Comments on SJ Thomason’s Essay on Social Justice in Sheep’s Clothing

SJ Thomason recently posted a curious piece of writing titled: Social Justice Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: A Christian Response – Christian Apologist (christian-apologist.com) It begins incongruously with an anecdote about a graduate assistant from Sweden she claims to have mentored in a way that borders on practicing psychotherapy without a license; moves to a transitionalContinue reading “Comments on SJ Thomason’s Essay on Social Justice in Sheep’s Clothing”

William Lane Craig Takes Another Wild Swing at Intelligent Design

William Lane Craig takes another crackpot shot at intelligent design by a creator in this short video: Again, Craig is either sadly ignorant of contemporary physics or he is just dishonest. He begins with the preposterous claim that “the single most significant physical evidence that a creator god created our universe…is the remarkable discovery thatContinue reading “William Lane Craig Takes Another Wild Swing at Intelligent Design”

William Lane Craig Takes another Stab at Intelligent Design

I recently commented on William Lane Craig’s attempt to rebut my article on the illusion of fine-tuning which showed Craig’s response lacking in any substantive content while heavy on invective. He now takes another swing at fine-tuning in support of intelligent design in which he repeats many of the same fallacies and false statements here:Continue reading “William Lane Craig Takes another Stab at Intelligent Design”

Part III: Response to Bob Felts on Applicability of Mathematics to Physical Reality

In this section I will discuss consciousness from three different perspectives: 1. Contemporary neuroscientific models 2. Quantum mind theory 3. An ontological inquiry. 1. Contemporary Neuroscientific Models. The neuroscientists Anil Seth and Donald Hoffman are representative of cognitive models that can be thought of as 21st Century updates of Kant’s epistemology. We can generalize theseContinue reading “Part III: Response to Bob Felts on Applicability of Mathematics to Physical Reality”

Script of My Video Responding to Braxton Hunter’s Ten Questions

 A few days ago, Braxton Hunter uploaded a video asking Atheists ten questions:  Below is a transcript of my video answering Hunter’s questions. 1 This is a fuzzy question resting on possible equivocation of the word “explain”. One can contrive a story that takes into account all relevant facts, but is that what we generallyContinue reading “Script of My Video Responding to Braxton Hunter’s Ten Questions”

Part II: Response to Bob Felts on Mathematics and Reality

In Part II Bob gives us an impressive and interesting overview of the mechanics of computation. The problem is that it skipped over the questions at hand, which are whether the mind really is fundamentally a computer, and why reason should accurately describe reality. Those questions remain and I will go on to address them.Continue reading “Part II: Response to Bob Felts on Mathematics and Reality”

Comments on William Lane Craig’s Attempt to Rebut My Article on the Illusion of Fine-Tuning

Just this week I discovered that, on his website last August, William Lane Craig attempted to rebut my article on the fallacy of intelligent design. I suggest you read his rebuttal before going any further: https://www.reasonablefaith.org/media/reasonable-faith-podcast/the-illusion-of-design/ And for those who haven’t read my original piece, you might want to take a look at it here:Continue reading “Comments on William Lane Craig’s Attempt to Rebut My Article on the Illusion of Fine-Tuning”

Part I: Response to Bob Felts on the topic of Applicability of Mathematics to Physical Reality

Bob Felts has provided several extremely interesting responses to my initial post and has come to a brief pause so I can catch up to what he has written so far. My response will also divide into several sections over the coming days. Here I will begin with thoughts on his Part I and anotherContinue reading “Part I: Response to Bob Felts on the topic of Applicability of Mathematics to Physical Reality”

Continuation of a Conversation with a Mathematician on the Seeming Applicability of Mathematics and Reason to Physical Reality

This is a continuation of a Twitter discussion I am having with wrf3 on the applicability of mathematics and reason to physical reality. We have moved it here for a more convenient forum for lengthy responses. Wrf3 is a mathematician and software engineer. I’ll briefly restate my position on this question and then respond toContinue reading “Continuation of a Conversation with a Mathematician on the Seeming Applicability of Mathematics and Reason to Physical Reality”

Script to YouTube Video: William Lane Craig’s 14 Ridiculous Responses

Introduction On Cameron Bertuzzi’s YouTube channel, Capturing Christianity, William Lane Craig appears on a recent video entitled “Dr. Craig Rebuts the Best Atheist Arguments”, to which I’ve linked above. I am convinced that Craig is a dishonest apologist who knowingly presents false arguments and empty rhetorical tricks, not to actually convert anybody, but to playContinue reading “Script to YouTube Video: William Lane Craig’s 14 Ridiculous Responses”

Script for YouTube Video: Refutation of William Lane Craig’s Argument for God From Mathematics

William Lane Craig and his sidekick, Cameron Bertuzzi, recently responded to a video by Rationality Rules’ rebutting Craig’s five-minute cartoon presentation of his argument for god from mathematics that was based on a paper by Eugene Wigner. Being mired in the reductionist and trivializing nature of analytic philosophy, Rationality Rules did not mount a veryContinue reading “Script for YouTube Video: Refutation of William Lane Craig’s Argument for God From Mathematics”

Response to Eckels on the Messiness of Applicability of Mathematic to the Universe

This is a response to a question arising from my recent video on the error of the argument for god from mathematics, which Eckels raises the question of messiness. The video can be seen here: This becomes somewhat demystified if we take Kant’s view of mathematics as our starting point and focus on Poincare’s demonstrationContinue reading “Response to Eckels on the Messiness of Applicability of Mathematic to the Universe”

Response to Eckels on Heidegger and Being

An overview of Heidegger is extremely difficult, dangerous in that it can give a trivialized impression that obscures the great profundity of his thought, and perhaps even impossible. Consider what follows to be less than even a mere introduction, and if it interests you then ask lots of questions. First let’s put him in historicalContinue reading “Response to Eckels on Heidegger and Being”