Claim 5 of 5 · Case 07 · Philosophy
Alvin Plantinga argues that belief in God can be “warranted” and rationally held without a supporting argument, which means the charge that such belief is irrational cannot be settled without first asking whether it is true.
One claim from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.
Warrant is Plantinga’s term for whatever it is that turns a true belief into knowledge. His claim is contested, and some philosophers reject it, so it belongs here as an argument to weigh, not as a settled result. But the structure is clean and worth teaching.
Backed by 3 pieces of evidence
Alvin Plantinga, “Warrant and Proper Function”
This defines the technical term at the center of the argument, and sets up why Plantinga thinks a belief can be rational even when the believer has no argument in hand.
Alvin Plantinga, “Warranted Christian Belief,” the argument itself
This logical argument reframes the burden of proof, which is the practical payoff. It does not prove God, and it should not be sold as if it did. It shows the “you are irrational to believe” objection cannot stand on its own.W.K. Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief,” the strongest objection to Plantinga’s Warrant
Clifford is the best and most quoted form of the “no evidence, no right to believe” challenge, so stating him fairly is honest. The response does not dodge the demand for evidence, it questions whether the rule can meet its own standard and whether all rational belief really works by argument.