In this article, I want to consider a spurious attempt to favor naturalism over theism. To be clear, I don’t take issue with the general maxim in the meme posted below. What I do dispute is the facile attempt to favor naturalism over theism based on the maxim:
In my rebuttal, I point out that if we attempt to apply that principle to favor naturalism over theism, then we ought likewise to apply it to favor solipsism over realism:
This rebuttal functions as a reductio ad absurdum. Just as it is absurd to conclude that solipsism is, ceteris paribus, to be preferred over realism, so it is absurd to suppose that naturalism is, ceteris paribus, to be preferred over theism.
Conversely, one could accept the conclusion that both solipsism and naturalism are, ceteris paribus, the preferred hypotheses. However, one could then point out that this is a weak concession because all sorts of other evidence can immediately overwhelm that preference: i.e. all else is most certainly not equal.
