Rob Harold

In this article, I offer a new response to Paul Draper’s argument for the conclusion that the intrinsic probability of theism is much lower than that of a competing atheistic theory he calls “source physicalism”. His argument must first motivate the view that source physicalism is equally intrinsically probable to a view he calls “source idealism”, which he claims theism is a specific version of. However, I argue that–on his own account of intrinsic probability–it is unclear whether source physicalism is equally intrinsically probable to source idealism. I do this by explicating the relationship these two theories bear to his criterion of “coherence.”