“Carefully lay out and explain Plantinga’s argument for this conclusion. In doing so be sure to identify premises, including any implicit premises, and intermediate conclusions; and show how the premises link together to support the conclusion. Attempt to make clear the structure or form of the argument. Where possible, identify any common valid argument forms used in the argumentation.”

PASSAGE: “From Alvin Plantingas book Knowledge and Christian Belief page 39:

[I]f theistic belief is true, then it seems likely that it does have warrant. For if it is true, then there is indeed such a person as God, a person who has created us in his image (so that we may resemble him, among other things, and having the capacity for a knowledge), who loves us, who desires that we know and love him, and who is such that it is our end and good to know and love him. But if these things are so, then God would of course intend that we be able to be aware of his presence, and to know something about him. And if that is so, the natural thing to think is that he created us in such a way that we would come to know such true beliefs as that he is our creator, that we owe him obedience and worship, that he is worthy of worship, that he loves us, and so on. And if that is so, then, further, the natural thing to think is that the cognitive processes that do produce belief in God are aimed by their designer (God) at producing that belief. But then the belief in question will be produced by cognitive faculties functioning properly according to a design plan successfully aimed at truth: it will therefore have warrant.

On page 28 Plantinga had said:

a belief has warrant for a person S only if that belief is produced in S by cognitive faculties functioning properly (subject to no dysfunction) in a cognitive environment that is appropriate for S’s kind of cognitive faculties, according to a design plan that is successfully and at truth.”