Plantinga Calls This A Good Argument for God’s Existence?
The title of my post might come across as snarky, so I want to begin my making it clear that is not my intent. In fact, I want to go on record as saying I have great respect for Plantinga’s skill as a philosopher. Among other things, I think he succeeded in his attempt to … Plantinga Calls <I>This</I> A Good Argument for God’s Existence?
Quibbling over Semantics While Missing the Point
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’m a linguistic relativist. I don’t think words have objective meanings. I think the meaning of words is relative to time and place. So when I encounter someone who is adamant about defining a word in a different way than I do, I just shrug my … Quibbling over Semantics While Missing the Point
Here’s One Way to Resist Naturalistic Arguments: Lack Belief that Matter Exists!
A Christian apologist writing under the pseudonym ‘InvestigativeApologetics’ stated the usual objection to atheism, namely, that it’s impossible to prove or give evidence for the non-existence of God. The fact is that atheists who yell that “there is no evidence for God (or Christianity)” are protesting too much, so to speak, and they are, in … Here’s One Way to Resist Naturalistic Arguments: Lack Belief that Matter Exists!
Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 3
This post is part of a series on Paul Draper’s classic version of the evidential argument from evil. In the previous entry, I summarized Draper’s first argument, which attempts to show that certain facts about the types, quantity, and distribution of pain and pleasure (P&P) are much more probable on the hypothesis of indifference (HI) … Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 3
Link: Darwin’s Argument from Evil by Paul Draper
Draper’s chapter was published in Yujin Nagasawa (ed.), Scientific Approaches to the Philosophy of Religion. Palgrave Macmillan. 49 (2012). It’s available online for free courtesy of Google Books. LINK