Posts

Theodicy Isn't for Wimps

Image
  Introduction The problem of evil. That's apparently a problem for theists in general, and Christians more specifically. Primarily it is a problem for theists is general--at least in the realm of philosophy of religion--because goodness, more specifically, omnibenevolence, is pointed to as a characteristic or attribute of God. A  Video Version  of This Response I am not sure if I have ever put this point into writing but, in discussions about theism in general, I have noted that such discussions--due to the fact that the west is overwhelmingly Christian--that such matters necessarily presuppose Christian categories. It is in this recognition that in an examination of Stephen Maitzen's article "Atheism and the Basis for Morality", that I responded to it from a largely Reformed Christian understanding. Before I go any further, perhaps it would be beneficial to define some terms first. Theodicy Defined The word "theodicy" is derived, according t...

About the "Sagan Standard"

Image
  Introduction Atheists can be like a dog with a bone when they find some witty one-liner or superficially clever aphorism. More often though they betray a tremendous amount of thoughtlessness when it comes to their worldview and its extended application.  Perhaps you’ve never heard of the “ Sagan standard ”, which is something like “ Hitchen’s Razor ”, when it comes to examining claims or, more properly, assertions. The “Sagan standard”, so named after astrophysicist and science popularizer Carl Sagan, is derived from his 1979 book Broca’s Brain , and is most often presented, sans context, as “ Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence ”. The issue is, of course, what do the terms “extraordinary claim” and “extraordinary evidence” actually mean when they’re used? Defining Terms Indeed the issue is, as David Deming points out, that Sagan never bothered to define his terms.[ 1 ] As a result, no one else seems to bother to define their terms, though s...