An internal critique examines the merits of an idea based on the internal consistency of that idea. Essentially it assumes the position being discussed and examines it for contradiction. By contrast, an external critique seeks to falsify an idea using criteria outside the idea. So, for example, an internal critique of Christianity’s theology would examine it to see if it is consistent within itself. An external critique would be to examine it based on something like Islam. This is problematic because the reverse can be applied. Islam would be false based on Christian theology. Nothing would really be solved. So, external critiques are weak.
| INTERNAL CRITIQUE | EXTERNAL CRITIQUE |
|
|
| EXAMPLES OF INTERNAL CRITIQUE | EXAMPLES OF EXTERNAL CRITIQUE |
|
|
Beware of the Alternating Approach
The alternating approach of examination is when someone is arguing against an idea using the information within that idea, switches to information external to that idea, then back to internal, etc. There’s an inconsistency in that approach. Generally speaking, ideas must first be examined for internal consistency. Then we look for external criteria to falsify or validate the idea.
An example of this would be examining the truth of the Trinity. First of all, a person could examine it for internal consistency or inconsistency. But to then say it is false because the Quran says it is false, then go back to attacking the Trinity from within biblical revelation, and then use the Quran again is an alternating approach between internal and external critiques. Be careful of this both in committing it and identifying it with those who would argue against truth, particularly the truth of Scripture.
For more information on internal and external critiques, please see the following
