William Lane Craig Endorses My Argument from Scale against Theism!
He doesn’t mention by name, of course, and may not have even had my argument in mind, but the sort of Bayesian considerations he raises support my Bayesian argument from scale, in two ways. First, he agrees with me about the “direction” the evidence points (against theism). Second, he agrees with me about the “magnitude” … William Lane Craig Endorses My Argument from Scale against Theism!
Apologist Responds? Check. Uncharitable? Check. Uses Cheap Shots and Insults? Check.
I stopped reading Triablogue some time ago, but today I decided to make an exception. After I posted my comment about the twin hypothesis, I thought to myself, “I’ll bet Steve Hays responds to this and uses the ‘Village Atheist’ tag.” My prediction was accurate. (See his post here.) In my comment, I didn’t defend the twin … Apologist Responds? Check. Uncharitable? Check. Uses Cheap Shots and Insults? Check.
Theists Can Always Deny the Evidence
One of the cool tricks you can use to check yourself for confirmation bias is to try swapping roles with someone who holds a contrary opinion. For example, suppose I wrote the following: One of the things that an atheist must never forget when speaking with a theist, and especially when speaking with a theist who intones … Theists Can Always Deny the Evidence
Debate 101
If your debate opponent defends a position (call it H1), argue against H1. Don’t argue against positions they don’t hold (H2 or H3 or …). Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Moral Arguments for God and Coining a Name for a Common but Fallacious Objection
In response to Wintery Knight’s recent blog post on the plausibility of objective morality on atheism, I posted a comment in the combox on his site. The comment consisted solely of a link to my YouTube video, “Naturalism, Theism, and Moral Ontology: A Reply to William Lane Craig.” In response to that link, WK wrote … Moral Arguments for God and Coining a Name for a Common but Fallacious Objection
Naturalism, Theism, and Moral Ontology: A Reply to William Lane Craig
(Reposting since this seems to be so popular. So far as I am aware, neither WLC nor anyone else has responded to this.)Abstract: This paper considers William Lane Craig’s metaethical argument for God’s existence. Roughly, the argument is that the existence of objective moral values provides strong evidence for God’s existence. I consider one by one … Naturalism, Theism, and Moral Ontology: A Reply to William Lane Craig
The Intellectual Poverty of Ken Ham’s Presuppositionalist Meme
I recently saw a Twitter meme of Ken Ham making a crude appeal to a presuppositionalist type of argument against all non-Christians, not just atheists. I don’t want to deal with any potential licensing issues with the image, so rather than display the image on my blog instead I’ll quote the words below. Non-Christian scientists are … The Intellectual Poverty of Ken Ham’s Presuppositionalist Meme
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
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
The Empty Tomb: Reply to Josh and Sean McDowell
(Redated post originally published on 20 November 2012) A friend informed me that Josh and Sean McDowell, in the new (revised?) edition of More Than a Carpenter (MTAC) on page 134, have offered a critique of the relocation hypothesis, which I defended in The Empty Tomb (TET). I have reviewed what they wrote. Here is … The Empty Tomb: Reply to Josh and Sean McDowell