Lowder-Vandergriff Debate on God’s Existence Now Out!
I’m pleased to announce that my debate on God’s existence with Mr. Kevin Vandergriff is now out! Here are the options for accessing the debate. Topic and Format The topic and format for our debate was as follows. Topic: Naturalism vs. Christian Theism: Where Does the Evidence Point? Format: Mr. Lowder’s Opening Statement: 20 minutes Mr. Vandergriff’s … Lowder-Vandergriff Debate on God’s Existence Now Out!
Horia George Plugaru: The Argument from Physiological Horrors (2003)
This was recommended to me, but I haven’t read it yet. Please feel free to debate in the combox. P1: If human beings: (1) would produce extremely disgusting, abhorrent, horrible, pestilential, totally ugly results, (2) those results would be due to no fault of their own, (3) assuming that (some of) those results would help … Horia George Plugaru: The Argument from Physiological Horrors (2003)
The Evidential Argument from Biological Evolution: Part 1
Many conservative Christians and lay atheists alike claim that if biological evolution is true, then God does not exist. Ironically, while many conservative Christians have attacked evolution because it supposedly entails atheism, only one contemporary atheist philosopher has argued that evolution is evidence for atheism: Paul Draper. Draper defends an evidential argument from evolution for naturalism. … The Evidential Argument from Biological Evolution: Part 1
Repost: Brittany Maynard and the Problem of Evil
In case you’ve been under a rock (or you’re reading this in the future when it is an old, archived post), Brittany Maynard, a women with terminal brain cancer, died by assisted suicide last weekend in the U.S. state of Oregon, where it is legal. Brittany’s life and death are an especially tragic combination of two … Repost: Brittany Maynard and the Problem of Evil
Link: Darwin’s Argument from Evil by Paul Draper
Draper’s chapter was published in Yujin Nagasawa (ed.), Scientific Approaches to the Philosophy of Religion. Palgrave Macmillan. 49 (2012). It’s available online for free courtesy of Google Books. LINK Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God – Part 2
In a previous post I pointed out three different problems related to the third argument in Richard Swinburne’s systematic case for the existence of God. The third argument is the final argument of his arguments from the nature of the universe. It is his Teleological Argument from Spatial Order (hereafter: TASO):(e3) There is a complex physical … One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God – Part 2
Quote of the Day by Paul Draper
“Suppose Wykstra is right that, if there is a God, then we shouldn’t expect to know what God’s reasons for producing or allowing certain evils are. Then it follows that our ignorance of those reasons (i.e. the failure of the project of theodicy) is not strong evidence against theism. It does not follow, however, that … Quote of the Day by Paul Draper
Did God Create Nuclear Weapons?
Christians and other believers in God often say, ‘God created everything.’ If we take this literally, as a young child would do, we might start thinking of some objections or possible counterexamples: ‘Did God create nuclear weapons?’ ‘Did God create the ebola virus?’ etc. The doctrine of divine creation leads quickly to the problem of evil. … Did God Create Nuclear Weapons?
One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God
In The Existence of God (2nd edition, hereafter: EOG), Richard Swinburne lays out a systematic cumulative case for the claim that it is more likely than not that God exists. I have a specific objection to the third argument in this case, but I believe this objection throws a monkey wrench into the works, and … One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God
Evidential Asymmetry, Scientific Confirmation of Prayer, and Horrific Evils
1. The General Case One of the most important (and equally most often forgotten) lessons that Bayes’s Theorem can teach us about evidence is that the strength of evidence is a ratio. To be precise, let H1 and H2 be rival explanatory hypotheses, B be the relevant background information, and E be the evidence to … Evidential Asymmetry, Scientific Confirmation of Prayer, and Horrific Evils