Archive for the ‘ philosophy’ Category

Is God Alive?

Friday, January 22nd, 2010

Is God dead? Or is God neither/something else entirely?

The Abrahamic religious tradition talks about God as a “Living God.”

For sake of this argument, we need not assume that God does exist or does not exist. So, let’s assume that God exists.

By strong induction, we can say that all living beings start to live at some discreet point in time.
We can point to no living being and show that it did not first start to live.

Life, as I refer to here, is biological life. Some other kind of life is not logically impossible, but any other type of life is merely speculative (even if this or that holy book tells you otherwise).

Let’s ignore death for this argument.

I think it is both common and fair to define God as eternal, including having no starting point in time (either existed before time, or time and God always existed prior to our spacetime — pick your poison).

Does our strong induction that any given living being started to live at some discreet time t therefore lead to the conclusion that God is not a living being? (more…)

Sophisticated Philosophical Arguments

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

I recently watched a video on YouTube featuring William Lane Craig. His assertion was that the “new atheists” were rather not intellectually bright, and that they present no sophisticated philosophical arguments. The new atheists, he claims, are doing little more than rehashing arguments from the intellectual giants (my words) who were their predecessors, such as Bertrand Russell.

Presenting Russell’s arguments, for example, is hard not to do. The man, right or wrong, truly was an intellectual giant. A behemoth of a beast of a philosophical machine. You cannot, I think, blame the new atheists, such as Dawkins and Hitchens, for carrying on with Russell’s arguments, as far as they go. (more…)

What Is the Nature of Truth?

Monday, November 16th, 2009

Or: Is Truth Absolute or Relative?

Truth has qualities of both absoluteness and relativity. Truth is simply “what is.” And falsity is simply “what is not.” Is “what is” absolute? Is “what is” relative? To both questions, we must answer: Yes.

What is, depends. Is depends on time, place, manner, condition, and countless factors that are often fleeting.
(more…)

What If Atheism Kills Religion?

Monday, November 16th, 2009

Or, A Nostalgic Look Back on the Usefulness of Religion

An atheist should not think of spirituality as useless any more than a capitalist should think of agriculture as useless. There are evolutionary reasons why religion developed. If religion and spirituality were biologically disadvantageous, shouldn’t they have been selected out? If there were no or little advantage, then should we have reason to think that religion would have developed at all? To some extent, I’m sure we could imagine religion developing without benefit; after all, reality television has developed without any obvious advantage to our species.

Whether any given sect is important, or even whether certain beliefs were material or immaterial, I’m sure is highly debatable. Consider that humans have ranged from worshipping nature and parts of nature to incarnate deities to invisible all-powerful sky beings to space aliens. What is consistent is probably not the content of the beliefs, but the plain fact of or existence of beliefs among our species in the first place.
(more…)