Forthcoming New Book: The God Problem: How a Godless Universe Creates

Just saw this:The God Problem: How a Godless Cosmos CreatesLINK … [Read more...]

The Evidential Argument from Moral Agency (AMA) Revisited

I want to revisit Paul Draper's very interesting argument from moral agency against metaphysical naturalism.[1]Informal Statement of the ArgumentWe know that moral agents exist. If we ignore for a moment the evidence for moral agents--i.e., independent of the evidence for moral agents--we have much more reason on theism than on naturalism to expect the existence of moral agents.Let us start by considering metaphysical naturalism. If naturalism is true, then it is extremely improbable that there … [Read more...]

Index: The Evidential Argument from the History of Science (AHS)

Informal Statement of the ArgumentIf there is a single theme unifying the history of science, it is that naturalistic (i.e., non-supernatural) explanations work. The history of science contains numerous examples of naturalistic explanations replacing supernatural ones and no examples of supernatural explanations replacing naturalistic ones. Indeed, naturalistic explanations have been so successful that even most scientific theists concede that supernatural explanations are, in general, … [Read more...]

The Evidential Argument from the History of Science, Part 3: Reply to Rauser on Defining Metaphysical Naturalism

Randal Rauser really doesn't like the argument from the history of science (AHS). After I refuted his initial objections to AHS, he seems to have abandoned those objections. Instead, he now takes issue with the definition of metaphysical naturalism itself, a point he makes over the course of no less than three separate, additional replies. (See here, here, and here.) According to Rauser, metaphysical naturalism "is a vacuous cipher that is consistent with belief in the existence of an … [Read more...]

Jehovah is a Sexist – Part 2

For those who want a syllogistic summary argument, here you go:I. If Jehovah is a sexist, then Jehovah is a false god and Judaism is a false religion.II. If Jehovah is a false god and Judaism is a false religion, then Christianity is a false religion.Therefore:III. If Jehovah is a sexist, then Christianity is a false religion.This doesn't completely do the trick, however, because there is still the question of whether Jehovah is a sexist.  I suppose one could summarize the full argument … [Read more...]

Jehovah is a Sexist

This is not a very philosophically sophisticated argument, but it is one that helped me to escape from the idiocy of Christianity:1. Jehovah is a sexist (if Jehovah exists).Therefore,2. Christianity is a false religion.This is, of course, a very condensed summary of an argument, and requires a bit of filling out to reveal the logic of my reasoning, and various assumptions required to get from (1) to (2).First, let's work from the beginning and head a ways towards the end:1. Jehovah is a sexist … [Read more...]

The Implications of Evolutionary Explanations of Religious Belief for Atheism

This is not new, but I just saw for the first time an interesting article by Alan Jacobs entitled, "The Future of Atheism: Damned If You Don't, Damned If You Don't."Jacobs expresses a viewpoint I haven't seen addressed by other atheists, but it's one I've often thought about myself.if the evolutionary account of religious belief that many atheists are now promoting is correct, then atheists don't have much of a future. Their own arguments, plus some elementary demographic data, show that … [Read more...]

The Evidential Argument from the History of Science, Part 2: Detailed Reply to Randal Rauser

IntroductionTheists hold that there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person (God) who created the universe. Metaphysical naturalists, on the other hand, hold that the universe is a closed system, which means that nothing that is not part of the natural world affects it. Metaphysical naturalism (N) denies the existence of all supernatural beings, including God. Therefore, N entails that any true scientific explanations must be naturalistic (i.e., non-supernatural) ones.In my … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X