How does Fallibilism contradict/rule out God?

[Codix105]

Hi I was having a discussion with a friend of mine, and she was talking about Fallibilism or

"Fallibilism (from medieval Latin fallibilis, “liable to err”) is the philosophical principle that human beings could be wrong about their beliefs, expectations, or their understanding of the world, and yet still be justified in holding their incorrect beliefs. In the most commonly used sense of the term, this consists in being open to new evidence that would disprove some previously held position or belief, and in the recognition that “any claim justified today may need to be revised or withdrawn in light of new evidence, new arguments, and new experiences.”

Anyway she went on to explain how this, philosophical idea contradicts Christianity, and especially Catholicism. I had no answer, and as of now we just left it at that. I was just curious if there was a strong answer?

 

[fhansen]

Hi I was having a discussion with a friend of mine, and she was talking about Fallibilism or

"Fallibilism (from medieval Latin fallibilis, “liable to err”) is the philosophical principle that human beings could be wrong about their beliefs, expectations, or their understanding of the world, and yet still be justified in holding their incorrect beliefs. In the most commonly used sense of the term, this consists in being open to new evidence that would disprove some previously held position or belief, and in the recognition that “any claim justified today may need to be revised or withdrawn in light of new evidence, new arguments, and new experiences.”

Anyway she went on to explain how this, philosophical idea contradicts Christianity, and especially Catholicism. I had no answer, and as of now we just left it at that. I was just curious if there was a strong answer?

Faith is the supernatural gift which enables us to believe truths revealed by God, who alone in incapable of error. So if God, rather than man (whether ourselves or others), is the source of truth, then our understanding is correct.

And as individuals we can come to confirm this knowledge, this faith, to ourselves, by trying and testing it over time. We also have to realize that the fact that man can be wrong doesn’t necessitate that he always will be wrong-otherwise all knowledge would be impossible; we’d be incapable of making strides in science, etc.

 

[Nita]

Hi I was having a discussion with a friend of mine, and she was talking about Fallibilism or

"Fallibilism (from medieval Latin fallibilis, “liable to err”) is the philosophical principle that human beings could be wrong about their beliefs, expectations, or their understanding of the world, and yet still be justified in holding their incorrect beliefs. In the most commonly used sense of the term, this consists in being open to new evidence that would disprove some previously held position or belief, and in the recognition that “any claim justified today may need to be revised or withdrawn in light of new evidence, new arguments, and new experiences.”

Anyway she went on to explain how this, philosophical idea contradicts Christianity, and especially Catholicism. I had no answer, and as of now we just left it at that. I was just curious if there was a strong answer?

As I understand the definition above of “Fallibilism”, it rejects the possibility of knowing for certain that a particular belief is infallible. Thus your friend is right, this philosophical idea does contradict Catholicism. We do believe in*** infallible truths that can never be changed or withdrawn***. (They can be further explained or expanded, but never in a way that contradicts what has once been proclaimed as infallible.)

As to other Christian churches, ??? I rather think some, maybe many, non-Catholics would have no problem accepting fallibilism. I’ll have to let them answer for themselves. I don’t think any of them have officially defined truths that they say must be held as infallible truth that can never be changed or withdrawn. They may personally believe in certain truths in that way, but I don’t think their denomination specifically defines which truths would be “infallible” and/or can never change or be withdrawn.