Reply to John Mark Reynolds on the significance of William Shakespeare

I started a conversation with my good friend, the Christian philosopher John Mark Reynolds, on Shakespeare’s pivotal cultural role with this article published in John’s blog: Eidos. He responded here, but due to events surrounding the Covid virus he wasn’t able to publish my counter-response: Due to several requests, I present my last response below:Continue reading “Reply to John Mark Reynolds on the significance of William Shakespeare”

Answers to Questions from Chris Rhodes on Epistemology, Physics and the Kalam

This is in response to a conversation between Chris Rhodes and me on Twitter. The subject is too involved to attempt on Twitter, so I am answering here. 1. Why should we believe it to be true and what evidence is there for it? A. The physical structure of perception and cognition suggest it. TheContinue reading “Answers to Questions from Chris Rhodes on Epistemology, Physics and the Kalam”

Response to Michael’s Millerman’s Call for a New Heideggerian Beginning to a Political Crisis

This a partial reproduction of the script of a video I recently released on my YouTube channel and some further clarification of certain points. The video is a response to Michael Millerman’s argument for a Heideggerian approach to a new political beginning and can be seen here: I made the video because I disagree withContinue reading “Response to Michael’s Millerman’s Call for a New Heideggerian Beginning to a Political Crisis”

A Short Reply to SJ Thomason’s Video: Evidence Atheists Believe in God

One of the most common responses among apologists is the employment of the psychological defense mechanisms of cognitive distortion and projection. SJ’s video is a clear example of distorting the arguments of atheists to avoid the cognitive dissonance and threat to religious beliefs that would result from processing these arguments and facing them head on,Continue reading “A Short Reply to SJ Thomason’s Video: Evidence Atheists Believe in God”

Critique of Bertuzzi’s Powerful Arguments for Dualism

Excellent display of how trivial and silly most of academic philosophy has become, although admittedly these wouldn’t be the brightest representatives. But before the video even starts Cameron has introduced his confusion into the mix by conflating soul with nonphysical. It is possible that if duality were true, it would not consist of anything likeContinue reading “Critique of Bertuzzi’s Powerful Arguments for Dualism”

A Critique of “Numerous Reasons Why Secular Humanism is FLAWED” by SJ Thomason

I had hoped to do a live debate with SJ on the topic linked to above, but after first agreeing she backed out – ostensibly because I’m too arrogant. How a simple semiliterate biker who lives somewhere under a bridge could be too arrogant remains a mystery, but even if it were true it isContinue reading “A Critique of “Numerous Reasons Why Secular Humanism is FLAWED” by SJ Thomason”

Critique of William Lane Craig's Argument in Debate with Alex Malpass

Here I critique a debate on 3/24/2020 between William Lane Craig and Alex Malpass  on the validity of Craig’s version of the Kalam Cosmological Argument, although Craig succeeds in bogging down the discussion in diversionary examples of metaphysical conundrums. The debate can be seen here: Craig’s enterprise is to defend a primitive religion by meansContinue reading “Critique of William Lane Craig's Argument in Debate with Alex Malpass”

The Birth of Shakespeare out of the Spirit of Music

My great friend, the theist philosopher John Mark Reynolds, and I embark on a new conversation in which I instruct him on Shakespeare’s Renaissance linkage of Europe back to its pre-Christian roots as well as the nature of poetry.https://www.patheos.com/blogs/eidos/2020/03/the-birth-of-shakespeare-out-of-the-spirit-of-music-guest-voice-jeff-williams/

Bertuzzi’s Failed Attempt to Conflate Claim and Evidence

Cameron Bertuzzi once again reveals that his intellectual side of Christianity plays at the shallow end. In this video he attempts to refute Matt Dillahunty’s statement that there is no evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, where Dillahunty distinguishes anonymous claims from evidence that backs up claims. In doing so, Bertuzzi builds a strawman, pieceContinue reading “Bertuzzi’s Failed Attempt to Conflate Claim and Evidence”

Genealogy of an Error: Cartesian Dualism

It is regrettable that today in the 21st century there is still discussion of substance dualism, an idea that died some time ago, but the moldering corpse of which is dutifully carried from cave to cave and revered by stiff necked theists. It originates with the catastrophic collision of two momentous errors:  Ancient Near EasternContinue reading “Genealogy of an Error: Cartesian Dualism”

Moral Ontology vs. Objective Morality

The following is a response to a Twitter discussion concerning epistemological and ontological issues in the theist claim of an objective moral law. I am responding here to a theist’s criticism of my view of evolving morality which he does by means of a metaphysical argument derived from Aquinas’s metaphysical assertion of actus assendi andContinue reading “Moral Ontology vs. Objective Morality”

To SJ Thomason: Why Ontology Really Matters.

(A response to her essay: Moral Values and Duties are Universal, Objective, and Grounded in a Benevolent God) Thomason attempts to argue there is an objective and universal moral law given to us by the Christian god. This is an ontological assertion that must first be clarified before moving to its descriptions or conclusions. She doesContinue reading “To SJ Thomason: Why Ontology Really Matters.”

The Philosophical Naivety of Alvin Plantinga and SJ Thomason’s Failure to Restore the God of the Gaps

This is a response to a blog by SJ Thomason: SJ announces in the first paragraph: “The intention of this blog is to offer reasons to reject naturalism and scientism.” Unsaid but revealed at the end of her blog is the additional intent of claiming validity for god of the gaps arguments with this abolitionContinue reading “The Philosophical Naivety of Alvin Plantinga and SJ Thomason’s Failure to Restore the God of the Gaps”