Replies to critics: Very brief, very selective, rather snarky

The notion that a serious discussion of the existence of God should require pro and con, response and rejoinder, timekeepers, votes of who “won”, and judges of rhetoric is laughable. Paul Moser is a serious and influential epistemologist. He employs expertise in the area to identify an epistemic location from which you can defend a belief in God as responsible while ungrounded by justification. And the mere fact of acquaintance suffices to justify Moser’s belief in God in the absence of any argument in which, for example, an assertion of his/her/its presence would serve as a premise. Knowledge by acquaintance is a familiar device in epistemology. Moser Conveniently, however, Moser provides it himself earlier in his own essay: “Neither mere claims nor mere subjective experiences are self-attesting about objective reality”. Hence Christian philosophers would do well to focus on these problems if they really want to convince anyone but themselves that their views are not irrational.

Duke Scholars

Author Alexander Rosenberg Philosophy