Over the weekend, I noticed a few things to bash Chris Mooney over, things that tie together in an important way. First: For instance, I wished I’d set aside purely scientific matters and remarked upon how intolerant it is for some Christians to contend that their particular scripture–to which not all of us subscribe–is a [...]
Monthly Archives: October 2009
The “yo mama” response to the argument from religious experience
From sometimes-commenter here Joshua Blanchard: I do not feel as certain about God’s existence as I do about my mother’s existence. In fact, I feel much less certain about God’s existence than my mother’s existence. For example, I can’t even imagine a plausible explanation for my experiences if it turns out my mother doesn’t exist. [...]
Should I even be responding to J. L. Hinman?
After people who’ve wasted their time with him read this post, they’ll probably tell me the answer is “no,” but I can’t resist. J. L. Hinman, a.k.a. “Metacrock,” has responded to some criticism of his work I wrote a month ago. The thing is silly enough to make me think “even Derrida must have smarter [...]
Taking an idea seriously
Jerry Coyne asks what this means, and proposes two meanings “accepting that the ideas may be credible” and “realizing that these ideas have a real impact on society.” Coyne thinks religious ideas should be taken seriouly in the second sense but not the first. I’m tempted to cheer Coyne on, but (1) there’s another important [...]
Information is magic
No, not really, but increasingly I run into creationists who seem to think it is. The existence of information in, say, DNA, is invoked as proof that God exists, because obviously information is a mysterious immaterial thing that must come from an immaterial source</irony>. As someone who got a decent science education, it’s just obvious [...]