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
Watching a debate between Matt Dillahunty and Mike Licona on whether Jesus was raised from the dead was a weird experience. Licona’s approach relied heavily on the supernatural is real therefore literally anything could have happened. And his defence for the supernatural also helped a lot in defining the supernatural. And it is to that… Continue reading Is there a supernatural realm?
According to some apologists, the mind can only work if it is designed or permitted to work by a God. The mind can only access ‘logic’ and reason because such things are authored and exist in some sort of platonic realm. If the world were different to this ― i.e. if it were strictly natural… Continue reading Can I trust my brain?
What follows is a brain dump of ideas relating to feminism. I accuse feminism of being sexist towards women by having a disproportionate response to things that may not be issues, while neglecting things that really are issues. I also pose a handful of better ways for feminism to progress. In many respects, I’m simply… Continue reading A Brain Dump RE: Feminism
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)
By now, many of you know I believe there is a conflict between religion and science. It’s not simply the case they have different methods and different bodies of knowledge; it’s that this difference exists while they try to answer questions in the same field. There is a scientific way of distinguishing life from death… Continue reading Is a Miracle Unscientific?
Dear Bema Sheep, I read your letter with curiosity and thought it interesting to respond. This is due mainly to the binary opening passages which grabbed my attention for all the wrong reasons. But it may be an opportunity for me to restate some things about atheism and make some interesting comments about science. You… Continue reading Responding to Bema Sheep’s Open Letter
The BBC's The Big Questions continues to captivates, today with the question of whether it is more rational to believe in God. There has been some allusion to what it means to be rational; the philosopher Julian Baggini refers to science and naturalism. But a strong definition is never given. I'd like to do that (and… Continue reading Is it More Rational to Believe in God?
“We are entitled to some muddled thinking now and then” said my new friend, Steve (fake name). Steve is an atheist, with a certain amount of superstition he can’t get out of his head. By that I mean Steve doesn’t like to say that he is an atheist because that might cause something bad to… Continue reading Holy Ghosts: ghost stories