conversion and ...
    Sep 4, 2023 · Theory and anecdotal evidence suggest that people undergo psychological changes before and after religious conversion and deconversion. Yet, ...
  188. [188]
    Can religious norms reduce violent attitudes? Experimental ...
    Mar 22, 2022 · Our evidence shows that exposing subjects to religious anti-violence norms reduced support for violence by 0.2 standard deviations (p = 0.026).<|separator|>