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)
Reply to Prof. Feser’s Fourth Question
Ed, Here is your fourth question to me: “4. In response to another reader’s question, about Craig’s version of the First Cause argument, you wrote: “Both theists and atheists begin with an uncaused brute fact. For Craig it is God, and for me it is the universe.” Now, as you know, the expression “brute fact” … Reply to Prof. Feser’s Fourth Question
Reply to Prof. Feser’s Third Question
Ed, your third question and accompanying commentary was this: In response to a reader’s comment, you wrote: I think Bertrand Russell’s beautifully succinct critique of all causal arguments holds good: “If everything requires a cause, then God requires a cause. However, if anything can exist without a cause, it might as well be the universe … Reply to Prof. Feser’s Third Question
Index for Feser-Parsons Exchanges
The purpose of this blog post is simply to provide a convenient index to all of the posts in the planned two series of exchanges between Edward Feser and Keith Parsons. Feser’s contributions will be posted on his blog and Parsons’ contributions will be posted on The Secular Outpost. This post will be updated with links as as they … Index for Feser-Parsons Exchanges