links

How to Do Careful Argument Analysis

Critical Thinking is basically CAREFUL thinking. More specifically, it is thinking in which a person continually strives to conform his or her thinking to the universal standards of thinking, which include the following: Careful argument evaluation is the heart and soul of critical thinking. But one cannot do a careful job of evaluating an argument How to Do Careful Argument Analysis

Analysis of 14 Objections to the Hallucination Theory

In their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) the Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli claim to prove the resurrection of Jesus. Their argument can be summarized briefly: 1. There are only four possible skeptical theories about the alleged resurrection of Jesus: Swoon, Hallucination, Conspiracy, and Myth.THEREFORE:2. IF Kreeft and Tacelli have refuted those Analysis of 14 Objections to the Hallucination Theory

Skeptical Theories about the Resurrection of Jesus

In their Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA) the Christian philosophers Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli claim to prove the resurrection of Jesus. Their argument can be summarized briefly: 1. There are only four possible skeptical theories about the alleged resurrection of Jesus: Swoon, Hallucination, Conspiracy, and Myth.THEREFORE:2. IF Kreeft and Tacelli have refuted those Skeptical Theories about the Resurrection of Jesus

Must-Read Paper on the Confusing Terminology in the Philosophy of Religion

Philosopher Dale Tuggy has written an incredibly helpful paper which seeks to help clarify some of the confusing terminology in the philosophy of religion regarding God vs. gods. Key terms defined in this paper include deity, godhood, ultimate, the Ultimate. So far as I can tell, his modest proposal for terminology does not appear to Must-Read Paper on the Confusing Terminology in the Philosophy of Religion

Reply to William Lane Craig on Evangelical Support for Trump

I’ve published an article on my political blog, Data-Driven Politics, which should be of great interest to many Secular Outpost readers: On a related note, I’ve also published on that site my Presidential Effectiveness Dashboard, which is a work in progress, and likely also to be of interest. Link to latest version:

Links: Two Metaethical Arguments for Atheism from John J Park

Park, John. “The Moral Epistemological Argument for Atheism.” European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7, no. 1 (n.d.): 121. doi:10.24204/EJPR.V7I1.133. Abstract: Numerous supposed immoral mandates and commands by God found in religious texts are introduced and discussed. Such passages are used to construct a logical contradiction contention that is called the moral epistemological argument. It is shown how there is Links: Two Metaethical Arguments for Atheism from John J Park