Atheism is neither moral nor immoral; rather, it is amoral. By itself, atheism does not make it obligatory, permitted, or forbidden to do anything. It's not an ethical theory. … [Read more...]
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 4
March 11, 2014 by 3 Comments
Richard Swinburne presents his inductive cosmological argument in Chapter 7 of his book The Existence of God (second edition, hereafter: EOG). I plan to start at the beginning of the chapter and go paragraph by paragraph, stopping to comment on each paragraph that includes either support for, or defense of, some part of the cosmological argument (hereafter: TCA).Paragraph 1 (EOG, p.133) This paragraph neither supports nor defends a part of TCA.Paragraph 2 (EOG, p.133-134) This … [Read more...]
Richard Swinburne on Aquinas’s First Way
March 9, 2014 by 2 Comments
Aquinas's first way is sometimes said to be a version of the cosmological argument, but it does not count as one on my definition of a cosmological argument, since it argues not from the existence of physical objects, but from change in them. It claims in effect that, given that there are physical objects, change in them is so surprising that we need to invoke God as its source. I cannot see that change in them is so surprising that we need to invoke God as its source. Given the existence of … [Read more...]
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 3
March 8, 2014 by 4 Comments
I am exploring a concern about, or potential objection to, Swinburne's inductive cosmological and teleological arguments for the existence of God. The objection I have in mind is something like this, for the cosmological argument:Although the one factual premise of Swinburne's cosmological argument is supposed to be the ONLY contingent factual claim or assumption upon which the conclusion of the argument rests, the argument actually rests on a considerable number and variety of contingent … [Read more...]
Reply to Prof. Feser’s Response, (Part IV)
March 5, 2014 by 3 Comments
Ed, I am going to take the liberty of first replying to your response to my answer to your fourth question. I am going to do this because I think that this is where we most significantly clash, that is, where our fundamental disagreements are most apparent. I want to address these points right away, and the others I will take up after the 15th when I will be back at my office.Sorry if I was unclear and gave a misleading impression. I do, in fact, think that the laws of nature are best … [Read more...]
Erik Wielenberg’s argument re sceptical theism defended and developed – forthcoming in Religious Studies
March 5, 2014 by 1 Comment
(revised 9 April 2014) Sceptical theism and a lying God – Wielenberg’s argument defended and developed Stephen Law Department of Philosophy, Heythrop College, University of London, Kensington Square, London W5 8HX UK s.law@heythrop.ac.uk Abstract: Sceptical theists attempt to block the evidential argument from evil by arguing that a key premise of that argument – that gratuitous evil exists – cannot reasonably be maintained. They argue that, for all we know, our knowledge of reasons … [Read more...]
Swinburne’s Cosmological and Teleological Arguments – Part 2
March 3, 2014 by 4 Comments
Like many other liberals, I'm delighted and mesmerized by Bridgegate and various other Chris Christie scandals from the fine state of New Jersey. I cannot wait for my daily dose of Rachel Maddow dishing the latest dirt on Christie and his idiotic crowd of corrupt New Jersey hooligans.What does this have to do with Swinburne's arguments for God? Well, one neat trick that a couple of Christie's friends have pulled is to plead the 5th amendment as a legal justification for refusing to turn … [Read more...]
Very Interesting Theistic Argument
February 28, 2014 by 3 Comments
I just discovered Robin Collins' very, very interesting reply to Carroll. Collins defends an entirely new class of fine-tuning argument for theism. This new class of fine-tuning argument does not argue that the universe is fine-tuned for life. Rather, this new class of fine-tuning argument argues that the universe is fine-tuned for discoverability. This novel argument sets up the following reply to Carroll on the extremely low entropy of the early universe: the extremely low entropy of the early … [Read more...]
Follow Patheos
Atheist: