Posted by Kevin Stephenson on February 22, 192001 at 16:56:01:
In Reply to: why did C.S... posted by Gilbert Humphrey on February 01, 192001 at 16:48:12:
There is an appendix in one edition of God in the
Doc which explains the controversy that caused him
to change this paragraph and to add a qualification
to this same argument in subsequent editions of
"Miracles . . ." An Oxford philosopher, I think
by the name of Anscombe pointed out an error in
his reasoning. I didn't understand entirely myself,
but what I thought they were getting at is that
Lewis had failed to make a distinction between
the grounds for thinking something was true and
the cause for thinking it was true. Suppose a
person had a brain injury and for this reason
believed something about the external world,
that was, in fact, sometimes true. I think
Lewis answered the objection, but I not
philosopher enough to explain it any better
than I have.
Kevin Stephenson
: For those who might know, here's a puzzling question.
: Why did C.S. (or someone) take out a paragraph from The
: Case For Christianity when compiling Mere Christianity?
: Specifically, I am talking about the paragraph that
: deals with the claim that if an atheist doesn't believe
: he can trust his own thought, then thought can't be used
: to deny the existence of God. He concludes the paragraph
: with a most declarative statement about the subject. For
: reference, the paragraph also includes the analogy of
: spilling a jug of milk and expecting a map of London.
: Anyone with information regarding this question, please
: respond.