In the last post I discussed a spectrum of genres of existence. They went from a physical reality to a conceptual reality unbounded by sense data. I finished talking about the need for evidence when one is talking about the physical reality and existence, and so the appropriate follow up, so far as I see,… Continue reading Values and Evidence
What does it mean to exist? I obviously can’t answer that ― no one can. But permit me, if you will, a perspective. I think existence can be subdivided into genres of existence, and not everything that is ‘true’ necessarily exists. There is the most obvious kind of existence, which is a physical presence in… Continue reading To exist
Expertise is a very specific quality. Dorion Sagan said of scientists ― but it applies to expertise in general ― that an expert who continues to make progress in their field “learns more and more about less and less until [they] know everything about nothing”. Admittedly, experts tend to retire or die before they meet… Continue reading Experts, Nonexperts and Metaexperts
This is part 2 of looking at how a blogger, Michael Egnor, has assessed the mental competence of the Caltech physicist, Sean Carroll. Last time we assessed the claim that Carroll’s ideas on Boltzman brains make him illogical. This time, we are looking at whether finding a multiverse more believable than a God makes Carroll… Continue reading Many Worlds or a Straight Jacket? The pseudointellectual tantrum of Evolution News
I have recently been introduced to Evolution News; in particular, their opinions on the physicist Sean Carroll. One particular author ― Michael Egnor ― takes umbrance with Carroll’s discussions, discoveries and publications in physics, and this comes up in two of his articles: An Infinite Number of Universes Is More Plausible Than God and Is… Continue reading Boltzman Brains and a False Universe? Does the content of Naturalism undermine the philosophy?
Throughout history people have attributed many phenomena to God and then shown them to be caused by natural mechanisms. The attribution to God was a move of faith, whereas natural mechanisms stand as discoveries. An inductive argument could be formed from that to show that it is rational to not believe God is responsible for… Continue reading If You Do Not Know How the Universe Was Created, How Do You Know For Sure There Is No God?
In February, I read the case of the ‘Inexplicable Omelette’, in which the author played off a difficult question: how can you tell whether something has come into its current form ― been constructed or altered ― with intent? His argument was that some things are too complex to consider unintended, and even an omelette… Continue reading How do you identify intent?