Month: February 2016

I Don’t Care – Part 6

Aquinas is often thought of as a rigourously logical and systematic thinker.  This is only half-true.  There is a good deal of vaguness, ambiguity, and illogical thinking in his book Summa Theologica, as far as I can see. Here is a cautionary note from a philosopher who is an expert on Aquinas: From the concept of I Don’t Care – Part 6

Jerry Coyne on Goodness without God

(Originally published on 17 October 2011) Jerry Coyne recently wrote an op-ed in USA Today entitled, “As Atheists Know, You Can Be Good Without God.” Christian philosopher Matt Flanagan wrote an excellent critique, not of Coyne’s claim that nonbelievers can be good without God (which Flanagan grants), but of pretty much everything else Coyne wrote Jerry Coyne on Goodness without God

The Problem of Epistemic Evil

The problem of epistemic evil is raised by Rene Descartes in the fourth of his Meditations on First Philosophy. In the previous meditation he believed that he had exorcised the Evil Genius who might be systematically and comprehensively deceiving us. Descartes believes that he has proven the existence of a good God who will not The Problem of Epistemic Evil

Christian Apologists Ignore the Best Objections to the Moral Argument

(Redated post originally published on 2 August 2014) To be precise, there are many kinds of moral arguments for theism. The question in the title is really talking about what we might call “ontological” or “metaphysical” moral arguments, the kind which claim that we need God in order to have an “ontological foundation” for objective Christian Apologists Ignore the Best Objections to the Moral Argument

Where have all the Miracles Gone?

As a kid, I often left Sunday school wondering why God was so much less communicative today than he had been in Biblical times. Back then, according to the stories I heard, he was constantly speaking, out loud apparently, to some patriarch or prophet. Further, the Holy Book was chock full of flashy, often public Where have all the Miracles Gone?

For Victor Reppert: The Metaethical Objections to Craig’s Moral Argument Which His Sophisticated Critics Use, But Craig Never Acknowledges in Debate Opening Statements

(Redated post originally published on 21 June 2012) This is a quick follow-up to my last reply to Victor Reppert. The title of Reppert’s post is, “The Moral Argument that Christians don’t use, but atheists always rebut.” In reply, we can point to “The Metaethical Objections to Craig’s Moral Argument Which His Sophisticated Critics Use, For Victor Reppert: The Metaethical Objections to Craig’s Moral Argument Which His Sophisticated Critics Use, But Craig Never Acknowledges in Debate Opening Statements

I Don’t Care – Part 5

The famous Five Ways passage by Aquinas in Summa Theologica does not contain five arguments for the existence of God. Rather, it contains ZERO arguments for the existence of God.  There is actually only one argument for the existence of God in the Summa Theologica, and the reasoning in the Five Ways passage only represents a I Don’t Care – Part 5

Doug Geivett’s Turnaround Argument on Evil as a Departure from the Way Things Ought to Be

(Redating post last published on 31 October 2011) (Redating this post due to clarification from Geivett regarding his argument) For those of you who don’t know of him, Doug Geivett is a Christian philosopher at Biola University. I had the opportunity to meet him in 1997 at the I.I.-sponsored debate on the existence of God Doug Geivett’s Turnaround Argument on Evil as a Departure from the Way Things Ought to Be