Breaking News: WLC Disses Aquinas
During the Q&A period of tonight’s Craig-Carroll debate on God and cosmology, WLC said this (or something very close to it): “Aquinas’ metaphysical principles are just dubious.” Shhhhh… Don’t tell Ed Feser. Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Theism, Naturalism, and the Total Evidence: Torley’s Reply to Me
About a year ago, I commented on the exchange between John Loftus and Vincent Torley. Torley has just posted his reply at Uncommon Descent. Check it out! LINK I hope to write a reply eventually, but it may be a couple of months before I am able to do so. Your name Your email Subject … Theism, Naturalism, and the Total Evidence: Torley’s Reply to Me
Angra Mainyu Responds to WLC and Murray on Animal Pain
His response is spread over three posts. Here are the links. Introduction Part 1 Part 2 Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Feser Insults Readers of www.infidels.org
Here’s the insult. And one’s more gullible followers—people like the www.infidels.org faithful who have been buying up The God Delusion by the bushel basket—will be thrilled to have some new piece of smart-assery to fling at their religious friends in lieu of a serious argument. LINK Speaking of “smart-assery,” Pot, meet kettle. I’m not sure … Feser Insults Readers of www.infidels.org
Do Christian Apologists Spend Too Much Time Focusing on their Weaker Opponents?
Refuting the “New Atheists” is all the rage among Christian apologists these days. Among professional philosophers of religion, however, it’s well-known that the new atheists are not the best representatives for atheism. So why do Christian apologists continue to harp on the new atheists and ignore what atheist professional philosophers of religion have to say? … Do Christian Apologists Spend Too Much Time Focusing on their Weaker Opponents?
Apologist Bingo!
Hemant Mehta blogs about this clever, funny way to combat an apologist: LINK ETA: I love one of the comments in the combox at that site: I’m giggling at the thought of an audience member jumping up in the middle of the talk and shouting “Bingo!” Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
YOU’RE JUST BEING OBSTINATE. NO, YOU. YOU!!!
On his Dangerous Idea site, Victor Reppert quotes, apparently approvingly, from St. Augustine’s City of God: “Even after the plain truth has been thoroughly demonstrated, so far as a person is capable of doing, the confirmed skeptic will insist on maintaining belief in his own irrational notions. This is due to either a great blindness, … YOU’RE JUST BEING OBSTINATE. NO, YOU. YOU!!!
Playing The Mystery Card (incl. McGrath vs Dawkins) from my book Believing Bullshit
PLAYING THE MYSTERY CARD Suppose critics point out that not only do you have little in the way of argument to support your particular belief system, there also seems to be powerful evidence against it. If you want, nevertheless, to convince both yourself and others that your beliefs are not nearly as ridiculous as … Playing The Mystery Card (incl. McGrath vs Dawkins) from my book Believing Bullshit
Best of All Possible Persons – Part 2
What do you get if you cross ‘the best of all possible worlds’ (from Leibniz) with ‘the being than which none greater can be conceived’ (from Anselm)? You get: the best of all possible persons, which is another way to conceive of God. Here are two proofs of the non-existence of God, based on this … Best of All Possible Persons – Part 2
Best of All Possible Persons
Now this supreme wisdom, united to a goodness that is no less infinite, cannot but have chosen the best… If there were not the best among all possible worlds, God would not have produced any. (Gottfried Leibniz, Theodicy, translated by E.M. Huggard, 1951, p.128) According to Anselm, God is the being than which none greater … Best of All Possible Persons