What is Faith – Part 6
I have noticed a problem of unclarity in my own thinking and writing about the Thomist view of faith. Before I go further in discussing Swinburne’s characterization of the Thomist view of faith, I want to briefly consider the point of unclarity or ambiguity in my previous discussion of this view of faith. I have … What is Faith – Part 6
What is Faith? – Part 4
We have looked at a simple and widespread understanding of ‘faith in God’: Definition 1 Person P has faith in God IF AND ONLY IF P believes that God exists. One problem with Def. 1 is that the devil himself would have ‘faith in God’ based on this definition, and thus this could hardly be considered to … What is Faith? – Part 4
What is Faith? – Part 3
I said that I was not going to walk slowly through the rest of Chapter 4 of Faith and Reason (FAR), by Richard Swinburne. But there is a lot going on in the next few paragraphs of Chapter 4, and I find myself wanting to make several comments on them. So, contrary to my previous … What is Faith? – Part 3
Link: Can Atheism Be Properly Basic?
The academic blog The Prosblogion has a very interesting post by Nik Peels on whether atheism can be properly basic. I see that commenters include several of the regular commenters on this blog.LINK
Happy Easter Dr. Craig
Last year I wrote several posts criticizing William Lane Craig’s case for the resurrection. Here are several excerpts from those posts (plus links, in case you want to read the full post from which an excerpt was taken): =========== Some Skeptical Thoughts on the Resurrection 1. Geisler vs. Craig Norman Geisler makes an excellent point … Happy Easter Dr. Craig
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 6
I will now try to wrap up this series of posts on Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience (AFR). I don’t have any big bold conclusion that I’m driving toward, just a few observations, clarifications, and an objection or two. One thing I have done is to make use of the concepts of dependence and … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 6
Religious Experience – Recognizing God
Sam said to me and our gathered friends: Give me someone who is willing to sit down and take a three-hour Chemistry test, and another hour to review the test after it is completed, then I will be able to give you a reliable estimation of how much that person knows about chemistry. This claim … Religious Experience – Recognizing God
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 5
Here is a brief plot summary of the movie Harvey: Due to his insistence that he has an invisible six-foot rabbit for a best friend, a whimsical middle-aged man is thought by his family to be insane – but he may be wiser than anyone knows. James Stewart played Elwood P. Dowd, the “whimsical middle-aged man” … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 5
Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 4
Although I have been considering the implications of the idea that the veridicality of a Theistic Religious Experience (TRE) is independent of the veridicality of other TREs, this is NOT the view of Swinburne. In fact, Swinburne clearly holds the opposite view, the view that the veridicality of a TRE is dependent on the veridicality … Swinburne’s Argument from Religious Experience – Part 4
Evolution vs. The Argument from Providence
In the Existence of God (2nd edition, hereafter: EOG) Richard Swinburne lays out a carefully constructed, systematically presented case for the the claim that it is more likely than not that God exists. I have previously argued that there is a big problem with this case that arises with the third argument. In order to know that … Evolution vs. The Argument from Providence