Mythicism, Plausibility and Uncertainty

Last updated on: January 11, 2011 at 2:55 pm by James F. McGrath

Mythicism, Plausibility and Uncertainty 2011-01-11T14:55:00-05:00 James F. McGrath

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In a somewhat obscure comment on a recent post, mention was made of the problematic nature of “arguing from plausibility.” Presumably the point was that showing something is plausible or possible doesn’t demonstrate that it is correct, or in the case of history, that it actually happened.

While this is true, it must also be pointed out that, whether in the natural sciences or in history, ultimately we reach a point at which the choice is between a variety of scenarios, none of which may be strictly impossible, and so it is a question of which is more likely. Even determining likelihood is not the same as demonstrating what actually happened with no room for error or uncertainty. But it is the best we can hope to achieve.

If there is something that makes an argument problematic, whether it is made by an apologist or a scholar or anyone else, it is a demand for absolute proof before being willing to modify your own conclusions, while considering mere possibility, the mere absence of definitive proof to the contrary, as a sufficient case for your own beliefs.

Let me provide some illustrations of what I mean when I say that non-scholarly viewpoints are not distinguished from scholarly ones because the unscholarly or unscientific ones are impossible:

Is it possible that a deceitful God created the universe with the appearance of age and evolution – or for that matter, that aliens creating a simulated world that has these features and even deceives us as to the reality of the world we inhabit? Yes, strictly speaking this cannot be shown to be impossible. And so unless one is willing to accept that the data we can observe and test is a legitimate basis for drawing conclusions, then it will be possible to believe almost anything.

[As an aside, this is one of the reasons it is important to have theological arguments be made against the kind of deceptive divine activity that has to be posited for young-earth creationism to seem plausible to anyone. Unless such assumptions are addressed, one will not make progress no matter how much evidence is presented, since a mechanism remains in place for explaining that evidence away].

Is it possible that a rich group of ancient conspirators minted coins and left or dropped them at various places on their journeys, out of a malicious desire to mislead or at least confuse future generations about the political and social realities of earlier times? Yes. Unless at some point we decide that it makes more sense to treat certain kinds of historical evidence at face value, then no scenario about the past can be excluded.

How do we know that Christianity was not first invented by Nero in order to have someone to blame for the fire in Rome? Perhaps in the trauma that ensued, relatives of those wrongly accused began searching for answers about what this “Christianity” was that their relatives had supposedly adhered to, and someone forged documents to give them answers. Is that possible? Sure. The question is whether the mere fact that something is possible means that we ought to hold it as “true” – in the scholarly sense of providing the best explanation we can currently offer.

Perhaps the heart of the matter boils down to the following question: At what point should one stop asking about other possible interpretations of evidence, and accept what the majority of those who spend their working lives investigating the evidence agree on as most probable?

What differentiates mainstream science from various forms of pseudoscientific creationism, and mainstream historical study various forms of conspiracy theories and revisionism, is nothing other than the point at which one stops introducing ad hoc explanations to avoid the implications of the evidence, and instead follows the evidence where it leads.

The line is much finer than the above statement might suggest. Every major scholarly and scientific viewpoint struggles with difficulties, explanatory gaps, and incongruent data. That doesn’t mean that they are invalid, just that they are imperfect, and do not altogether eliminate the possibility of uncertainty and of subsequent improvement.

And so let me suggest that it is neither providing comprehensive, satisfying, completely unproblematic explanations that distinguishes scholarship from pseudoscholarship, nor the complete absense of assumptions introduced to make sense of data. Neither is it that those who make discoveries and contribute to discussions always have certain qualifications or a particular set of professions.

Rather, scholarship is the attempt to make the best sense of the data, in a way that does the best justice possible to as much of the relevant evidence as possible.

What do others think? Is this what scholarship ought ideally to be about? Does it provide a helpful continuum, if not a sharp dividing line, that might allow science and pseudoscience, scholarship and pseudoscholarship or apologetics, to be distinguished?

Perhaps it needs to be added that the question of what makes the best sense of the data is best decided by those who spend their lives rigorously studying the subject, and not by the impression that some may have who are only somewhat acquainted with it?

Uncategorized

Previous Post

January 11, 2011

How It Could Have Ended: Return of the Jedi

Next Post

January 12, 2011 Mythicism, Creationism, Certainty and Innkeepers around the Blogosphere

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1 John 1 Peter 1 Samuel 1 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Corinthians 2 Kings 2 Peter 2 Samuel 2 Thessalonians 2 Timothy academia Acts of the Apostles afterlife Akhaten Alcatraz American Academy of Religion Amos Anglican Arabic Aramaic archaeology art artificial intelligence astronomy atheism atonement Babylon 5 Baptists Battlestar Galactica Bible Biblical Studies Carnival biblioblogging Black Mirror Blade Runner Book of Job book review Buddhism Call for Papers China Christianity Christmas Christology Chronicles Coptic creation Daniel Deuteronomy Doctor Who Dune Easter Ecclesiastes economics education Eldad Keynan Enoch Seminar Ephesians eschatology Esther Evangelicals evolution Exodus Expanse Ezekiel Ezra fantasy Fringe fundamentalism Galatians games Ge'ez genealogy Genesis Gnosticism Gospel of Jesus' Wife Gospel of John Gospel of Judas Gospel of Luke Gospel of Mark Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Peter Gospel of Thomas Greek Harry Potter Hebrew Hebrews Hinduism historical Jesus history Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Holidays horror Hosea humor incarnation India inerrancy information literacy inspirational Intelligent Design Ireland Isaiah Islam Israel Italy James Jeremiah John the Baptist Jonah Joshua Judaism Jude Judges Judith Lamentations languages Latin Leviticus libraries literature Lord of the Rings LOST Mandaeans Mandaic memes Methodism Micah monotheism morality Mormons movies music mythicism NASSCAL Nehemiah new perspective New Testament news Numbers Orthodox paganism panentheism pantheism Patheos Paul and his letters Pentecostals Philippians Philippians 2:6-11 philosophy physics Planet of the Apes podcast politics Progressive Christianity Protestantism Proverbs Psalms pseudoscience racism religion Revelation Roman Catholicism Romania Romans Ruth scams science science fiction Secret Gospel of Mark Society of Biblical Literature Song of Songs Star Trek Star Wars Stargate Swahili Syriac Taoism technology Terminator The Handmaid's Tale The Hobbit The Matrix theodicy theology theory Timeless Titus tomb Torchwood travel TRON Uncategorized United Kingdom Westworld X-Files young-earth creationism Zechariah

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 February 2007 January 2001

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz