G&T Rebuttal, Part 2: Chapter 3
Chapter 3. In the Beginning There Was a Great SURGE G&T tell us that the “Cosmological Argument is the argument from the beginning of the universe” (74). That is sloppy; G&T have conflated the family of arguments known as ‘the’ cosmological argument with one specific version of that argument (the kalām cosmological argument). But let … G&T Rebuttal, Part 2: Chapter 3
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)
Richard Swinburne on Aquinas’s First Way
Aquinas’s first way is sometimes said to be a version of the cosmological argument, but it does not count as one on my definition of a cosmological argument, since it argues not from the existence of physical objects, but from change in them. It claims in effect that, given that there are physical objects, change … Richard Swinburne on Aquinas’s First Way
Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part IV)
Ed, I am going to take the liberty of first replying to your response to my answer to your fourth question. I am going to do this because I think that this is where we most significantly clash, that is, where our fundamental disagreements are most apparent. I want to address these points right away, … Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part IV)
Breaking News: WLC Disses Aquinas
During the Q&A period of tonight’s Craig-Carroll debate on God and cosmology, WLC said this (or something very close to it): “Aquinas’ metaphysical principles are just dubious.” Shhhhh… Don’t tell Ed Feser. Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)