Chris Mooney and essential properties.
October 31, 2009 by Chris Hallquist
Filed under William Lane Craig, biology, ethics, philosophy, religion, science, social and literary criticism, stupidity
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 science [...]
The “yo mama” response to the argument from religious experience
October 31, 2009 by Chris Hallquist
Filed under epistemology, philosophy, religion
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. However, [...]
Should I even be responding to J. L. Hinman?
October 27, 2009 by Chris Hallquist
Filed under philosophy, religion, stupidity
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 [...]
Continue Reading »Taking an idea seriously
October 27, 2009 by Chris Hallquist
Filed under epistemology, philosophy, politics, religion
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 interpretation [...]
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 [...]
Continue Reading »