For example, in the opening pages of A Survey of Christian Epistemology A transcendental argument works by finding the preconditions of meaningful thought or judgment. Being greedy is immoral. The most difficult of the three arguments to understand is the Ontological argument, for it is purely logical proof; it attempts to argue from the idea of God to His necessary existence. And what is a logical absolute? Simply put the ontological argument attempts to prove the existence of God by stating God exists because he must. This argument can also be called The Transcendental Argument or Presuppositional Apologetics. Hence the scepticism is either meaningless or false. Collett, Don, “Van Til and Transcendental Argument,” Westminster Theological Journal, forthcoming. Example: X is better/more important/ than Y. Happiness is more important than money. What, you may ask, is a transcendental argument? Back of this claim lies the conviction, oft-stated by Van Til, that the Christian theism disclosed in Scripture entails a distinctive apologetic method. Today, you can see this method used by people like James White and Jeff Durbin. Frame, John, Cornelius Van Til (Phillipsburg, N. J.: 1995). Some well-known theologians and philosophers who have taught this are Greg Bahnsen, Cornelius Van Til, and Gordon Clark. Bibliography. Immanuel Kant is known for having coined a term and utilized an argument which is now referred to as transcendental, though it may be traced back even further, having been used in some sense by Aristotle (as one example). The Transcendental Argument for the existence of God, or TAG for short, is a pain in the arse. Rather, a transcendental argument overcomes the sceptical hypothesis indirectly, by undermining its basis. It’s a class of arguments. For example, what is the necessary condition, for logic. Transcendental arguments seek to answer scepticism by showing that the things doubted by the sceptic are in fact preconditions for the scepticism to make sense. Example: X is right/wrong, good/bad, important/insignificant, helpful/hurtful… Capital punishment is wrong. Here’s an example. A transcendental argument does not beat the sceptical hypothesis directly by accepting the challenge to try and disprove it by providing a theory in response to it. That is to say that a complete argument for Christian theism, however many sub-arguments it contains, will be transcendental in character. Answer: The transcendental argument for the existence of God is the argument that attempts to prove God’s existence by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose the theistic worldview and that God’s transcendent character is the source of logic and morals. It’s a kind of argument. A transcendental argument is not a particular argument. The Transcendental Argument for the existence of God This is an attempt to demonstrate the existence of God using the Laws of Logic, also referred to as Logical Absolutes. Cornelius Van Til, writing from the Continental Tradition in Philosophy, wrote extensively concerning a transcendental argument which is utilized to prove … SEP has this to say on transcendental arguments: "As standardly conceived, transcendental arguments are taken to be distinctive in involving a certain sort of claim, namely that X is a necessary condition for the possibility of Y—where then, given that Y is the case, it logically follows that X must be the case too.". When you compare, you are making a value argument. It has demonstrated no power to bring non-believers around to a theistic way of thinking, let alone a Christian way, but it’s unparalleled in its ability to reassure Christians that … So the Transcendental Argument for God takes basic human experience, any experience that is uncontroversial (all agree that humans experience X) and proceeds to argue that God is the necessary precondition for the intelligibility of that experience. When you evaluate, you are making a value argument. 1 The oversimplified argument, which is expanded in outline form below, goes as follows: Logical absolutes exist. A transcendental argument asserts that the acceptance of a proposition entails the acceptance of some prior proposition. Logic as Necessary Proof for God. apologetic and transcendental argument go hand-in-hand.