Arguments For God that are Arguments Against God
GOD AND CONFIRMATION BIAS There is a theme in Jeff Lowder’s case for Naturalism: the thinking of religious believers is often distorted by confirmation bias. They look for evidence that supports their belief in God, but ignore, or forget, or fail to notice, evidence that goes against their belief in God. When believers offer some reason or … Arguments For God that are Arguments Against God
More Reflections on Epistemology: Prove Your Authority
WHERE WE ARE AT Recent comments on Part 11 of my series defending the Swoon Theory concern some basic issues of epistemology, and for some reason I could not prevent myself from jumping in and responding to some of the comments concerning epistemological issues. So, I shared some of those comments and some of my … More Reflections on Epistemology: Prove Your Authority
Some Reflections on Epistemology
To be honest, I tend to shy away from discussions of epistemology (the theory of knowledge, the sub-discipline of philosophy that attempts to understand and clarify the concept of knowledge and the conditions or criteria for what counts as knowledge). First of all, I don’t enjoy discussing “Calvinist epistemology” which has been a big topic … Some Reflections on Epistemology
The Resurrection of Dr. Sean George – Part 2: Littlewood’s Law
Dr. Sean George claims that God raised him from the dead. I have prepared a PowerPoint presentation called “The Resurrection of Sean George” which contains lots of relevant information and skeptical points about Dr. Sean George’s miracle claim. Here at The Secular Outpost, I plan to present my main objections to his miracle claim. The … The Resurrection of Dr. Sean George – Part 2: Littlewood’s Law
Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 3: Improved Definition
In Part 2 of this series, I argued that Peter Kreeft suggested at least seven different definitions of “The Conspiracy Theory” (herafter: TCT), each of which was WRONG. In order to refute TCT, Kreeft must clearly characterize or define TCT, so his refutation FAILS right out of the starting gate. But in order to evaluate … Defending the Conspiracy Theory – Part 3: Improved Definition
Belief in Miracles – Part 1: Summary
I was invited to be a speaker at the NW Miracles Conference, thanks to Bob Seidensticker who suggested to the conference organizer that I could represent a skeptical viewpoint on the question “Is it ever reasonable to believe miracle claims?” I came prepared with a PowerPoint presentation called “Belief in Miracles”, but because of time constraints … Belief in Miracles – Part 1: Summary
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 3: Clarification of My Reasoning
WHERE WE ARE AT In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I have shown that Dr. Erasmus’ objection to my skeptical reasoning (a) attacks a STRAW MAN, and (b) is based on an INVALID INFERENCE. In doing so, I also argued that Dr. Erasmus does not have a good understanding of probability calculations, especially … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 3: Clarification of My Reasoning
Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 2: Straw Man and Invalid Inference
In this post I will reply to an objection that was raised by Dr. Jacobus Erasmus against my reasoning in one of my skeptical posts about the resurrection of Jesus. DR. ERASMUS COMMITS THE STRAW MAN FALLACY The most basic problem with the objection raised by Dr. Erasmus is that he commits the all-too-common STRAW … Reply to Dr. Erasmus – Part 2: Straw Man and Invalid Inference
The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL The problem of evil is concerned with whether the existence of evil (or of particular kinds or amounts of evil) is logically incompatible with the existence of God or provides significant evidence against the existence of God. The “logical” problem of evil focuses on whether evil (or particular kinds or amounts … The Logic of Miracles – Part 6: The Problem of Evil
The Logic of Miracles – Part 5: Two Objections
WHY CLASSICAL APOLOGETICS IS DOOMED TO FAILURE I have previously argued in Part 2 that Richard Swinburne’s case for the existence of God depends on some assumptions about the PLANS or PURPOSES of God. I have also argued in Part 3 and in Part 4 that Peter Kreeft’s case for the existence of God depends … The Logic of Miracles – Part 5: Two Objections