Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 5
The Cosmological Argument (TCA) is the first argument in Swinburne’s inductive case for the existence of God. The arguments are presented in a specific order, each argument adding one more contingent fact (or specific set of contingent facts) to the facts presented in the premises of the previous arguments. Since TCA is the first argument, … Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 5
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 4
Richard Swinburne presents his inductive cosmological argument in Chapter 7 of his book The Existence of God (second edition, hereafter: EOG). I plan to start at the beginning of the chapter and go paragraph by paragraph, stopping to comment on each paragraph that includes either support for, or defense of, some part of the cosmological … Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 4
The Courtier’s Reply as Post-Theistic Attitude, Not Fallacy
Sam Sawyer, SJ, a fellow a Patheos blogger over at the new blog The Jesuit Post (in Patheos’s Catholic Channel) recently plugged the exchange between Edward Feser and Keith Parsons. (Thanks!) I’d like to return the favor by plugging a post on his blog: “Not Even Wrong: Answering the New Atheism with Better Belief, Not … The Courtier’s Reply as Post-Theistic Attitude, Not Fallacy
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 3
I am exploring a concern about, or potential objection to, Swinburne’s inductive cosmological and teleological arguments for the existence of God. The objection I have in mind is something like this, for the cosmological argument: Although the one factual premise of Swinburne’s cosmological argument is supposed to be the ONLY contingent factual claim or assumption … Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 3
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 2
Like many other liberals, I’m delighted and mesmerized by Bridgegate and various other Chris Christie scandals from the fine state of New Jersey. I cannot wait for my daily dose of Rachel Maddow dishing the latest dirt on Christie and his idiotic crowd of corrupt New Jersey hooligans. What does this have to do with … Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 2
Swinburne’s Cosmological & Teleological Arguments
I’m not going to try to fully explain and evaluate Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological arguments for God here. That would be way too much to tackle in one or two blog posts. There are just a couple of doubts or concerns about these arguments that I would like to express and explore. Swinburne’s inductive cosmological … Swinburne’s Cosmological & Teleological Arguments
Richard Carrier Responds to Uncommon Descent on Atheism and Suicide
LINK
John Shook Enters the Fray on Defining “Atheism”
As I read him, John Shook’s approach can be summed up in three, related propositions. 1. One can be an atheist without believing that atheism is true. 2. Following the OED, an atheist is “One who denies or disbelieves the existence of a god.” 3. Atheism is the belief that “Believing that no god exists … John Shook Enters the Fray on Defining “Atheism”
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