Is Street Epistemology bad?

Lately, I've noticed that there are some Christian apologists (and apologetic websites) who are coming out against street epistemology [1]. Apparently, they are displeased with it, which is weird because street epistemology is essentially the Socratic method. It's true that a lot of atheists are using street epistemology, but that doesn't make the Socratic method/street epistemology …

Continue reading Is Street Epistemology bad?

Advertisements

Deformed Epistemology, confidence, and reflective awareness

I commonly refer to reformed epistemology as "deformed epistemology" because it quite apparently lowers the bar for what constitutes epistemic justification/warrant. For one thing, it appears to be more of a defensive posture that isn't out to seek the truth, or it isn't out to look for what are the most reliable ways of coming …

Continue reading Deformed Epistemology, confidence, and reflective awareness

Objections to “Warranted Christian Belief”

Alvin Plantinga defends the notion that if God exists, then God can probably be known in a properly basic way. Moreover, if Yahweh exists, then Yahweh can probably be known in a properly basic way. Crucial to Plantinga's model of warrant (i.e. the property that makes true belief knowledge) is epistemic externalism. However, for all …

Continue reading Objections to “Warranted Christian Belief”

The superfluousness of reformed epistemology and other problems

Reformed epistemology emphasizes that a theist (or Christian in particular) can have epistemic justification for their belief in God, but the justification doesn't have to be by way of argument or external/independent evidence. I say "external evidence" because reformed epistemology is not fideism; it might be better to describe one as having "grounds" for their …

Continue reading The superfluousness of reformed epistemology and other problems

An evolutionary explanation of the belief in God and the (supposed) genetic fallacy

We've all had our views or arguments misrepresented at some point. Typically, if you (mis)represent your opponent as giving a deductive argument, then you can easily find a fallacy. Conversely, when certain arguments are, for example, properly represented as abductive arguments, some of those same fallacies just don't apply. One argument against the existence of …

Continue reading An evolutionary explanation of the belief in God and the (supposed) genetic fallacy

Leibniz’s critique of the ontological argument

How does Anselm's (and Descartes') ontological argument not assume that the concept of God is possible? Leibniz argued that that the ontological argument assumes this. For all I know, I have a concept of something that is impossible. Or, I could draw contradictory conclusions. I have a concept of God, but, for all I know, …

Continue reading Leibniz’s critique of the ontological argument

Lacktheism or “atheism is just a lack of belief in God’s existence”

There's something that's wrong with saying atheism is just a lack of belief in God. The problem is that one can have a confidence level of 51% that God exists. But would we say that they believe that God exists? No. If I have a confidence level of 51% that it is going to rain …

Continue reading Lacktheism or “atheism is just a lack of belief in God’s existence”

Divine Hiddenness and Human Sophistry

The Hiddenness Argument claims that if God exists, then there will not exist any instances of nonresistant nonbelief.  Since there are such instances of nonbelief, it follows that God does not exist. One particular objection to this argument that I find really bad is a move that appeals to free will. The main reason I …

Continue reading Divine Hiddenness and Human Sophistry

Anti-natalism and religion

Global anti-natalism is the position that it is always morally wrong to have children. It's not wrong to adopt, but it is wrong to bring new people into the world. There have been various arguments for this conclusion; however, contrary to what some groups on the internet think, none of the arguments for global anti-natalism …

Continue reading Anti-natalism and religion

Ed Feser on the mind-body problem

Ed Feser claims that the mind-body problem is something that essentially began with Descartes. But, while it's true that the mind-body problem as is understood today began with Rene Descartes, it's not totally accurate to say that the issue began with him. To be sure, things changed a lot when Descartes came onto the scene. …

Continue reading Ed Feser on the mind-body problem