Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 5: The Argument from Common Consent
WHERE WE ARE AS OF PART 4 In Part 1 and Part 2 I argued that eight out of ten (80%) of the last ten arguments in Peter Kreeft’s collection of twenty arguments (from Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Chapter 3) are AWFUL arguments that are not worthy of serious consideration, that we should thus toss … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 5: The Argument from Common Consent
Roy Moore and the Tide of Irrationality
As you may have noticed, it looks like the next U.S. Senator from Alabama, taking the seat vacated by Jeff Sessions, will be former judge Roy Moore. Moore won the Republican primary, defeating the appointed incumbent, Luther Strange. Strange, an obsequiously loyal Trump supporter, was apparently not conservative enough for Alabama voters. Moore was twice … Roy Moore and the Tide of Irrationality
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 4: Evaluation of Argument #12
WHERE WE ARE AT WITH EXAMINATION OF ARGUMENT #12 In Part 3 of this series I analyzed the logical structure of Argument #12 in Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God from Chapter 3 of his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA). My initial criticism of this argument is that much of it is … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 4: Evaluation of Argument #12
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 3: The Origin of the Idea of God
MY DIVIDE-AND-CONQUER STRATEGY I have argued that Peter Kreeft puts forward what he takes to be his strongest and best arguments for the existence of God in the first half of his list of twenty arguments (Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Chapter 3), and then puts forward his weakest and most … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 3: The Origin of the Idea of God
The Laws of Physics and the Laws of Logic
I recently conducted a typically inconclusive discussion with Victor Reppert in the comments section of my post “Can Brains Think?” While I doubt that we will ever agree (each of us in in his mid-sixties), I think I can identify one issue that keeps coming up again and again. Repeatedly Victor pointed to the difference … The Laws of Physics and the Laws of Logic
Richard Dawkins and Moral Realism
Christian apologists who love to substitute quote-mining for actual argumentation are fond of quotations like the following, in order to conclude that atheism somehow undermines morality. In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, and other people are going to get lucky; and you won’t find … Richard Dawkins and Moral Realism
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 2: Tossing Out Four More Arguments
KREEFT’S CREDIBILITY PROBLEM To focus in on the alleged flaws and failings of an arguer, as opposed to the alleged flaws and failings of his/her arguments is generally to be avoided, and can amount to the fallacy of ad hominem. However, the CREDIBILITY of an arguer can affect the persuasive force of an argument, so credibility should … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 2: Tossing Out Four More Arguments
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 1: Tossing Out Four Arguments
INTRODUCTION TO KREEFT’S CASE FOR GOD In this new series of blog posts, I plan to analyze and evaluate Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God. Peter Kreeft is a Catholic philosopher of religion and a Christian apologist. He has published many books defending the Christian faith. Kreeft co-authored Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 1: Tossing Out Four Arguments
Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 19: The Whole Enchilada
In part 11 of this series of posts I reviewed the overall structure of Norman Geisler’s case for the existence of God, the case that he presented, along with coauthor Ronald Brooks, in When Skeptics Ask (hereafter: WSA). In this present post, I will once again review the overall structure of Geisler’s case, and will summarize … Geisler’s Five Ways – Part 19: The Whole Enchilada