LINK: In Memoriam: William L. Rowe (1931-2015)

LINK … [Read more...]

LINK: Are Atheists and Christians Enemies?

According to this atheist, the answer is "no."LINK … [Read more...]

Link: An Ontological Disproof of Anselmian Theism by Ex-Apologist

LINK … [Read more...]

LINK: The Jones-Parsons-Martin Exchange (1991)

Douglas Jones opens the interchange by sketching the argument for the Christian critique of non-Christian thought. Douglas Jones, an elder in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, is the editor of Antithesis and a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Idaho and Lewis-Clark State College. Keith Parsons offers the first of two atheistic responses to Jones's essay. Keith Parsons, Ph.D., (Queen's University, Ontario, Canada) is the founder of Georgia Skeptics and teaches philosophy at Berry C … [Read more...]

Link: Russell Blackford on Charity to Those We Oppose

LINK … [Read more...]

Luke Muelhauser: The Courtier’s Reply, the Not My Theology Reply, and Straw Men

The Courtier’s Reply is useless. It ignores the real target of an argument. The Not My Theology Reply is legitimate, though it may be beyond the scope of the present discussion. If someone’s argument does not apply to your philosophy but it does apply to the philosophy of others, then that argument probably wasn’t intended for you. But you might still want to make the Not My Theology reply just to clear things up for people. The Straw Man Reply is legitimate only if someone misrepresents the vi … [Read more...]

Old But Still Relevant: Phil Plait on “Don’t Be a Dick”

LINK … [Read more...]

Link: “The End of the Teapot Argument for Atheism (and All Its Tawdry Imitators)” by Mark F. Sharlow

Abstract: Atheists sometimes use Bertrand Russell’s teapot argument, and its variants with other objects in place of the teapot, to argue for the rationality of atheism. In this paper I show that this use of the teapot argument and its variants is unacceptably circular. The circularity arises because there is indirect evidence against the objects invoked in the arguments. LINKDisclaimer: I haven't read, much less evaluated this paper. Feel free to debate in the combox! … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X