There is a Larry Moran Sandwalk asked:
Say stop the geindre on how the "know nothing" atheists are ignoring the best arguments for the existence of God. Come all you theists and accommodationists, put your money where your mouth is. Give us something of substance instead of hiding behind the Courtisan.Voyons reply angels...I'm betting that [theists] do not have the slightest notion of all the arguments advanced and new for the existence of God who have not already addressed on the new athées.Je am betting that they are just blowing smoke to provide coverage for their friends theist hoping to save their intellectual embarrassment.
Moran obtained 551 comments.Not an argument for the theism met him:
I think it is fair to say that person will come to all that looks even remotely to a modern "sophisticated" argument that ignore atheists GNU.Par therefore I declare victory.
But what about arguments for new atheism? occasional reading again atheist speech reveals the themes.
The new atheism Cliff notes:
(1) There are no gods
(2) Theists are for IDiots
(3) Catholic priests molest children.
It is certainly more again athéisme.Certains old atheism (Epicurus, Lucretia, Hume, Russell, Quine) was quite deep.New atheism should still be meilleur.Raison, modern science, Brights, etc.
I want to learn more about what really new athées.Donc I asked Moran a few questions, although other atheists (Myers, Coyne, Novella, Shallit, etc.) are invited to respond on their blogs and I will answer.
Here are the questions.
(1) Why is something?
(2) That caused the universe?
(3) Why are there (Act) regularity in nature?
(4) Of the four causes in the nature proposed by Aristotle (hardware, formal, effective and final), which are real? do final causes?
(5) Why do we experience subjective and not simply objective existence?
(6) Why is mind intentionally, in the technical philosophical sense of aboutness, which is the reference to something outside of itself human? how mental States may be on something?
(7) No moral law exists in itself, or it is an artifact of nature (natural selection, etc.).
(Why 8) is evil?
I'm not expecting a treatise on chacun.Theists do not have all the réponses.Je don't expect new atheists so they soit.Mais each tradition metaphysical - Catholics, protestants, Jews, Islam, Buddhism, animists, old atheist, heck, even a Scientologist and Raelian - addressed at least some of these questions, for better or for the pire.Comment new atheists remedy? some coherent sentences for each question will start a conversation.Si is one of the questions too hard and say ignore les.Bient?t, I'll publish my ainsi.Aucune reading responses.
The rules:
(1) Responses cannot be limited to the defects of Theism (e.g. ' which caused God?').I'm looking for an exhibition of new atheist belief, not a criticism of the mutual theist.Critique belief comes once all beliefs are on the New table.Si atheist belief can only be expressed by the negation of the beliefs of others, just saying that.
(2) Myers "Of the courtier respond" gambit is fine.Si you think that a question is absurd, said.
(3) No change to the object .Nouvelles questions are welcome, that old issues are addressed.
(4) Of the Act, the Snark Conservation if applies. courteous thoughtful answers more courteous thoughtful answers.
I want to learn more about what really new atheists.
This entry transmitted via the service for full-text RSS - if this is your content and you read on someone to another site, please read our FAQ page fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Article five filters features: After Hiroshima - non-rapport Cancer Catastrophe of Fallujah.
No comments:
Post a Comment