At the very front of my immediately preceding post I announced an end to the discussion thread about naturalism. The reason is simply lack of time to read and respond to every post–many of which were very long and had many parts. Occasionally a discussion thread simply has to die because keeping up with it requires me to spend more time on the blog than I have. I need to get other work done.
I apologize to those of you who crafted comments that didn’t get posted here, but “last word” means what it says. Now we must move on to other subjects. If you want to keep up the discussion about naturalism, feel free to do it elsewhere. And, by the way, I’m not persuaded by anything anyone has said to change my mind about naturalism–as I described it. If that’s not “naturalism” to you, then we are talking about different things.
My next blog post will return to a familiar subject but with a new twist or at least new information: capital punishment. The Washington D.C. based Constitution Project has just released its policy statement “Irreversible Error: Recommended Reforms for Preventing and Correcting Errors in the Administration of Capital Punishment.” I attended one of the meetings that advised the Project about this. It is the result of many months, perhaps year, of research and conversation about the subject and is a model of sane, level-headed, realistic (if not perfect) response to a very difficult and controversial subject.