Readers may recall University of Colorado atheist philosophy prof Bradley Monton, who has written sympathetically about ID. He’s resigned recently (“I’ve been unhappy with the administration’s recent treatment of me and others in the philosophy department”) amid speculation.
A friend points out, however, that his Web page tells us,
In philosophy of time, I confess a sympathy for presentism, the doctrine that only presently existing things exist, and I’m currently at work on a book, The Flow of Time, defending that doctrine (and I have a lot to say in my book about how to define the doctrine more precisely than I just did).
\In philosophy of religion, I have two new papers forthcoming, a short one (“Mixed Strategies Can’t Evade Pascal’s Wager”) and a long one (“Against Multiverse Theodicies”). Also, I wrote a book, Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design. Click on the “ID” link above for more information.
In philosophy of physics, a recent research project (“Prolegomena to Any Future Physics-Based Metaphysics”) critiques some metaphysicans who appeal to physics to attempt to establish metaphysical conclusions.
In probabilistic epistemology, I’m interested in in developing a probability theory which can handle indexical propositions (self-locating beliefs), an area where Bayesian epistemology breaks down. I also am interested in various issues involving reasoning with infinite possibility spaces.
So he is still in the game.
Here’s some information about his book, Seeking God in Science, and here is Salvo’s interview with him.
Follow UD News at Twitter!
As to:
Well Dr. Monton, with advances in quantum mechanics, certainly has a lot of evidence to back up “presentism”.
Einstein was once asked by a philosopher,,,
Einstein’s answer was categorical, he said:
The ‘now’ quote from Einstein was taken from the last few minutes of this following video, and what the philosopher meant by the question can be read in full context in the article following the video:
Moreover, ‘the now of the mind’, contrary to what Einstein thought possible for experimental physics, and according to advances in quantum mechanics, takes precedence over past events in time.
i.e. per LaPlace, quantum mechanics says of time ‘I have no need of that hypothesis’. In fact, due to advances in quantum mechanics, it would now be much more appropriate to phrase Einstein’s answer to the philosopher in this way:
It is also interesting to note how the perception of time radically changes for Near Death Experiencers who go through a tunnel to a higher heavenly dimension,,
As well, it is interesting to note that Einstien’s special relativity supports this ‘higher dimensional, “eternal now”, view of time:
Verse and Music
supplemental note:
If temporal time has always existed, (as was held in materialism prior to the discovery of the Big Bang), due to the infinite regress, we could never reach the present ‘now’:
All this shows is that there are even a few atheists that can’t spot pseudoscience when they see it.
Well, as they say in the (horse)racing industry, Bradley is with the ‘smart money’, according to this brief YouTube video-clip, as William Lane Craig makes an interesting comment on a revolution going on in the philosophy departments at some of the most prestigious universities in the Anglo-American world, since the late 1960s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14YM7MP6HzY
By the way, the term, ‘smart money’ is a pun on the legal term for: ‘Vindictive, punitive, or exemplary damages given by way of punishment and example, in cases of gross misconduct of a defendant.’ Which could itself be a circular pun anticipating the racing term – in which the meaning of smart as ‘shrewd’ is the more common.