Over the last year or more I have scrupulously avoided any interaction with the work of John Loftus. But I can’t help myself. When I saw the following blurb for his forthcoming book Unapologetic which comes from Peter Boghossian, I was unable to restrain myself from writing a brief rejoinder. First off, here’s the blurb: Unapologetic offers the Philosophy […]
Peter Boghossian
Faith is Irrational: Reflections on the Worst Arguments Against Christianity (Part 5)
Let’s get back to our list of the worst arguments against Christianity as suggested by my readers. Tim offered a long list of suggestions including this doozy: “Religious belief is a matter of ‘faith,’ hence irrational since faith is ‘Believing what you know ain’t [sic] so,’ or some such.” I have rebutted this ridiculous canard too […]
The Philosophy Fashionistas, or Sitting at the Adult Table
Today a reader forwarded to me a link to the latest article from Chris Hallquist (aka, the Uncredible Hallq). The article is titled “Philosophy of religion is mostly not taken seriously in mainstream philosophy“. Basically, Chris describes the current hostility many secular philosophers hold toward philosophy of religion. He’s certainly right to note that this […]
Has Boghossian’s bulldog been neutered?
I have noted in the past that John Loftus has come out as a vocal defender of Peter Boghossian. So it was with great interest that I read Loftus’ comments on the McGrew/Boghossian debate. In his response, Loftus keeps up his bravado, even throwing in the proverbial chest-thump as he dubs himself “Boghossian’s bulldog”. In my response, “Boghossian’s […]
“I just have faith?” How atheists go wrong in understanding the concept of faith
This week Justin Brierley read some of the many responses to last week’s debate between Tim McGrew and Peter Boghossian. One of those responses caught my attention and I’m going to address it here. The response was from an atheist who reported that in his experience when he asks Christians for evidence for their beliefs, […]
Boghossian’s bulldog … or his lapdog?
John Loftus has posted a response to the McGrew-Boghossian debate. In his article Loftus refers to himself as “Boghossian’s bulldog”. I think Loftus may have confused “bulldog” with “lapdog”. Bulldogs are known for being tenacious and territorial, aggressive and fiercely effective in a fight. Lapdogs, by contrast, are noisy and ineffectual and express uncritical admiration for the target […]
Take a short survey on faith (from Tom Gilson)
Peter Boghossian’s Manual for Creating Atheists, like the film Gigli and the Ford Pinto, has achieved such a stellar degree of monumental awfulness that it promises to be remembered and reviled for years to come. Not surprisingly then, the book has not lacked for critics. At the apogee of that impressive pyramid of criticism stands […]
Peter Boghossian is a bigot. But is Tim McGrew brain-damaged?
My review of the great Boghossian/McGrew Debate of 2014 elicited one irksome criticism and it related to the opening sentence in which I referred to Peter Boghossian as “the atheist bigot” and Tim McGrew as “the brilliant Christian philosopher”. The criticism, which I encountered in both Facebook and Twitter, went something like this: “Hrumph. That’s […]
Tim McGrew gives Peter Boghossian an unbelievable public drubbing
On Saturday, May 24 “Unbelievable” with Justin Brierley hosted a discussion/debate between Peter Boghossian, the atheist bigot and author of A Manual for Creating Atheists, and the brilliant Christian philosopher Tim McGrew. If you haven’t heard it yet you can listen to it here. The discussion starts off with the two bizarre definitions of “faith” that […]
Peter Boghossian’s Manual for Wasting Paper (Part 9): Don’t be a jerk
I began my review of Boghossian’s book by pointing out the spurious definitions he provides for terms like “faith” and “atheism”. John Loftus immediately sprung to Boghossian’s defense (not surprising given that he had gushed about the book like a prepubescent superfan at a Justin Bieber concert). However, instead of attempting to critique my analysis […]
Peter Boghossian’s Manual for Wasting Paper (Part 8): Anti-religious indoctrination
Boghossian’s book evinces one of the clearest examples of indoctrination that I have yet encountered in atheist literature. One of the hallmarks of indoctrination (as I explain in my book You’re not as Crazy as I Think) is found in the categorization (and marginalization) of all opinions that dissent from the in-group in terms of mental or […]
Peter Boghossian’s Manual for Wasting Paper (Part 7): Doxastic Closure
Thus far in my review I’ve argued at length that Boghossian’s definitions of key terms — deepity, faith, atheism, agnosticism — are wholly spurious. I have identified my method as one of taking core samples or test cases (i.e. my analogy with testing the candidate for his adeptness at sign language translation). Given that Boghossian […]
Peter Boghossian’s Manual for Wasting Paper (Part 6): Defining Agnosticism
Thus far we have seen Peter Boghossian to be utterly inept at defining basic terms: “deepity”, “faith” and “atheism”, he’s flubbed ’em all. So it is little surprise that his incompetence continues when he attempts to define “agnosticism”. Before we consider Boghossian’s proposed definition, and the problems with it, let’s consult a few philosophical dictionaries to […]
Boghossian’s book helps explain John Loftus’ recent meltdown
Yesterday I posted an article, “Loftus admits Boghossian doesn’t care about truth. I call that bogusian!” in which I pointed out that John Loftus’ pragmatic defense of Peter Boghossian suggested that neither Loftus nor Boghossian care about truth, despite their asseverations to the contrary. Instead, each subverts truth (e.g. in manner of definitions) to the […]
