Atheism and Theism JJ Haldane - Common Sense Atheism

6 J.J.C. Smart
1
Atheism and Theism
J.J.C. Smart
1 Introduction
In this ‘great debate’ I shall be giving what I hope will be seen as a sympathetic
critique of theism. I was once a theist and I would still like to be
a theist if I could reconcile it with my philosophical and scientific views. So
I shall not be too sorry if John Haldane wins the argument. I do not really
expect that we will come to agreement, but at least we may achieve a better
and perhaps more sympathetic understanding of one another’s positions.
I hold that there are never – or perhaps rarely – knock-down arguments in
philosophy. 1 This is because a philosopher may claim to question anything,
so that both the premisses and the methodology are liable to challenge.
This can happen in science too, and if the challenge is to central and unquestioned
beliefs or methods the scientific debate will be seen as philosophical.
One important methodological principle of mine is that an important
guide to metaphysical truth is plausibility in the light of total science. Of
course other philosophers may take another tack. Some may even hold
that our best theories will come to be overturned and that there is no accumulation
of sure scientific knowledge. Here I think that they would have
taken to extremes Thomas Kuhn’s theory of scientific revolutions. 2 Is it
plausible that revolutionary new theories about the ultimate constituents
of matter or about what happened in the first microseconds after the ‘big
Acknowledgement: I am grateful to the following persons who kindly read a draft of this essay
and have made valuable comments and given useful advice much of which I have tried to take:
John Bigelow, John Bishop, Peter Forrest, James Franklin, John Leslie, Graham Oppy, Ian
Ravenscroft, Ross Taylor.