On the importance of the philosophy of science

Many people lie in a casual ‘I’ll recognise it when I see it’ relationship with science. That ambiguity gives room for any interlocutor to add sudden vagaries to their criteria, hurriedly adding and removing things from their definition of science to suit their needs. Science can suddenly need to be given a ‘direct observation’ criteria… Continue reading On the importance of the philosophy of science

Advertisements

xPrae: How I defeated you so soundly (Part 6: the whining hyper-scepticism of facts you don’t like)

This post is going to catharticly address the hypocrisy of the blogger, xPrae, on the topic of facts evidence, as well as give a short introduction into when sources and evidence are useful. I don’t know why I do this, xPrae has so few followers as to be irrelevant. However, his pseudo-conversation was fun at… Continue reading xPrae: How I defeated you so soundly (Part 6: the whining hyper-scepticism of facts you don’t like)

Jesus’ Resurrection: best explanation of the evidence

It is irrational to belief that Jesus rose from the dead. I made that argument a while ago, using mostly the Bible and Dr Bart Ehrman as sources. My argument was that we have laughably unreliable, inconsistent, outdated oral tales supposedly based on second-hand eye-witness accounts that Jesus’ tomb was found empty three days after… Continue reading Jesus’ Resurrection: best explanation of the evidence

History cannot Prove Jesus’ Resurrection

Anyone that has studied history as an investigative discipline (i.e. the historical method) will know that history cannot prove Jesus’ resurrection, even if it happened. The investigative form of history is the form that concerns itself with the methods and the question how do we know, instead of the body of knowledge. For those that… Continue reading History cannot Prove Jesus’ Resurrection