Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 3

William Craig's MOVE argument is simple:1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.2. Objective moral values do exist.Therefore:3.  God exists.One obvious atheistic objection would be to reject or cast doubt on premise (2).  If one rejects or doubts that objective moral values exist, then this argument will fail to be persuasive.Another possible objection is to reject or cast doubt upon premise (1).  Some atheists accept moral realism, and thus believe t … [Read more...]

Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 2

I am going to engage in a bit of logic chopping now.  But for those who do not have an appreciation for logic chopping, do not despair;  my close examination of the bark on one tree will lead me to make some broader points that have significance for philosophy of religion, ethics, and serious thinking about God.  The broader points might even have some relevance to evaluation of William Craig's argument from the Existence of Objective Moral Values (Let's rearrange those words a bit: "Moral Ob … [Read more...]

Atheistic Moral Realism – Part 1

In his essay "Why I Believe God Exists", William Craig gives three main reasons for believing in God (Why I am a Christian - hereafter: WIAC - edited by Norman Geisler and Paul Hoffman, Baker Books, 2001, p.62-80):God makes sense of the origin of the universe (the Kalam Cosmological argument, p.62-68) God makes sense of the complex order in the universe (the Fine Tuning argument, p.68-74). God makes sense of objective moral values in the world (his argument from the Existence of … [Read more...]

Materialism and Beauty

In response to a post by Victor Reppert, I left the following comments on his blog. Victor -- I'm very late to this thread, but I hope you'll respond to this comment. I read the linked article. Maybe I misunderstood it, but it seems to me that even if everything that article said were correct, it wouldn't follow that materialism cannot explain beauty. What that article talked about is one recent attempt by neuroscientists to offer a (neuro-)scientific explanation for beauty, an attempt … [Read more...]

Skeptical Atheism and the Fine-Tuning Argument?

The multiple universes objection is a common objection to fine-tuning arguments for God's existence. Paul Draper once wrote an interesting essay comparing that objection to that argument to the same objection applied to arguments from evil. What I've often wondered is this: what if we tried to draw another parallel between fine-tuning arguments and arguments from evil, this time focusing on "skeptical theism"? In other words, I think it would be interesting to compare, on the one hand, skeptical … [Read more...]

Richard Swinburne’s newest book: Mind, Brain, and Free Will

This book will be published May 15, 2013. Here is the book’s description on Amazon: Mind, Brain, and Free Will presents a powerful new case for substance dualism (the idea that humans consist of two parts--body and soul) and for libertarian free will (that humans have some freedom to choose between alternatives, independently of the causes which influence them). Richard Swinburne argues that answers to questions about mind, body, and free will depend crucially on the answers to more general p … [Read more...]

Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 2

I want to continue where I left off in part 1 of my response to Metacrock on the use of Bayes’ Theorem (BT) to measure evidence about God. Here is Metacrock: Bayes’ theorem was introduced first as an argument against Hume’s argument on miracles, that is to say, a proof of the probability of miracles. The theorem was learned by Richard Price from Bayes papers after the death of the latter, and was first communicated to the Royal society in 1763.[6] The major difference in the version Bayes an … [Read more...]

Is It a Crock to Use Bayes’ Theorem to Measure Evidence about God? Part 1

Over at the Christian Cadre, “Metacrock” has written a post entitled, “Bayes Theorum [sic] and Probability of God: No Dice!” Metacrock makes a number of points regarding the use of Bayes’ Theorem (BT) with evidence about God’s existence. I want to comment on many of those points. It is understandable that naturalistic thinkers are uneasy with the concept of miracles. I think I understand the point that Metacrock is trying to get across, but I disagree with this sentence as written. Metaphy … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X