(August 11, 2009 at 4:58 pm)Jon Paul Wrote: Assuming that more evidence was available, which is an assumption you are making that is not a part of the scenario Plantinga speaks of, then until that evidence was collected, it would still be externally unverifiable and the external verifiability of an internal knowledge which is properly basic would be possible both theoretically and practically. There are real cases where people are innocent and yet the evidence is against them due to either viscious coincidences or conspiracies. The external unverifiabillity of an internal knowledge is possible and there are many actual examples of it within the very criminal system of a country like America, where people have been released up to 20 after being convicted of a crime they didn't commit, because the discovery and collection of some new evidence suddenly occured.
My bold.
If there was no other evidence available then the example is fictitious and couldn't possibly happen. There always will be evidence, although it may be impractically difficult to come across.
My italics.
The claims are unverified- not unverifiable. Again, there are cases where verifying the evidence is extremely difficult, but the evidence is there. It is veriable, although currently unverified.
