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 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”

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”

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”

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”