Cosmological Arguments: The Naturalists Strike Back

A couple of days ago, I blogged some potential objections to Swinburne's inductive cosmological argument. I concluded that post with an argument that the existence of a physical universe is evidence favoring naturalism over theism.Tonight, ex-apologist has blogged about the prospects for a Leibnizian cosmological argument against theism. Take a look! … [Read more...]

Potential Objections to Swinburne’s Cosmological Argument

After studying inductive logic for so long, I've decided it is finally time to reread Richard Swinburne's The Existence of God (second ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 2004) and reconsider his inductive case for God's existence. In doing so, I think I may have discovered a new objection to his cosmological argument. This is very rough and any comments would be appreciated. Swinburne's Terminology The first thing we need to do is to get clear on Swinburne's terminology and a … [Read more...]

Amoral Atheism

Atheism is neither moral nor immoral; rather, it is amoral. By itself, atheism does not make it obligatory, permitted, or forbidden to do anything. It's not an ethical theory. … [Read more...]

Cosmos Reboot with Neil deGrasse Tyson

The TV series Cosmos (of Carl Sagan fame) has been rebooted, this time with astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson as the host.What do Intelligent Design (ID) theorists have to say about it? Here's Uncommon Descent's review. (TL;DR: they're unhappy with the "materialistic message.")Did you watch it? If so, let us know what you thought in the comments below! … [Read more...]

Follow @SecularOutpost on Twitter

If you're the kind of person who uses Twitter, please follow at @SecularOutpost. Also, while you're at it, you should also follow these:@Justinweh (Justin Schieber of Reasonable Doubts)@JohnDanaher (John Donaher of Philosophical Disquisitions)@exapologist (This is Ex-Apologist of the, you guessed it, Ex-Apologist blog) … [Read more...]

Richard Swinburne on Aquinas’s First Way

Aquinas's first way is sometimes said to be a version of the cosmological argument, but it does not count as one on my definition of a cosmological argument, since it argues not from the existence of physical objects, but from change in them. It claims in effect that, given that there are physical objects, change in them is so surprising that we need to invoke God as its source. I cannot see that change in them is so surprising that we need to invoke God as its source. Given the existence of … [Read more...]

The Courtier’s Reply as Post-Theistic Attitude, Not Fallacy

Sam Sawyer, SJ, a fellow a Patheos blogger over at the new blog The Jesuit Post (in Patheos's Catholic Channel) recently plugged the exchange between Edward Feser and Keith Parsons. (Thanks!) I'd like to return the favor by plugging a post on his blog: "Not Even Wrong: Answering the New Atheism with Better Belief, Not Better Arguments." The post provides a Jesuit perspective on the 'New Atheism,' which is well worth a read.In a featured comment, Sawyer mentions his experience of being … [Read more...]

New Paper on the Secular Web by Clifford Greenblatt: David Chalmers’ Principle of Organizational Invariance and the Personal Soul

Abstract: David Chalmers argues that conscious experience is a real but nonphysical feature of nature. However, he also believes that all particular facts about any conscious experience supervene (naturally, but not logically) on physical facts, such that physical facts fully determine any conscious experience. His principle of organizational invariance goes even further to claim that fine-grained functional organization fully determines any conscious experience (naturally, but not logically). … [Read more...]