Aquinas’ five ways and other classical arguments for the existence of God

If you want arguments for the existence of God that are totally free of the sort of problems I talked about last week in criticizing Bill O’Reilly, Peter van Inwagen, and design arguments in general, your best bet may be to go back in time two centuries or more. To arguments like those of Thomas [Read More...]

New Atheists, explained with a stick figure comic

Via Facebook: [Read more...]

One more point about Feser

I left this out of my previous post on Feser, but it’s worth emphasizing: a central part of Feser’s shtick is talking about how horrible atheists are for not paying more attention to his beloved Aquinas. When Keith Parsons fails to pay enough attention to Aquinas, that’s part of “The brutal facts about Keith Parsons” [Read More...]

Ed Feser’s temper tantrums

This post ties in with the post series I’m writing on arguments for the existence of God, but I don’t consider it a part of the post series proper. Rather, I want to pre-empt a problem I suspect I may have to deal with with the next post. The problem is this: Catholic philosopher Ed [Read More...]

JT Eberhard: Why the arguments for god’s existence suck

Given the kick I’ve been on this week (and will continue to be on for another couple weeks at least) about arguments for the existence of God, this video of a talk JT Eberhard gave at the Madison Freethought Festival seems worth posting. JT is a great speaker, and the talk also includes great material [Read More...]

South Korean creationists manufactured a fake victory

This is a correction to a post I wrote where I reported that South Korean creationists had gotten evolution taken out of South Korean textbooks. I was wrong. I was alerted to this by an e-mail from reader David Cortesi who writes: [Read more...]

Bertrand Russell explains Ray Comfort

Via Facebook: [Read more...]

Friday recap: arguments for the existence of God, Chris Mooney, and more!

I’m going to experiment with doing weekly recap posts. This is partly because I got more blogging done than usual this week, including four posts on Wednesday, and people not used to that may have missed some things. Are these worth doing? Let me know what you think. But without further ado: [Read more...]

Peter van Inwagen’s argument for Christianity

My previous post brings me back to a point I made in chapter 1:¬†too many attempts to refute “atheism” fail to understand that atheism is just thinking there aren’t any gods. They think that refuting “naturalism” or “materialism” or whatever is somehow evidence that their god exists. I’m now going to give a somewhat longer [Read More...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X