Month: February 2016

Open Combox for Debating Objective Morality

Feel free to debate in the combox as your heart desires. I have just one suggestion: make sure you clearly define your terms. Notoriously polysemous words to define include Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)

How to Get Published on The Secular Web: Call for Papers

As “Call for Papers Editor” for The Secular Web, I’d like to take this opportunity to advertise The Secular Web’s “Call for Papers” page on the site. I recently updated the page with several new requests for original articles and book reviews for The Secular Web’s “Modern Library,” which is the peer-reviewed, scholarly section of How to Get Published on The Secular Web: Call for Papers

“The Argument from Reason” (2)

(redating post originally published on 14 December 2011) At 349, Reppert says: “We ought to draw the conclusion if we accept the premises of a valid argument”. This is obviously wrong. Suppose, to take the worst case, that my beliefs contradict one another. If we are supposing classical logic — as Reppert clearly is — “The Argument from Reason” (2)

Does God Exist? Part 2

Here is a third option for breaking down the question “Does God exist?” (click on the image below to get a clearer view of the chart): This is a variation on Option 2 (see the previous post in this series). In this analysis I stick with the process of simply adding on divine attributes to Does God Exist? Part 2

“The Argument from Reason”

(Redating post originally published on 8 December 2011) A couple of comments on Reppert “The Argument from Reason” in Craig and Moreland (ed.) Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, 344-90. (I have a long list; I may post further comments later.) 1. At 368, Reppert argues: If the reference of our terms is indeterminate, then this “The Argument from Reason”

From Keith Parsons: Craig on the Relevance of Christianity

(redating post originally published on 13 November 2006) Keith Parsons recently sent me the following e-mail, which he has authorized me to post here on the Secular Outpost. Craig recently sent a message to Vic Reppert’s Dangerous Idea blog What is really sad is that these “young people” that were subjected to Craig’s browbeating probably From Keith Parsons: Craig on the Relevance of Christianity

What is Christianity? Part 8

I have a cognitivist view of religions, and of Christianity in particular. 1.  Christianity is something that can be true (or false). 2. An experience is NOT something that can be true (or false). 3. A feeling is NOT something that can be true (or false). 4. A commitment is NOT something that can be What is Christianity? Part 8