Atheist Ethicist on Evolution and Morality
The Atheist Ethicist has been writing a nice series on morality and evolutionary ethics. Posts (so far) include: “Evolution Accounts for Morality?” “Concerning Evolution and Morality” “Evolution and Two Conceptions of Morality” “Evolution, Morality, and Objective Values” “The ‘Necessity’ of an Evolved Moral Sense” “Evolution, Altruism, and Morality” “Evolved Sentiments and Moral Content” “The Immorality … Atheist Ethicist on Evolution and Morality
The Polemical Medic on Why You Shouldn’t Believe the Resurrection Happened
LINK
Secular Outpost is Now on Twitter
For those of you who are into Twitter, the Secular Outpost is now on Twitter at @secularfrontier.
Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 2: The Failure of the Resurrection ‘Explanation’
What I want to do in this post is to summarize (and offer my own interpretation of) Cavin’s second main contention in his debate with Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus: CC2. The Resurrection Theory is a dismal failure as an explanation of the empty tomb and postmortem appearances of Jesus—being ad hoc and … Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 2: The Failure of the Resurrection ‘Explanation’
The Perfect Goodness of God – Again (Part 2)
In my previous post on this topic, I used conditional derivation to try to prove that one statement entailed another statement, to show that ‘There is a person who is omniscient and perfectly free’ entails ‘There is a person who is perfectly good’. But because I’m a bit unclear on how the logic of conditional … The Perfect Goodness of God – Again (Part 2)
William Lane Craig’s silly views on animal pain further debunked
This brand new video exposes in some detail the absurdity of William Lane Craig’s ongoing attempt to defend his silly, unscientific views regarding animal pain (his view is that animals other than higher primates are unaware they have it – which is a great comfort to animal lovers like himself). This video responds to … William Lane Craig’s silly views on animal pain further debunked
The Argument from Scale (AS) Revisited, Part 6
In Part 1 of this series, I critically reviewed Nicholas Everitt’s formulation of the argument from scale (AS). In Part 5, I critically reviewed John Loftus’s defense of AS on his blog. In this post, I want to review Loftus’s defense of Everitt’s formulation of AS in his (Loftus’s) book, Why I Became an Atheist: … The Argument from Scale (AS) Revisited, Part 6
Update on Comments Migration
1. There were seven (7) comments submitted while I was migrating the new site to use Disqus for commenting. I had those held in a moderation queue while I tried migrating comments (so that they would not be lost) and then I forgot about them. Tonight I tried “approving” them in the moderation queue and … Update on Comments Migration
Robert Oerter’s Fine-Tuning Argument for Naturalism
Robert Oerter has written an interesting post on his blog outlining what he calls a fine-tuning argument for naturalism. It’s important to keep in mind that Oerter doesn’t actually believe that this argument is a good argument for naturalism. Rather, he thinks it’s useful for showing what’s wrong with the fine-tuning argument for theism. Rather … Robert Oerter’s Fine-Tuning Argument for Naturalism
When is a Debate “Win” Significant?
A reader asked me if I had watched the debate between William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg. Here is my reply. No, I haven’t seen it. I’ve read some of Rosenberg’s book, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality, however. My prediction is that WLC not only “won” the debate, but that Rosenberg did awful. Why would … When is a Debate “Win” Significant?