Should atheists be worried about modal Calvinist epistemology?

Abstract In the philosophy of religion, ‘ de jure objections’ is an umbrella term that covers a wide variety of arguments for the conclusion that theistic belief is rationally impermissible, whether or not God exists. What we call ‘modal Calvinism’ counters these objections by proposing that ‘if God exists, God would ensure that theistic belief is rationally compelling on a global scale’, a modal conditional that is compatible with atheism. We respond to this modal Calvinist argument by examining it through the lenses of probability, modality, and logic – particularly, we apply analytical tools such as possible world semantics, Bayesian reasoning, and paraconsistent models. After examining various forms of the argument, we argue that none can compel atheists to believe that serious theistic possibilities worth considering would involve the purported divine measure.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Religious Studies
Published
2025-06-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034412525100784
Primary Topic
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Should atheists be worried about modal Calvinist epistemology?

Shawn Standefer, Lok‐Chi Chan
Religious Studies
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
article

Should atheists be worried about modal Calvinist epistemology?

Shawn Standefer, Lok‐Chi Chan
article en

Abstract

Abstract In the philosophy of religion, ‘ de jure objections’ is an umbrella term that covers a wide variety of arguments for the conclusion that theistic belief is rationally impermissible, whether or not God exists. What we call ‘modal Calvinism’ counters these objections by proposing that ‘if God exists, God would ensure that theistic belief is rationally compelling on a global scale’, a modal conditional that is compatible with atheism. We respond to this modal Calvinist argument by examining it through the lenses of probability, modality, and logic – particularly, we apply analytical tools such as possible world semantics, Bayesian reasoning, and paraconsistent models. After examining various forms of the argument, we argue that none can compel atheists to believe that serious theistic possibilities worth considering would involve the purported divine measure.

Religious Studies
National Taiwan University (TW)
National Chengchi University, Fudan University, Waseda University, Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, Lingnan University
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Should atheists be worried about modal Calvinist epistemology? — Shawn Standefer, Lok‐Chi Chan · Religious Studies (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS