LINK: Philip Kitcher on Militant Modern Atheism

From the abstract:Militant modern atheism, whose most eloquent champion is Richard Dawkins, provides an effective and necessary critique of fundamentalist forms of religion and their role in political life, both within states and across national boundaries. Because it is also presented as a more general attack on religion (tout court), it has provoked a severe reaction from scholars who regard its conception of religion as shallow and narrow. My aim is to examine this debate, identifying insights and oversights on… Read more

LINK: Rosalind Carey’s Review of Michael Martin’s ATHEISM, MORALITY, AND MEANING

LINKRelated articles: here, here, here, and here Read more

LINK: William Rowe’s Latest on Friendly Atheism

Abstract:This paper endeavors to explain what friendly atheism is and why it is reasonable to seek to be friendly toward those whose views about God differ substantially from one’s own.Unfortunately, online access to this requires a paid subscription.LINK Read more

LINK: Silver’s Defense of Draper’s Argument from the Biological Role of Pain and Pleasure

LINK Read more

Wanchick’s Reply to Baggini’s Atheism: A Very Short Introduction

LINK Read more

Biological Evolution as Evidence against Theism

LINK Read more

The Argument from the Biological Role of Pain and Pleasure

LINK Read more

Help Wanted – Part 1

For the past two years I have, in my copious free time, been studying Richard Swinburne’s case for God. Recently my focus has been on his evaluation of the cosmological argument (hereafter TCA) in his book The Existence of God, 2nd edition (hereafter EOG). His version of TCA is quite simple:e: A complex physical universe exists.Thereforeg: God exists.But Swinburne’s argument about TCA is not so simple. Swinburne does not present TCA as a proof of the existence of God, nor… Read more

Friendly Atheism, Reasonable Nonbelief, and Unfriendly Apologetics

I am what William Rowe calls a “friendly atheist.” I respect many Christian philosophers and other theistic philosophers. I do not believe they are irrational or suffer from a mental disorder, as some “unfriendly atheists” have claimed.Similarly, I know Christian philosophers who I happily describe as “friendly theists;” I’ve always enjoyed my interactions with them. Other theists, on the other hand, may be described as “unfriendly theists.” For example, some theists seem to believe–almost as a matter of doctrine–that all… Read more

Why Are Members of the Clergy Assumed to be Moral Experts?

At http://www.uncg.edu/~nphuntbu/lectures.html (site now discontinued), I found a set of lecture notes entitled “Why religion is irrelevant to ethics”. Here is a quotation I particularly liked: Why are members of the clergy (who presumably are experts in the theology of their particular sect) assumed to be experts in ethics? Why put them on ethics ommissions rather than taxi drivers or literature professors?This issue obviously boils down to presuppositions. If you assume a priori that a member of the clergy is… Read more

Follow Us!



Browse Our Archives