Samuel Clarke In Paul Russell’s masterful analysis of the irreligious nature of Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature entitled, The Riddle of Hume’s Treatise, Russell recounts an argument for theism by Samuel Clarke and Hume’s refutation. Russell shows how, in his efforts to defend a natural science of human knowledge, Hume is also attacking common theistic proofs. Clarke’s argument is as follows: Something existed from all eternity. If something had not existed from all eternity then something would have come from nothing. That which has existed from all eternity is unchangeable and independent. If there had not existed from all eternity something unchangeable and independent then everything that has ever existed would be changeable and dependent. If everything is changeable and dependent then it is equally possible…
-
-
C.S Lewis’ Argument from Beauty
The argument from beauty has a certain intuitive strength. It is roughly as follows: Beauty evokes longing. When we see or hear something of great beauty we long for something beyond what we think is beautiful. A great piece of music impels us to desire for an experience beyond the one we are having. Of course, we can just say it is synapses and endorphins, but when we do we neuter the power of the experience. Perhaps, Lewis suggests, the beauty we are glimpsing is not in the music or painting or mountain-top view, but from somewhere else mediated through our experience. Lewis concluded that there is no way to…
-
Why Physicalism Fails
Laws of logic are necessary truths. The least debated law is the law of non-contradiction: statements that are contradictory cannot both be true in the same way at the same time. To say that it is a necessary truth is to say that there is no possibility that it could be false. Or, in possible world parlance, there is no possible world in which the law of non-contradiction is false. Physicalism is the view that there is no entity that is non-physical or that is not reducible to a physical entity. All physical states of affairs are contingent upon other physical states of affairs. It is possible, therefore, that everything…
-
Bertrand’s Blunderbuss
Bertrand Russell and his pipe “As soon as we abandon our own reason, and are content to rely upon authority, there is no end to our troubles. Whose authority? The Old Testament? The New Testament? The Koran? In practice, people choose the book considered sacred by the community in which they are born, and out of that book they choose the parts they like, ignoring the others” (Bertrand Russell). Russell liked to have a go at religion with the argumentative equivalent of a blunderbuss: He shoots out many different arguments that go all over place and hopes that something will hit the target. There are at least three arguments in…
-
Conrad’s Consciousness
“[W]hatever falls under the dominion of our senses must be in nature and, however exceptional, cannot differ in its essence from all the other effects of the visible and tangible world of which we are a self-conscious part… I am too firm in my consciousness of the marvelous to be ever fascinated by the mere supernatural, which… is but a manufactured article, the fabrication of minds.” (Joseph Conrad). There are a number of reasons to hold such a view. First, there is the argument from awesomeness: God is neither necessary nor sufficient in order to find nature awesome. Nature is awesome enough without God. Or perhaps the argument from sense:…
-
Babies and Lions: Why What We See Doesn’t Always Change What We Believe
The picture of a dead lion and the videos of Planned Parenthood workers went head to head this past month. Who won? Time will tell. One thing we do know is that evidence, the type of evidence you can see and hear, doesn’t always change a person’s mind. “How can anyone, any human being, see that poor defenseless lion and feel no moral outrage?” some people said. “No one with any moral scruples can watch the Planned Parenthood videos and remain a supporter of such an organization,” others cried. Yet, for some reason, many people defy the supposedly obvious evidence. Are they mad, irrational or psychopathic? I suppose many people…
-
On the Completeness of Physics
All is Physical and Physics is All Physicalists say that all facts are fixed by physical facts. Whatever physics tells us there is – that’s it. And physics tells us that there are no non-physical things. This creates two questions: What are qualities and what are mental properties? If physicalism, of the strongest kind, is true, then qualities are identical to quantities and mental properties are identical to physical properties. On physicalism of this stripe, all effects are physical and all causes are physical. If all the effects that we can observe are physical then all the causes are physical. Empirical evidence renders non-physical causes for physical effects implausible. The measurable…
-
Young Earthers and Presuppositionalism
Does one’s view of origins have anything to do with apologetic method? This was the subject of a recent debate held at Southern Evangelical Seminary. Three views were held at the debate. Jason Lisle argued that a presuppositional apologetic assumes a hermeneutic of literalism. Since presuppositionalists typically hold that scripture is the ultimate authority on what is true and since there is no indication found in the text that the six day creation account was anything but an account of actual events in 24 hr days there is no reason found in scripture to abandon a young-earth, six day creation position. The only reason for abandoning this view is found…