One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God – Part 2
In a previous post I pointed out three different problems related to the third argument in Richard Swinburne’s systematic case for the existence of God. The third argument is the final argument of his arguments from the nature of the universe. It is his Teleological Argument from Spatial Order (hereafter: TASO):(e3) There is a complex physical … One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God – Part 2
Did God Create Nuclear Weapons?
Christians and other believers in God often say, ‘God created everything.’ If we take this literally, as a young child would do, we might start thinking of some objections or possible counterexamples: ‘Did God create nuclear weapons?’ ‘Did God create the ebola virus?’ etc. The doctrine of divine creation leads quickly to the problem of evil. … Did God Create Nuclear Weapons?
“But is it Art?!” Family resemblance concepts’ (Wittgenstein) explained simply (from my The Philosophy Gym)
9. But is it Art? From my book The Philosophy Gym: 25 Short Adventures in Thinking. I mean they’d gone and fucking installed the work without me even being here. That’s just not on. This is my bed. If someone else installs it, it’s just dirty linen. If I do it, it’s art. Tracey Emin … “But is it Art?!” Family resemblance concepts’ (Wittgenstein) explained simply (from my The Philosophy Gym)
Secular Humanism: why it’s a strategic mistake to define as requiring naturalism
What does secular humanism (or, as we say in the UK, humanism) involve? In Humanism: A Very Short Introduction (OUP 2011) I suggest that most of those who sign up to secular humanism sign up to following:
Critical Thinking and Skepticism – Part 2
Based on a quick review of Michael Shermer’s key statements about skepticism (A Brief Introduction, and A Skeptical Manifesto) there appear to be at least two general principles of rational skepticism: GP1. Be open-minded, not closed-minded or dogmatic. GP2. Be discriminating about believing claims, theories, and viewpoints, not gullible and credulous. In my previous post on this subject … Critical Thinking and Skepticism – Part 2
Critical Thinking and Skepticism
In a recent post advocating the end of Philosophy of Religion, John Loftus commented that PoR classes are often taught with the primary goal of teaching students to think critically, and he objected that “Teaching students to be critical thinkers is very important but teaching them to have a skeptical disposition is more important.” I would … Critical Thinking and Skepticism
The End of PoR – Part 2
John Loftus has begun laying out his views on PoR in greater detail on his website. I’m going to comment on a few key points that he makes in a recent post: What Exactly is My Proposal For Ending the Philosophy Of Religion Discipline in Secular Universities? It will probably take me a few posts … The End of PoR – Part 2
One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God
In The Existence of God (2nd edition, hereafter: EOG), Richard Swinburne lays out a systematic cumulative case for the claim that it is more likely than not that God exists. I have a specific objection to the third argument in this case, but I believe this objection throws a monkey wrench into the works, and … One Problem with Swinburne’s Case for God
Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 4
Part of Geisler’s case for the claim that “Jesus actually died on the cross” is based on the spear-wound story, which is found only in the historically unreliable Fourth gospel. One general reason for doubting the historicity and reliability of the spear-wound story is this: GR3. The Passion narratives of the gospels are historically unreliable … Norman Geisler’s Case for the Death of Jesus – Part 4
The End of PoR – Part 1
“The End of PoR” is intentionally ambiguous. It could mean the death or cessation of philosophy of religion, or it could mean the purpose of philosophy of religion. But I will not discuss the purpose of PoR in this particular post. I just have one brief point to make. The death of PoR as a … The End of PoR – Part 1