Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Category

Philosophy

L&FP, 48a: Is the denial of objective moral truth an implicit truth claim about duty to right conduct etc? (Thus, subject to Reductio?)

Over the past month or so, there has been an exchange of comments regarding my OP L&FP 48, where I note how New Atheist Stefan Molyneaux, in his “Universally Preferable Behavior” (2007), stumbled across the Ciceronian first duties of reason. As a part of that, sometime objector VL raised the claim: Obviously, for one to say that it is objectively true that there are no moral truths is absurd. But that is not what those who are arguing against the idea of objective truths are saying . . . I responded in comment 1110, and think it worth the while to headline that response, with slight adjustments: >>Saying and pretty directly implying are of course two distinct things. Relativists typically Read More ›

Does philosophy make better scientists?

Shraim: Most of us have a foundational understanding in this area — but, as a philosophy student, I was required to take a structured course in logic. At the start, it was like taking a class in brain-teaser puzzles: A∨B is true if both A and B are true; A∧B is true if either A or B is true. Read More ›

Does a culture reach a point where a rebirth of science is not even possible?

Anyone who lives in an aging society will be aware of this problem: Old ladies demanding endless lockdowns and crackdowns to fight COVID-19 who don’t even know what viruses are. Or care. But they don’t need to know — or care — because viruses are “science.” Once science replaced religion in some people’s lives, science became a superstition. And it shows. Read More ›

Mixing science with politics is like mixing mustard and ice cream

So far so good, Marcelo Gleiser, until we got to the part about “often giving equal weight to the opinion of the vast majority of scientists and to the opinion of a small contrarian group,” … There’s actually nothing unusual about the “small contrarian group” being right. Read More ›

Science is no more a “road to truth” than is art or religion

... virtually all modern philosophers and sociologists of science do not speak of science in this way. And we would know. Two of us have a combined 63 years of studying and teaching the philosophy of science. And we can assure you that the gap between the consensus among those who have carefully studied the logic and methods of scientific research and this more popular view of science could not be more cavernous... Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: Nautilus offers a primer on panpsychism

"What’s really interesting about [Massimo Pigliucci’s anti-panpsychism] comments is that even a decade or so ago, his was an utterly conventional view. Now he feels he must qualify it by saying “But that’s just one perspective and one way to look at it.” It seems that fewer researchers today expect the “Hard Problem of Consciousness” to suddenly yield to a new research finding — a situation that leaves many looking with interest and sympathy at a non-naturalist approach like panpsychism." Read More ›