Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 123 results found
A caller to the radio program asked Greg whether belief is mere fantasy, wishful thinking, or actually knowledge.  Here's Greg's answer: What Is Belief?
Sam Harris is attempting to offer a "scientific" explanation for morality. He's responding to the grounding challenge for naturalism - where do moral values fit in a purely material, physical world? This is a significant challenge for naturalism and atheism since morality is something human beings universally know is real. So any worldview has to be able to account for it or else it's a fatal flaw of that worldview. Harris attempts to explain how science can account for moral values.
Richard Dawkins says no.  “We don’t need to get morals from our religions … We don’t want to find morals from the holy books. We can have our own enlightened secular values.”
Did you notice the cover of the current Newsweek magazine for the article "Can You Build a Better Brain?"  The cover reads:  Grow Your Mind: The Truth about How to Boost Your Brain's Performance.  Equating the mind and brain - assuming the immaterial is only operations of the physical. Greg wrote about this tendancy for equivocation here.
One of the smartest men I know of, Robert P. George from Princeton University, with Sherif Girgis and Ryan T. Anderson have written an argument for the traditional definition of marriage.  You can download the PDF and digest it.  The summary reads:
"Science & Faith:  Are They Compatible?"In a recent webchat about Stephen Hawking's new book The Grand Design, noted biologist and atheist Richard Dawkins offered the following commentary on the physicist's findings: "Darwin kicked [God] out of biology, but physics remained more uncertain.  Hawking is now administering the coup de grace."
Stephen Hawking and his co-author Leonard Mlodinow were on Larry King Live last week.  Hawking was quite clear about some of the things that have been hashed about on STR's blog, namely his pyysicalism and determinism.
From the Discovery Institute - funny and takes Hawking's views to their logical conclusion:Hawking Not Needed to Explain His New Book, Says Universe
I want to make a distinction very explicit that I tried to make in an earlier post.  Stephen Hawking is a brilliant expert when he talks about science and physics.  He is not an expert when he talks about philosophy.  And when Hawking makes claims that lie outside of the boundaries of the physical universe, he is doing philosophy and those are the areas where I have critiqued him.  We need not rely on his expertise when he speaks on philosophic issues drawing from his science.
We got Hawking's new book, The Grand Design, delivered yesterday afternoon.  I've only had a chance to browse a bit, but I was very surprised to turn to this passage in the second chapter.