The Argument from Silence, Part 7: Victor Stenger on the Absence of Scientific Evidence for God
In this post, I want to revisit an argument from silence used by Victor Stenger against the existence of God based on the absence of scientific evidence for God. In his 2010 debate with William Lane Craig, Stenger argued that “the absence of evidence for God is evidence of absence” of God. In his words, … The Argument from Silence, Part 7: Victor Stenger on the Absence of Scientific Evidence for God
Sean Carroll’s 11 Lines of Evidence for Naturalism over Theism
This is my attempt to summarize the slides from Sean Carroll’s recent debate with WLC where he very quickly skimmed through eleven (11) lines of evidence which favor naturalism over theism. I don’t claim this is perfectly accurate; any corrections would be welcome and, in fact, appreciated! Facet Theism (Theistic Prediction) Naturalism (Naturalistic Prediction) Lowder’s … Sean Carroll’s 11 Lines of Evidence for Naturalism over Theism
Is HADD Evidence Against Theism? Part 1
I’ve been thinking lately about whether HADD, on the assumption that it exists, is evidence for or against the existence of God. I’m starting to think it is neutral, but I’m posting this here for feedback. Context Before diving into the details, let’s review a few items for context. First, let’s address terminology. HADD is … Is HADD Evidence Against Theism? Part 1
Craig-Carroll Debate Video Now Online
HT: Mikkel Rumraket Rasmussen 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)
Can the Arguments of the “New Atheists” be made Stronger?
Jeff Lowder notes Ed Feser’s critique of the “New Atheists” and indicates that his criticisms are cogent, perhaps fatal. Now, I do not read much of Ed Feser’s stuff, not even all of the two tirades he wrote about me—which outbursts made my day both times. However, I have read Alistair McGrath’s critiques of Dawkins … Can the Arguments of the “New Atheists” be made Stronger?
What’s So Great about What’s So Great about Christianity? – Part 2
As we saw in my last post, Dinesh D’Souza’s defense of the “moral laws presume a moral lawgiver” argument fails. In this post I want to comment on what D’Souza has to say about atheist “attempt[s] to meet this challenge” (232). 1.Like many partisan diatribes, D’Souza’s book says nothing about the strongest arguments and objections … What’s So Great about <I>What’s So Great about Christianity?</I> – Part 2
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