There is a contradiction at the heart of some escatological religions - or, at least, their interpretations - that I think can only be solved by recognising that it is necessary to have a secular ethical system. The contradiction is this: an escatological religion is one that has in it the claim that judgement and… Continue reading The necessity of secular morality – even for religious people
Pascal’s Wager is a lie. Here’s the issue: the wager is essentially a gambling matrix, with two options in reality and two options that you can believe in. The two possible realities are Christianity or Atheism (if you’re a Muslim, the options are Islam and Atheism ― continue to substitute your own God in as… Continue reading Pascal’s Wager is a lie
Ontological Arguments for the existence of God are an odd grouping. Not much holds them together except for their most common rebuttal: that they attempt to define a God into existence. This is not my favourite rebuttal to the arguments, although it is true: ontological arguments for God try to sneak the idea of existing… Continue reading Ontological Arguments
I rewatched Moana, and one thing about Maps of Meaning became clear: Peterson is right about the basic narrative and cast of myths and stories. What I still struggle with is the psychological necessity of these stories to capture values and meaning, or why these arcs are the ones that resonate with us. But, I… Continue reading Maps of Meaning, discussion – Part 4b, Peterson applied to Moana
Since my last update, I have come across two things in Maps of Meaning which seem to fully undermine the whole structure of Peterson’s thesis thus far. These are ‘The Terrible Mother’ and ‘goal-like’ behaviour which is instinctive. But, before we get there, I’m going to recap some main points and give the relevant expansions… Continue reading Maps of Meaning, discussion – Part 3a, Death, Sacrifice and Femininity
There is a claim that forms an integral part of the Teleological Argument for the existence of God, an argument that claims the universe has clear signs of purpose. This claim is that a life-permitting universe is so unbelievably unlikely that no thinking person should be able to say it happened due to chance. The… Continue reading What are the odds against a Life Permitting Universe
It’s a long standing argument: can theism be justified within scientific thinking? There have been attempts to bypass the argument, by calling the two concepts “non-overlapping magisteria”: the claim that the two concepts simply answer different questions and therefore are never justified by each other and never in conflict (Gould, 2011). However, that is not… Continue reading Are theism and science incompatible?
Introduction There is an argument for the existence of God called ‘The Modal Ontological Argument for the existence of God’ (MOAG). A major part of MOAG is the idea that something is ‘possible’. The “something” is a ‘maximally great being’, or something similar depending on which version you read. The vagueness of the “something” ―… Continue reading No way!? Is that ‘Possible’?
The Euthyphro Dilemma is a Theology 101 problem, without a satisfactory answer. Posed in Plato’s dialogues, it is often formulated like this: “Does God command something is good because it is good, or is it good because God commands it”. Plato was writing from a polytheistic culture, so this is a variation (and translation) on… Continue reading Is it good because it is God’s nature? or is it God’s nature because it is good?
There is an argument for God called the ‘Ontological argument’ and it received an ambivalent welcome whenever it is trotted out, which seems increasingly rarely. It isn’t at all compelling, and yet that appears to be irrational because it’s rare to see someone actually attack the premises or the structure. However, that, today, is what… Continue reading The Ontological Argument for God – and why it’s nonsense