(Today I went to a philosophy discussion about free will only to be reminded that Sam Harris exists. This led to my finishing this post that was initially started due to some unfortunate internet browsing.) So rather than investigating the Reddit cult of /r/SamHarris, reading his excellent blog at SamHarris.org, or engaging with one of his… Continue reading Sam Harris. Free Will. Just Kill Me.
Or so seems to be a growing opinion in that internet/New atheist community. I’ve heard this multiple times in the past month compared to maybe twice over the previous 5 years. Here’s one example from a Twitter interaction (yes, I know I’m a troll; we all need our outlets): So this is obviously dumb as… Continue reading Atheism Has Nothing to do With God’s Existence
Here is the proof: (1) If God exists, God exists necessarily. (2) An agnostic atheist does not claim to know that God does not exist. (3) Claiming to not know that God does not exist entails believing that God’s existence is possible. (4) Therefore the agnostic atheist believes that it is possible that God necessarily exists.… Continue reading Why Agnostic Atheists Believe in God
I got a comment that made me think about this again, so I figured I’d do a pretty brief write-up while I have a second. I do not find ontological arguments to be very compelling, and I believe that’s a common sentiment amongst theists as well; however, I will concede that I am not particularly… Continue reading Plantinga’s Modal Ontological Argument
The Fine Tuning of the Universe The fine tuning argument is meant to lend inductive support to the existence of God – it is not a standalone argument but rather one to be included in the theist’s toolbox. The argument itself is very straightforward, so I’ll look at the most common complaints and address them… Continue reading The Fine Tuning Argument
I’m going to talk about Gale & Pruss’ argument since I think it is one of the strongest. I’m stealing a bare bones version from the SEP, but here is a link to the original paper. (p1) If it is possible that it is necessary that a supernatural being of some sort exists, then it is necessary… Continue reading The Gale-Pruss Cosmological Argument
Another way to phrase the question: if the truth of evolution motivates us, quite strongly, to accept the existence of God? This is one of Platinga’s arguments against naturalism and I find it to be pretty interesting, and it is guaranteed to get a person thinking. To give the bare bones summary: We hold most of… Continue reading Can Naturalism And Evolution Both Be True?
There are two types of people in this world. The first type is the irrational, emotionally driven theist who, by means of indoctrination, actually believes in a Sky Daddy. The second type is the ultimately rational and logical atheist – the atheist thinks critically about the world and evaluates the evidence before settling on an… Continue reading That God Question…
What is agnostic atheism? The traditional line of thought among those who self-identify as agnostic atheists* is that each refers to a different part of their position: agnosticism refers to knowledge -they do not claim to know that there is no God – and atheism refers to belief. We can express this succinctly by paraphrasing agnostic atheists in… Continue reading Agnostic Atheism’s Incoherence
Lobster Lagoon 