McDowell’s Trilemma – Part 1

Here are the basic premises of McDowell's Trilemma Argument (hereafter: MTA), from The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict (hereafter: NETDV by Josh McDowell:=================...Jesus definitely claimed to be God (see below and in Chapter 6).  So every person must answer the question: Is His claim to deity true or false?  This question deserves a most serious consideration.[...]Jesus' claim to be God must be either true or false.  If Jesus' claims are true, then He is the Lord, an … [Read more...]

Rice Chemist says that we Know Nothing about Pre-biotic Chemistry

James Tour, a synthetic chemist and nanotechnologist at Rice University, recently spoke at Waterloo University in Canada and delivered a vigorous castigation of anyone who presumes to think that we know anything about abiogenesis: report is from Evolution News, which should more honestly be called Intelligent Design Theory News since it is an anti-evolution advocacy site. Needless to say, the IDers are delighted that a … [Read more...]

Does God Exist? Part 3

I'm still working on development of an analysis of the question "Does God exist?" that would help to organize systematic investigations of the question.In the Part 1 post in this series I suggested an analysis in terms of logical possibility, logical necessity, certainty, and probability (click on image below for a clearer view of the diagram):        In that same post I suggested another possible way to analyze … [Read more...]

Adamson’s Cru[de] Arguments for God – Part 7

There are more pathetic arguments given by Marilyn Adamson in the section of her web article that she characterizes as her first reason (out of six) for believing that God exists: The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.  After her crappy argument based on the size of the Earth and it's distance from the Sun, she gives another crappy argument based on the properties of water:Water...colorless, odorless and … [Read more...]

Adamson’s Cru[de] Arguments for God – Part 6

Cosmic pluralism, the plurality of worlds, or simply pluralism, describes the philosophical belief in numerous “worlds” in addition to Earth (possibly an infinite number), which may harbour extraterrestrial life.   (from Wikipedia article “Cosmic Pluralism“)In my criticism of Adamson’s initial argument for the existence of God, I pointed out that cosmic pluralism is an idea that has been around since the beginning of Western philosophy about 2,500 years ago (the pre-socratic philosopher Anax … [Read more...]

Why I Do Not Equate Religious Belief with Mental Illness

I'm not a psychiatrist, but as a teenager I worked for an elderly woman who I later found out was a paranoid schizophrenic with organic brain decomposition. (As an aside, if you have any empathy at all, it's impossible to get to know someone like this and not find their situation heartbreaking.) I agree that you cannot talk the mentally ill out of their delusions, hallucinations, etc. But this would only be relevant to the claim that all religious belief is mental illness if it were the case t … [Read more...]

William Lane Craig Admits that His Fine-Tuning Argument is Based Upon Speculation

In my last post, I reported that WLC has reached the same conclusion I have regarding the scale of the universe as evidence against theism. After re-reading his article, I realized I missed an even more important announcement. Although he would deny it, in the same article he also admits that his fine-tuning argument is based upon speculation. Here's the money quote: Indeed, once we launch into speculating about universes operating according to different laws of nature, then we have completely … [Read more...]

William Lane Craig Endorses My Argument from Scale against Theism!

He doesn't mention by name, of course, and may not have even had my argument in mind, but the sort of Bayesian considerations he raises support my Bayesian argument from scale, in two ways. First, he agrees with me about the "direction" the evidence points (against theism). Second, he agrees with me about the "magnitude" of that evidential support (very weak). (The words "direction" and "magnitude" are not Craig's words, but were inspired by David Schum, who pointed out long ago that evidence … [Read more...]