Cosmological Arguments: The Naturalists Strike Back
A couple of days ago, I blogged some potential objections to Swinburne’s inductive cosmological argument. I concluded that post with an argument that the existence of a physical universe is evidence favoring naturalism over theism. Tonight, ex-apologist has blogged about the prospects for a Leibnizian cosmological argument against theism. Take a look!
Response to Prof. Feser’s Response (Part I)
Ed, for the convenience of readers, here is a link to your response to my answer to your first question. Here is my response: And thanks back to you for a very gracious and constructive reply! You clarify your position admirably. Also, you are right that philosophers do legitimately serve a role as “public intellectuals” … Response to Prof. Feser’s Response (Part I)
Potential Objections to Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument
After studying inductive logic for so long, I’ve decided it is finally time to reread Richard Swinburne’s The Existence of God (second ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 2004) and reconsider his inductive case for God’s existence. In doing so, I think I may have discovered a new objection to his cosmological argument. This is very rough … Potential Objections to Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 5
The Cosmological Argument (TCA) is the first argument in Swinburne’s inductive case for the existence of God. The arguments are presented in a specific order, each argument adding one more contingent fact (or specific set of contingent facts) to the facts presented in the premises of the previous arguments. Since TCA is the first argument, … Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 5
Amoral Atheism
Atheism is neither moral nor immoral; rather, it is amoral. By itself, atheism does not make it obligatory, permitted, or forbidden to do anything. It’s not an ethical theory.
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 4
Richard Swinburne presents his inductive cosmological argument in Chapter 7 of his book The Existence of God (second edition, hereafter: EOG). I plan to start at the beginning of the chapter and go paragraph by paragraph, stopping to comment on each paragraph that includes either support for, or defense of, some part of the cosmological … Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 4
Cosmos Reboot with Neil deGrasse Tyson
The TV series Cosmos (of Carl Sagan fame) has been rebooted, this time with astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson as the host. What do Intelligent Design (ID) theorists have to say about it? Here’s Uncommon Descent’s review. (TL;DR: they’re unhappy with the “materialistic message.”) Did you watch it? If so, let us know what you thought in the … <I>Cosmos</I> Reboot with Neil deGrasse Tyson
Follow @secularfrontier on Twitter
If you’re the kind of person who uses Twitter, please follow at @secularfrontier. Also, while you’re at it, you should also follow these: @Justinweh (Justin Schieber of Reasonable Doubts) @JohnDanaher (John Donaher of Philosophical Disquisitions) @exapologist (This is Ex-Apologist of the, you guessed it, Ex-Apologist blog)
Richard Swinburne on Aquinas’s First Way
Aquinas’s first way is sometimes said to be a version of the cosmological argument, but it does not count as one on my definition of a cosmological argument, since it argues not from the existence of physical objects, but from change in them. It claims in effect that, given that there are physical objects, change … Richard Swinburne on Aquinas’s First Way
The Courtier’s Reply as Post-Theistic Attitude, Not Fallacy
Sam Sawyer, SJ, a fellow a Patheos blogger over at the new blog The Jesuit Post (in Patheos’s Catholic Channel) recently plugged the exchange between Edward Feser and Keith Parsons. (Thanks!) I’d like to return the favor by plugging a post on his blog: “Not Even Wrong: Answering the New Atheism with Better Belief, Not … The Courtier’s Reply as Post-Theistic Attitude, Not Fallacy