Presuppositionalism Primer, pt. 6

Last time (way back when the West was young), we looked at some of the conditions that must exist for our conversation with an unbeliever to take place. Remember, we ask, "What must be true in order for us to have this debate?" I listed a few of them.

The next step is to see if our unbelieving friend's stated worldview (and the assumptions which underlie what he has said) can give any sort of basis or an accounting for these conditions. Again, this is not a checklist, but more a demonstration of the method.

For example, our atheistic friend, who is going to be coming at us from a materialist point of view (only that which has material form exists; there is no supernatural realm) is also going to claim his position is based on empirical evidence and the scientific method.

So, we need to step into that position and take a look around. In a materialistic universe, do immaterial ideas like the laws of science truly exist? They have no form or material substance. Are they mere conventions? Are they the chemical reactions in the brains of apes? If they are simply arbitrary, they can not be said to prove anything.

Does the atheist have empirical evidence that the information conveyed to him by his senses corresponds to the universe outside himself? No; his senses themselves would be involved in any experiment. Does he have empirical evidence that the (immaterial and therefore non-existent!) laws of logic are universal and do not change? No; he would need to have observed the entire universe throughout all time (or know Someone Who has!).

As a materialist, he believes in brute facts. Things simply exist, and we come around some 15-30 billion years after the Big Bang and start making connections between things. All is therefore ultimately many, and our connections and categories are entirely arbitrary. They do not really exist.

You see how this works? Whatever the non-Christian position is, we examine it on its own terms, and see if on those terms reason and coherent communication between us and the unbeliever is even possible. If it isn't, we have refuted the system.

Now this all requires that we know or can infer what the underlying presuppositions of various belief systems are. It takes some work but one can learn how to do it--there are really only a few.

The next step involves demonstrating two things: that the Christian worldview does provide these essentials, and that our friend already assumes so, even if he does so subconciously.