Atheist Ethicist on Evolution and Morality

The Atheist Ethicist has been writing a nice series on morality and evolutionary ethics. Posts (so far) include: “Evolution Accounts for Morality?” “Concerning Evolution and Morality” “Evolution and Two Conceptions of Morality” “Evolution, Morality, and Objective Values” “The ‘Necessity’ of an Evolved Moral Sense” “Evolution, Altruism, and Morality” “Evolved Sentiments and Moral Content” “The Immorality of ‘An Evolutionary Basis for Morality’” “Evolution and ‘D … [Read more...]

The Polemical Medic on Why You Shouldn’t Believe the Resurrection Happened

LINK … [Read more...]

Secular Outpost is Now on Twitter

For those of you who are into Twitter, the Secular Outpost is now on Twitter at @secularoutpost. … [Read more...]

Cavin and Colombetti on the Resurrection of Jesus Part 2: The Failure of the Resurrection ‘Explanation’

What I want to do in this post is to summarize (and offer my own interpretation of) Cavin’s second main contention in his debate with Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus: CC2. The Resurrection Theory is a dismal failure as an explanation of the empty tomb and postmortem appearances of Jesus—being ad hoc and almost completely devoid of explanatory power and scope. 1. Explanatory Power In order to properly assess CC2, it’s crucial that we first clarify what “explanation” means. In o … [Read more...]

The Argument from Scale (AS) Revisited, Part 6

In Part 1 of this series, I critically reviewed Nicholas Everitt’s formulation of the argument from scale (AS). In Part 5, I critically reviewed John Loftus’s defense of AS on his blog. In this post, I want to review Loftus’s defense of Everitt’s formulation of AS in his (Loftus’s) book, Why I Became an Atheist: Personal Reflections and Additional Arguments (Bloomington: Trafford, 2008). It’s important to note that in his book Loftus also defends a version of AS against evangelical Christianity; … [Read more...]

Update on Comments Migration

1. There were seven (7) comments submitted while I was migrating the new site to use Disqus for commenting. I had those held in a moderation queue while I tried migrating comments (so that they would not be lost)  and then I forgot about them. Tonight I tried “approving” them in the moderation queue and …, well, I’m not sure what happened to them. If you submitted a comment shortly after we moved to Patheos and have been waiting for it to appear, please check the post you commented on. If it … [Read more...]

Robert Oerter’s Fine-Tuning Argument for Naturalism

Robert Oerter has written an interesting post on his blog outlining what he calls a fine-tuning argument for naturalism. It’s important to keep in mind that Oerter doesn’t actually believe that this argument is a good argument for naturalism. Rather, he thinks it’s useful for showing what’s wrong with the fine-tuning argument for theism. Rather than try to summarize his argument, I invite readers to simply read it for themselves. What follows is a comment I left at Oerter’s site. You write: … [Read more...]

When is a Debate “Win” Significant?

A reader asked me if I had watched the debate between William Lane Craig and Alex Rosenberg. Here is my reply. No, I haven't seen it. I've read some of Rosenberg's book, The Atheist’s Guide to Reality, however.  My prediction is that WLC not only “won” the debate, but that Rosenberg did awful. Why would I make such a prediction? Three reasons. First, Rosenberg is not a specialist in the philosophy of religion. Here is how he summarizes his areas of focus: My interests focus on probl … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X