A Very Unscientific Survey of Some Popular Responses to the Problem of Evil

I recently defended Paul Draper's evidential argument from evil (specifically, facts about pain and pleasure) against William Lane Craig's popular objections. (LINK) I decided to browse his website discussion forum devoted to the problem of evil. I was struck by some of the responses used by the people posting there (who should not be confused with Craig himself). Putting aside the posts which tear down strawman versions of the argument from evil, versions not defended by any atheist philosopher … [Read more...]

In Defense of an Evidential Argument from Evil: A Reply to William Lane Craig

Abstract: In a popular article about general arguments from evil against the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing, and perfectly good God, William Lane Craig raises objections to such arguments that are consistent with those he earlier raised against Paul Draper's evidential pain-and-pleasure argument from evil in an oral debate with Draper in 1998. In this article Jeffery Jay Lowder considers whether Craig's points have any force in rebutting Draper's writings on his pain-and-pleasure … [Read more...]

Ex-Apologist on Epicurean Cosmological Arguments for Matter’s Necessity

Our friend Ex-Apologist recently posted a nice piece on his blog summing up Epircurean cosmological arguments for matter's necessity. I highly recommend it.LINK … [Read more...]

Does Theism Explain the Necessity of Moral Truths?

The book, Does God Exist? The Craig-Flew Debate, contains a transcript of the debate between William Lane Craig and Antony Flew, responses by eight commentators, and final responses by Craig and Flew. Many of the commentators, including some of the theists, sharply criticized Craig's moral argument for God's existence because, they argued, some moral truths are necessary truths and so do not need an explanation. Let's call this objection UNMT (for 'Unexplained Necessary Moral Truths').In his … [Read more...]

Behe’s Continues to Ignore His Strongest Philosophical Critic

The blog Evolution News & Views just re-published a long essay written by Michael Behe in 2000 in which he responds to the philosophical objections of his critics. It's unfortunate, however, that Behe has never acknowledged his strongest philosophical critic, Purdue University philosopher Paul Draper. In 2002, Draper wrote a critique of Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box, in the journal Faith and Philosophy. (Click here for a link to the paper's record at PhilPapers.org.) Draper's paper did ma … [Read more...]

The Essentially Good-vs.-Morally Responsible Argument for Atheism

In the spirit of Ted Drange's 1998 article, "Incompatible-Properties Arguments: A Survey," I wish to sketch the following argument for consideration.Suppose we define "God" as a being who has, among other things, the following attributes:(m) essentially good; and(n) morally responsible for His actions.Using these definitions, we can construct the following argument.If God exists, then He is essentially good. If God exists, then He is morally responsible for His … [Read more...]

Party Before Country? Which Republican Senators Still Support Trump

In a normal election, you'd think that a video of a Presidential candidate talking about sexual assault would fatal for the candidate's campaign. But this election cycle has been anything but normal. So, with Trump's campaign in crisis, I thought it would be interesting to maintain a roll call of which Republican Senators have said enough is enough and will no longer support Trump. I intend to update this table as new information becomes available.Most of the information in the initial … [Read more...]

Recursive Humor #4: Changing Your Mind

I thought about changing my mind, but then I reconsidered. (Brian Haynes) … [Read more...]