Why do people like Hossenfelder feel they need to honor Darwinism’s rotting carcass?
Nelson: Now, you may think MN is unnecessary, or even unsound, for the practice of science. (Another time, I hope to discuss the surprising fact that many atheist scientists and philosophers disagree strongly with MN, when MN is proclaimed as an unconditional rule.) The National Academy, however, is not listening to you, nor are federal courts,
From Inspiring Philosophy: Does neuroscience show consciousness emerges from a brain? We show a wealth of data suggests the opposite. The mind does not appear to be reducible to matter.
Hugh Harris: “Some properties of living things are absent from viruses, such as cellular structure, metabolism (the chemical reactions that take place in cells) and homeostasis (keeping a stable internal environment).” And yet, as he goes on to say…
As philosopher Richard Johns explains, sims do not understand simhood: How can Alice determine whether the strange little man in her apartment who claims to be her Programmer is telling the truth? Recently, philosopher Richard Johns (left), whose work was profiled here at Mind Matters News in “A philosopher explains why thinking matter is impossible,” Read More…
No wonder New Atheism petered out. It wasn’t just all the stupid profanity. Ultimately, maybe they couldn’t argue with the math.
The Church recovered the classical academy—Plato and Aristotle and so forth. As for unfettered debate, under university atheism, it is becoming nearly extinct in many faculties, due to disbelief in the reality of the mind.
As Cardinal Pell has been recently cleared, perhaps some may be willing to learn from this telling vid: No, Virginia, you do not get a world from no-thing. END
You didn’t know, possibly, that when he thought we was dying, he showed the notebook to one of his colleagues, who copied out the proof.
Sheldon: … ironically, most of Sabine’s blogs are about the poor predictive power in particle theory, but in this blog she feels she has to reverse herself to defend the good name of global warming. My advice to her is to stick with what she has first-hand knowledge of, because 2nd-hand knowledge always suffers from authoritarian bias.
In other words, on this view, string theory and Darwinism could be said to be waiting for that giant breakthrough that overwhelms all the preceding nonsense. In that case, it all comes down to who they can get to wait with them. Are they important people or not? And can they successfully suppress alternatives?
According to Michael Egnor, responding to Jerry Coyne, arguments for God’s existence can be demonstrated by the ordinary method of
There are so many awkward questions that the propaganda keeps people from asking.
Feser: Mathematical truths exhibit infinity, necessity, eternity, immutability, perfection, and immateriality because they are God’s thoughts, and they have such explanatory power in scientific theorizing because they are part of the blueprint implemented by God in creating the world.
The new atheist project appears to be failing anyway. It might help Dawkins’s numbers if he did debate. But not our business, of course.