A few years ago I had an interesting conversation with a couple Jehovah’s Witnesses who came to my door. After a few minutes they realized I was not going to be as easy to b-p-t (biblical proof-text) into submission as the typical mark, and so they suddenly switched tactics. “Do you know,” one of them […]
Jeffrey Jay Lowder
A journey into a strange land: Why Lowder’s naturalism keeps getting worse
In “Not even wrong: The many problems with naturalism” I argued that the person who endorses “naturalism” faces a dilemma in terms of defining what it is that they believe in. The problem can be summarized in the choice between a fixed or an open definition of naturalism. The problem with fixed definitions of naturalism […]
How does the failure to define naturalism affect Lowder’s argument for naturalism from the history of science?
In retrospect, it may have been good to put this at the end of my previous article. But better late than never. How does Lowder’s failure to define naturalism adequately affect his argument for naturalism from the history of science? To put it mildly, it doesn’t do it any favors. First, let’s recount the argument […]
Not even wrong: The many problems with Naturalism
The phrase “not even wrong” is commonly used as a quip directed at an allegedly scientific claim which is not falsifiable. More generally, it is used as a description of any statement or question which is so off-base, which assumes so much baggage, that one cannot begin to engage it on its own terms. An […]
Prejudice against supernatural persons?
Over the last few days I’ve been having an exchange with Jeffrey Jay Lowder on his argument that the history of science provides prima facie support for naturalism over-against theism. I engaged in the discussion by bracketing the question of what naturalism is. I did so as a division of labor with the intent to […]
A second and more critical look at Jeff Lowder’s Evidential Argument from the History of Science
I provided a response to Jeffrey Jay Lowder’s argument for naturalism from the history of science here. Lowder provided a reply to my critique here. Theologians in perpetual retreat? Lowder’s response is limited to one part of my rebuttal, viz. my observation that theologians have defended what I call transcendent agent (henceforth TA) models of divine […]
