Bibliography on Arguments for Atheism

(redated post originally published on 7 November 2011)The purpose of this bibliography is to provide a comprehensive listing of academic resurces which contain presentations, formulations, or defenses of various arguments for atheism. The bibliography currently omits any references to resources which criticize those arguments; I hope to fix that in the future as time allows.As always, I don't claim this bibliography is perfectly accurate or complete; if spot any errors or omissions, … [Read more...]

I Don’t Care – Part 3

According to the Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft, and many others, Aquinas gives five different arguments for the existence of God.  In the Handbook of Christian Apologetics (IVP, 1994; hereafter: HCA) by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, there is a chapter that lays out twenty different arguments for the existence of God, and the first five arguments are versions of Aquinas' Five Ways:A word about the organization of the arguments.  We have organized them into two basic groups: those wh … [Read more...]

Moreland on Consciousness

(redated post originally published on 14 November 2011)Re: http://www.jpmoreland.com/2010/11/18/critique-of-graham-oppys-objection/There have been some further developments in this discussion. See:Graham Oppy "Critical Notice of J. P. Moreland's Consciousness and the Existence of God" European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3, 1, 2011, 193-212J. P. Moreland "Oppy on the Argument from Consciousness: A Rejoinder" European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3, 1, 2011, … [Read more...]

I Don’t Care – Part 2

OK. Maybe I care just a little bit.I summarized my complaint against Aquinas' Five Ways this way (in response to a comment from Jeff Lowder):I'm just pointing out that (a) NONE of the Five Ways is an argument for the existence of God as it stands (in the section called "Whether God Exists?"), and (b) in order to make use of any of the Five Ways as an argument for the existence of God, there is a serious amount of intellectual effort required to fill the logical gap that is located in the … [Read more...]

I Don’t Care

Thomas Aquinas pulled a classic BAIT-AND-SWITCH move in Summa Theologica: “Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, moved by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.”“Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.” “Therefore we cannot but admit the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of … [Read more...]

Weighing Theistic Evidence Against Naturalistic Evidence

In the next-to-last paragraph of his book, C.S. Lewis' Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason, Victor Reppert makes a very interesting statement: However, I contend that the arguments from reason do provide some substantial reasons for preferring theism to naturalism. The "problem of reason" is a huge problem for reason, as serious or, I would say, more serious, than the problem of evil is for theists. (emphasis mine) I think this is a very interesting statement for two r … [Read more...]

“The Argument from Reason” (2)

(redating post originally published on 14 December 2011)At 349, Reppert says: "We ought to draw the conclusion if we accept the premises of a valid argument".This is obviously wrong. Suppose, to take the worst case, that my beliefs contradict one another. If we are supposing classical logic -- as Reppert clearly is -- then, from my contradictory beliefs, using Reppert's principle, I ought to infer that every claim is true. But, even though there IS a valid argument from premises I accept … [Read more...]

Is There a Problem of Evil for Atheism?

In response to various arguments from evil for atheism, some theists attempt to turn the tables on atheists and argue that evil is at least as much of a problem for atheism as it is for theism. I've argued repeatedly that this response completely misses the point that the problem of evil can be understood as a reductio against theism (see, for example, here). And what has the response of those theists been? Silence. Or, at the very least, if they have responded, I'm unaware of it. (Please feel … [Read more...]