Looking for examples of people blaming creationism on Richard Dawkins

PZ Myers recently did a post ridiculing the notion–promoted by Robert Wright–that it’s his fault and Richard Dawkins’ fault that the evolution-creation debate has become more politically charged “more politically charged, more acrimonious.” PZ’s smackdown is great, comparing Gallup’s timeline of belief in evolution in the US, along with dates of major court cases over [Read More...]

Plantinga’s incredibly weak arguments in Warranted Christian Belief

When I initially planned chapter 6, I had meant to say something about Alvin Plantinga’s Warranted Christian Belief. The book strikes me as in a way representative of a certain kind of defense of religion, except that it takes points that are often tossed off without any argument and defends them in what looks like [Read More...]

Problems with Plantinga’s free will defense: the way detailed version

This is the one section of chapter 6 of the book that I’m particularly confident in. The lack of agreement about much of anything is widely recognized by philosophers themselves. But sometimes, a philosopher will say, “True, we philosophers cannot agree on the big questions, like ‘is there a God?’ or ‘what is free will, [Read More...]

Angry Atheists chapter 6: Why Philosophy Doesn’t Save Religion

Feel uneasy about this chapter. It weighs in on some big philosophical debates (namely Plantinga’s free will defense and the problem of induction), but at the end it feels like a lot of work for a little payoff. Partly, I was trying to take on things that are often claimed as the end result of [Read More...]

Did Notre Dame give me a skewed view of philosophy?

On my re-post of my review of Plantinga’s book Where The Conflict Really Lies, Landon wrote: [Read more...]

From the archives: Plantinga’s inexcusable faults (review of Where The Conflict Really Lies)

I’m reposting this post, from December of last year, in large part because I’m planning on incorporating it into my upcoming book. I need to figure out how to shorten it, though, so feel free to tell me about any bits you thought were unnecessary. I don’t expect Plantinga’s fans to ever totally agree with [Read More...]

From the archives: Plantinga’s ontological argument, take three

Plantinga’s ontological argument is an annoying argument in that it relies heavily on jargon that’s unintelligible to the average person, including using “possible” in a somewhat unintuitive way. As a result, even though I think it’s a terrible argument, someone without training in the relevant philosophy is likely to make wrong guesses about what’s wrong with [Read More...]

From the archives: Ignorance: Comparing Dawkins and Plantinga

Here’s a post from back in December 2010, just after I had left graduate school. It’s another one that I’m likely to refer back to in the future, and will satisfy people who’ve been hoping to see me talk more about Plantinga. A good chunk of my blogging over the next few weeks will be [Read More...]

From the archives: Is studying philosophy beneficial?

This is another post that generated a long discussion when I first posted it in July 2011. It’s also one I’m likely to refer back to in the future, so I really should give you all a chance to discuss it. From xkcd: Guy: I used to think correlation implied causation. Then I took a [Read More...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X