Rebecca McLaughlin: To Dawkins’s credit, he comes dangerously close to acknowledging that religious belief is correlated with better moral outcomes—though he would like to think humans are better than that (117). He finds it rather patronizing to say, “Of course you and I are too intelligent to believe in God, but we think it would be a good idea if other people did!” (122).
Atheism
At Scientific American: Can science rule out God?
If Alpert’s speculation pans out, naturalism could end up with a religion where God is an unprincipled Narcissist. Cool.
David Bentley Hart offers an honest assessment of Richard Dawkins’s new book
The book is Outgrowing God: A Beginner’s Guide. Hart thinks Dawkins has finally found his authorial voice but you had better read the rest.
Neurosurgeon Michael Egnor explains why new atheism was doomed to die young
Anyone who didn’t immediately accept all this new atheist rubbish as Big Insight was a moron, right? But Dr. Egnor goes on to warn that reason will not emerge victorious from a horse laugh at the declining new atheists’ expense.
Come to think of it, there is no necessary relationship between atheism and Darwinism
Thinking about books recently, I recalled that philosophers Jerry Fodor (What Darwin Got Wrong (2010)) and Thomas Nagel Mind and Cosmos: : Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False are examples of intellectually serious philosophers who are no way Darwin groupies.
How did new atheism become the godlessness that failed?
Ever since the new atheists declined (or whatever), discussions of Darwinism and evolution have become much more open-minded. For example, researchers seem to talk more openly about work that points in a direction other than Darwinism. Perhaps they don’t worry so much about 20,000 semi-literate trolls writing their Dean of Science to get them fired just for saying that their research points in another direction.
Logic and First Principles: Summarising first principles and duties of reason
As we continue to ponder the core of responsible rationality, it is helpful to ponder a summary of what we have won: I recall, way back, being taught how the seventeen first equations of Boolean Algebra [which can all be verified as equivalence relations through truth tables] were of equally axiomatic status. But then, I Read More…
The issue of epistemic rights and duties
Back in 2007, “todangst ” of the “rational response squad” atheistical site wrote: To say that I am within my ‘epistemic rights’ to hold to a claim, I am saying that I violate no epistemic responsibilities or obligations in believing in my claim. (Rights and responsibilities go hand-in-hand.) An epistemic obligation is an intellectual responsibility Read More…
Bad news: New atheism is still over
It’s been so easy to get people to take the claims for design in nature seriously after they’ve witnessed a huge dump of new atheism. But hey, the easy stuff never lasts.
EG vs objective reality (pivoting on distinct identity)
In a current thread frequent objector EG comments — and yes, I am catching up: KF and others talk about “objective” as being something that is unchangeable. For example, homosexuality is objectively wrong. Always was, always will be. This doesn’t change with the times. But you argue that my preference of ice cream flavor is Read More…
JCW on the need to face inescapable, necessary first truths
Famously, Epictetus had an exchange with someone on the necessity, credibility and utility of logic: DISCOURSESCHAPTER XXV How is logic necessary? When someone in [Epictetus’] audience said, Convince me that logic is necessary, he answered: Do you wish me to demonstrate this to you?—Yes.—Well, then, must I use a demonstrative argument?—And when the questioner had Read More…
Sci Fi Writer John C Wright on self-evidence, honesty and reason
Mr Wright observes: From time to time it is useful for sane men in an insane world to remind themselves of basic truths.The first truth is that truth is true. A statement that there is no truth, if true, is false. We know this truth is basic because without it, no question can be answered, Read More…
Peter Boghossian: Culture War II unites Christians and atheists
Boghossian: In Culture War 2.0, correspondence theories of truth aren’t just dead: truth itself is inaccessible to people who do not possess the right identity characteristics.
US AG Barr on the importance of religious liberty
Here (as updated): Money clip: The imperative of protecting religious freedom was not just a nod in the direction of piety. It reflects the framers’ belief that religion was indispensable to sustaining our free system of government . . . ” Food for thought. END F/N, U/D: Prepared text, found. I think he mostly read Read More…
Sean Carroll: “Nowadays, when a more scientific worldview has triumphed and everyone knows that God doesn’t exist . . . ” — really?
Carroll, here, was responding to a Weekly Standard cover article on the reactions to philosopher Nagel’s publication of Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False : What I find particularly interesting in the captioned clip is the laudatory reference to “a more Scientific WORLDVIEW” which is immediately problematic, Read More…