The Implausibility of Appealing to the Many-Worlds Hypothesis to Defeat the Fine-Tuning Argument

I know what I am about to write will be controversial among atheists--one of them may (?) be a certain professional physicist who writes regularly for The Secular Outpost--but I have never agreed with the idea of appealing to the hypothesis of multiple universes ("multiverse") as an objection to the fine-tuning argument for God's existence. Philosopher Bradley Monton is much more knowledgeable about the intersection of philosophy and physics than I am, so I felt good to discover he has the same … [Read more...]

LINK: Monton on “Design Inferences in an Infinite Universe”

Yet another one for the "not new, but new for me" category. Philosopher Bradley Monton has written an extremely intriguing essay on design inferences in an infinite universe. Here is the abstract:This paper addresses two main questions. First, how does one determine that something has the features it does as a result of design, as opposed to for example chance? Second, how are inferences to design affected when one makes the (plausible) assumption that the universe is spatially infinite? I will … [Read more...]

LINK: Schellenberg’s Review of The Cambridge Companion to Atheism

J.L. Schellenberg is arguably one of the leading philosophers of religion in the world and, among other things, the philosopher who formulated the argument from divine hiddenness for atheism. Schellenberg reviewed The Cambridge Companion to Atheism (ed. Michael Martin) in the Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.Here is the conclusion of Schellenberg's review:I myself think that a good case for atheism (understood as disbelief of traditional theism) can be developed, but the arguments in this book … [Read more...]

Summary and Assessment of the Craig-Drange Debate (1997)

(This is yet another old debate summary and assessment from my archives. I think I wrote this around 1998. I am posting it here unchanged.)On February 26, 1997 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, William Lane Craig debated Theodore Drange of West Virginia University. The topic was, "Does God exist?"Note: video of the debate is available online here.SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING THIS DEBATE SUMMARYDrange did not address each of Craig's theistic arguments in turn. Instead, he made three … [Read more...]

LINK: Bradley Monton’s Blog

This is another one that falls into the "not new, but new for me" category.Bradley Monton is an atheist philosopher at the University of Colorado at Boulder who specializes in philosophy of religion, philosophy of science (especially physics), probabilistic epistemology, and philosophy of time. Secular Outpost readers will be interested in Monton's interesting essay on the fine-tuning argument, "God, Fine-Tuning, and the Problem of Old Evidence," and his book, Seeking God in Science: An Atheist … [Read more...]

In Defense of William Lane Craig

After my last post on William Lane Craig and debating, I decided to do several web searches related to William Lane Craig and debating. While I obviously disagree with his arguments, I have no problem with him as a person. I suspect the majority of atheists (who know who he is) also do not. But a few of his critics have engaged in personal attacks which I think are unfair and inaccurate. As a freethinker, I think it's important to follow the evidence wherever it leads and avoid sloppy thinking. … [Read more...]

LINK: Matt McCormick’s Atheism Blog

His blog isn't new, but I just discovered it and wanted to mention it here.LINKFor those of you who do not know who Matt McCormick is, he is an atheist philosopher of religion at California State University at Sacramento. … [Read more...]

Some (Very Incomplete) Thoughts on Luke Muehlhauser’s “How to Debate William Lane Craig”

After writing a post about William Lane Craig and John Loftus debating, I remembered that Luke Muehlhauser (Common Sense Atheism) posted an article in April 2009 about debating William Lane Craig. (LINK) Here are some very incomplete thoughts about Luke's article.I agree with Luke that many of Craig's debate opponents were unqualified, in the sense that they did not have both (a) the relevant knowledge (e.g., of philosophy of religion, metaethics, etc.); and (b) suitable debating experience. I … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X