Assessing Papal Probabilities: A Reply to Joseph E. Blado

Joseph Blado critiqued my probabilistic arguments against Roman papal doctrines by deploying probability arguments, particularly Bayesian arguments, in favor of the papacy. He contends that there are good C-inductive arguments for papal doctrine that, taken together, add up to a good P-inductive arg...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Perichoresis
Main Author: Walls, Jerry L. 1955- (Author)
Contributors: Blado, Joseph E. (Bibliographic antecedent)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Sciendo, De Gruyter [2020]
In: Perichoresis
IxTheo Classification:HA Bible
KCB Papacy
VB Hermeneutics; Philosophy
Further subjects:B Luz
B probability arguments
B Intertextuality
B papal doctrine
Online Access: Volltext (doi)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Summary:Joseph Blado critiqued my probabilistic arguments against Roman papal doctrines by deploying probability arguments, particularly Bayesian arguments, in favor of the papacy. He contends that there are good C-inductive arguments for papal doctrine that, taken together, add up to a good P-inductive argument. I argue that his inductive arguments fail, and moreover that there are three good C-inductive arguments against papal doctrine in the neighborhood of his failed arguments. I conclude by critiquing his retreat to what he calls ‘skeptical papalism’ as a last ditch sort of move to defend papal doctrine.
ISSN:2284-7308
Reference:Kritik von "On the Plausibility of the Papacy: Scaling the Walls of Contemporary Criticisms (2022)"
Contains:Enthalten in: Perichoresis
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.2478/perc-2020-0031