The First Thing We Do, Let’s Kill All the Philosophers

"What sat in those three chairs was three men, though hard to recognize as men till you looked closely. Their hair, which was gray, had grown over their eyes till it almost concealed their faces, and their beards had grown over the table, climbing round and entwining plates and goblets as brambles entwine a fence, until, all mixed in one great mat of hair, they flowed over the edge and down to the floor. And from their heads the hair hung over the backs of their chairs so that they were wholly hidden. In fact the three men were nearly all hair."

I know there are some rumblings in yesterday's thread about sin, judgment, and necessity about my being tardy to reply to comments.  When there's such a fast discussion (over 100 comments in 12 hours, I can't pop in and out as much as I'd like to.  I did quite appreciate Steve Schuler's comment that, even though my tardiness was frustrating, "For my purposes the best aspect of Leah’s blog are the comments threads and the overall civil and thoughtful exchanges I am able to read here."  Ag … [Read more...]

The theologians Chris Hallquist doesn’t believe in

uncredible hallq

Chris Hallquist (who blogs in the Patheos Atheist channel as the Uncredible Hallq) is in the process of writing a book tentatively titled Angry Atheists?: Why the Backlash Against Popular Atheism Is Silly. As he writes it, he's posting drafts of chapters on his blog to invite comment, sort out confusion, etc.   The most recent chapter he's revised and posted is to be Chapter Two: The many gods I don’t believe in (yours included).Since I guess I'm in the intended audience for the eventual book … [Read more...]

The Man is Father of the Monster

Careful the tale you tell, that is the spell...

When I saw the National Theatre’s production of Frankenstein, I thought there were two somewhat cliché ideas that were lent additional depth in this staging. Previously, I wrote about Frankenstein learning humanity from his possibly inhuman monster, but there was also an interesting use of a trope as the creature learned to be a man.When the creature confronts Frankenstein’s wife near the end of the show, she marvels at his humanity and his sophistication, but when he lists what Frankenstein … [Read more...]

Bob, can I interest you in Transhumanism?

Bob Seidensticker has looked over my recent post on objective morality and hard to get at truths, and he's got some more questions.  Let me pull out a couple quotes from Bob's post: I'll agree that there’s nothing absolute for the consensus to be truth about. When we say, “Capital punishment is wrong,” there is no absolute truth (the yardstick) for us to compare our claim against. Is capital punishment wrong? We can wrestle with this issue the only way we ever have, by studying the issue and arg … [Read more...]

Objective Morality and Hard to Get at Truths

Bob Seidensticker has been checking out C.S. Lewis, and he's put up a post explaining why he still doesn't think it makes sense to talk about morality as objective.  I'm going to reply over here, but I'd love to have Hemant Mehta of Friendly Atheist step in and backstop me.You see, back when Hemant and I were scrapping on Justin Brierley's radio show, Hemant agreed with me that the Taliban are flat out wrong about the moral status of women, as wrong as people who think the earth is flat.  I w … [Read more...]

Get in the Game

Eli of Rust Belt Philosophy has expanded his critique of the LARPing exercise, and I found it really helpful. The game is meant to help you defend against not taking an idea very seriously or not working out its consequences or predictions, and now I understand why Eli doesn't think that properly falls into the category of good epistemology. I've excerpted below, but you should nip over and read the whole thing. On its face, this sort of thing [ugh fields] looks as though it's relevant to … [Read more...]

What are your utils denominated in?

harry potter catholicism

 In the comment threads for the "Hey! I didn't say Science Says!" post, there were a couple attempts to come up with metrics to check the impact of changes to marriage law.  Some of them are definitely quantifiable (suicide rate, reported domestic abuse) but don't do a good job capturing the impact of a given marriage schema on the whole population.  Those kinds of outcomes are only tracking couples who hit a certain threshhold of dysfunction.  It's like measuring the effectiveness of a … [Read more...]


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X