Reasonable Faith Forum
Welcome to the Reasonable Faith forum! This is a general discussion board on apologetics, theology,... View more
Taxicab Fallacy?
-
Taxicab Fallacy?
In Reasonable Faith and On Guard, Dr. Craig alludes to the <i style=””>taxicab fallacy, which seems to be based on a quote by Author Schopenhauer that says, “Science is not a taxi-cab that we can get in and out of whenever we like.” This quote may be in Schopenhauer’s PhD thesis because, if I recall correctly, he did his PhD thesis on Leibnitz’s “Principle of Sufficient Reason,” so it seems likely that it would be found in German in his thesis.
Strangely, many skeptical websites seem to deny this is a “legitimate fallacy,” which is why I wanted more information about it:
https://religions.wiki/index.php/Taxi-Cab_Fallacy
https://wickershamsconscience.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/fallacies-the-taxi-cab-fallacy/
It seems Craig’s cites the Taxicab Fallacy as a specific example of “Special Pleading,” where an atheist uses a principle to get to a specific point but dismisses it for other things (such as saying the universe does not need a causal explanation while everything in it somehow does). Any thoughts?
-
4 Replies
-
The concept of the “taxicab fallacy” is not a widely recognized or accepted fallacy in academic philosophy or logic. It is more of a rhetorical device used to illustrate a particular type of inconsistency in argumentation. The idea behind the taxicab fallacy is that someone who uses a particular argument or principle to support their position cannot simply abandon that argument or principle when it is no longer convenient for them.
In the case of Dr. Craig’s use of the taxicab fallacy, he is pointing out what he sees as a flaw in the reasoning of some atheists who deny the need for a causal explanation for the universe but then demand causal explanations for individual events or phenomena within the universe. This is an example of special pleading, where someone applies a double standard to their argumentation in order to support their position.
-
Another example of the taxicab fallacy would be the claim that ex nihilo nihil fit together with the claim that God creates ex nihilo.
-
-
Craig has attributed the “fallacy” to Pruss. See this:
He describes it here:https://www.reasonablefaith.org/media/debates/the-craig-krauss-debate-at-north-carolina-state-university
“It commits what’s been called the Taxi-Cab Fallacy, which is thinking
you can dismiss the need for explanation when you arrive at your desired
destination. And it’s simply arbitrary to apply the explanatory
principle everywhere else in life but then deny it when you get to the
existence of the universe itself.”He uses it when defending his argument from contingency, which depends on some debatable assumptions.
-
Thanks for the reply, that’s really helpful
Log in to reply.