Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• Farid al-Din Sebt ¹
• Saeideh Kowkab ²

¹ PhD Candidate, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies(ihcs), Iran. Tehran.

² Assiatant Prof. University of Tehran, Iran, Tehran.

Abstract

This paper is a reflection on Richard Swinburne's view on the hypothesis of theism, a view that claims to be the most probable explanation of the universe and tries to prove this claim by appealing to the principle of simplicity; The principle which states that the simpler hypothesis will be more probable to be true. Hence, he argues that since the subject of the hypothesis is a single and infinite God, and the notion of infinity is simpler than the notion of finite and also the hypothesis which contains fewer components will be simpler, therefore, this hypothesis will be simpler than any explanatory hypothesis (personal and scientific). Because the subjects of the other rival hypotheses are either finite or contain more than one component, then this hypothesis (the hypothesis of theism) can be regarded as the most probable explanation of the universe. In the following, we will try to demonstrate that if we take this claim epistemologically, the hypothesis of theism will be considered as the most complicated hypothesis. But the infinite can be considered simpler than the finite only ontologically.

Highlights

Introduction

The search for the ultimate explanation of the universe is a concern that has always been present in the history of humanity. So the most philosophers and empirical scientists have always tried to explain the emergence of the universe and its phenomena. In this essay, we also intend to answer the question of which of the explanatory hypothesis for the universe should we choose as the ultimate explanation? Swinburne's answer to this question is theism.

The question that now arises is why does he choose the hypothesis as the ultimate explanation of the universe? Because he believes that theism is simpler than any other explanation for the universe. Why does he consider theism as the simplest explanation, and how can this simplicity play a role in determining the ultimate explanation of the universe? This is the question we are going to answer in this essay. So let us first look at the nature of explanation and its types from his point of view.

1.The Nature of Explanation

When we can explain the occurrence of some phenomenon, such as E, to state truly what (object or event) brought E about (or caused E), and why it was efficacious. Then, an explanation consists of two components of “what” and “why”. We can divide the explanation into two types of personal(animate) and scientific(inanimate) explanations, according to their causes and reasons.

1-1. Personal Explanation

If the cause of the explanation is a person and its reason is the person's intention, it will be a personal explanation. The intention is based on two components of purpose and belief, that is to believe that we can achieve our purpose by doing a particular act.

1-2. Scientific Explanation

If the explanation of a phenomenon refers to a non-intentional act, it is called a scientific explanation. Swinburne suggests a classic account of the nature of scientific explanation, in which “what” is a set of events and “why” is the law of nature.

2. The Justification of Explanation

For a particular phenomenon, such as E, there can be many explanatory hypotheses. Now the question that arises is among the many hypotheses, which one should we select as the most probable explanation? and what is our Criterion for evaluation? To answer this question, Swinburne proposes four criteria for determining the most probable explanation: explanatory power, Consistency with background knowledge, Simplicity, and scope.

3. The hypothesis of theism as the most probable personal explanation of the universe

Theism is a personal explanation that the subject of which is a single and infinite God. So Two rival personal explanations can be conceivable: Polytheism and a single but finite God.

The most important reason is that God of theism is infinite, while the rival hypotheses postulate the finite god or gods. On the other hand, Swinburn believes that the notion of infinity is simpler than the notion of finite because the finite requires explanation, but the infinite does not. Consequently, his hypothesis is simpler than both of them.

4. Is theism simpler than the scientific explanations of the universe?

He states that the scientific explanations of the universe, postulate a first physical substance which the universe has generated by its expansion. He argues that if the first physical substance is an extended substance, then it has components, unlike God, who has not components and is absolutely simple. So this first physical substance will be more complicated than God. Also, if it is an unextended substance, then it must be a physical object of a certain type that has certain powers and liabilities because a physical substance is essentially limited.  He believes that this limitation makes this substance more complicated than God, because limitation entails finite.

5. The examination of Swinburne’s view

The notion of infinite, speaking epistemologically, consists of all perfects which are known separately from each other. Therefore it contains infinite components and is the most complex notion. From the above statements, we can conclude that the infinite cannot be epistemologically simpler than the finite. So our suggested solution to the problem is to get out of the epistemological realm and consider the infinite and the finite ontologically. Because the infinite existence is absolutely simple, so it has all existential perfects. Moreover, these perfections are united and do not cause any plurality in His essence.

6. Conclusion

As we have seen, Swinburne, by applying the principle of simplicity, demonstrates that the hypothesis of theism is the simplest and thus the most probable explanation for the emergence of the universe. Also, he tries to prove this claim by emphasising that the subject of theism is an infinite notion and so it is more simpler than the finite subjects of other hypotheses. As mentioned, theism can be the simplest explanation of the universe, only if we consider it ontologically not epistemically. So we must return infinity to its original position, which is existence.

Keywords

• Hypothesis of theism
• The principle of simplicity
• Infinity
• Epistemology
• Ontology