Adolf Grünbaum: Why is There a World AT ALL, Rather Than Just Nothing? (2009)
I have not read this paper and so I have no opinion on its contents, but it looks very interesting. Abstract: The titular question here “Why is There A World AT ALL, Rather Than Just Nothing?” is a fusion of two successive queries posed by Leibniz in 1697 and 1714. He did so to lay the … Adolf Grünbaum: Why is There a World AT ALL, Rather Than Just Nothing? (2009)
Link: Why Science Cannot Explain Why Anything At All Exists by Luke Barnes
Physicist and cosmologist Luke Barnes wrote an interesting post in his blog a while ago about why science cannot explain why anything at all exists. I’m inclined to agree with him. Here is how he summarizes his own argument in his own words. A: The state of physics at any time can be (roughly) summarised by … Link: Why Science Cannot Explain Why Anything At All Exists by Luke Barnes
Some Logic in Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument
I have been struggling for the past week or two to make clear the logic behind one premise of Swinburne’s cosmological argument. Perhaps those readers of The Secular Outpost who have an interest in logic or in Swinburne’s arguments will be able to help me with this task. Actually, his inductive cosmological argument is very … Some Logic in Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument
WLC’s Debate Quotation of Anthony Kenny
Here is WLC’s quotation of Kenny: A proponent of the Big Bang Theory, at least if he is an atheist, must believe that the universe came from nothing and by nothing. And here is a critique: LINK Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part III)
Ed, Russell’s argument is from Why I am not a Christian, which was a popular talk given to a general audience. As you say, almost certainly he was aiming at popular apologetics. He could, however, address the argument at a much more sophisticated level. I think his best response to cosmological arguments came in his … Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part III)
Response to Prof. Feser’s Response to…etc (Part II)
Ed, this will be a rather truncated response to these points because I will address just the arguments you present here. A fair treatment of your arguments would need to address your article on these topics in American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly. However, two physical realities—time and space—limit me here. The question I posed was why … Response to Prof. Feser’s Response to…etc (Part II)
Cosmological Arguments: The Naturalists Strike Back
A couple of days ago, I blogged some potential objections to Swinburne’s inductive cosmological argument. I concluded that post with an argument that the existence of a physical universe is evidence favoring naturalism over theism. Tonight, ex-apologist has blogged about the prospects for a Leibnizian cosmological argument against theism. Take a look! Your name Your … Cosmological Arguments: The Naturalists Strike Back
Response to Prof. Feser’s Response (Part I)
Ed, for the convenience of readers, here is a link to your response to my answer to your first question. Here is my response: And thanks back to you for a very gracious and constructive reply! You clarify your position admirably. Also, you are right that philosophers do legitimately serve a role as “public intellectuals” … Response to Prof. Feser’s Response (Part I)
Potential Objections to Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument
After studying inductive logic for so long, I’ve decided it is finally time to reread Richard Swinburne’s The Existence of God (second ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 2004) and reconsider his inductive case for God’s existence. In doing so, I think I may have discovered a new objection to his cosmological argument. This is very rough … Potential Objections to Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument
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