Bouwsma

If you enjoy philosophy and ever get the chance to read O.K. Bouwsma's essay "Descartes' Evil Genius" don't pass it up. How I wish more philosophers (including myself) wrote with such wit and in a style that both captivates and gives enjoyment. I recently purchased a book of his essays and have not wanted to put it down. Pure pleasure. Also, his argument in "Descartes' Evil Genius" is worth considering.

Are we expecting too much from causality?

I remember my professor saying that Hume couldn't know for sure if his eggs for breakfast would nourish him or kill him.

The skeptic's dependence on common sense

It seems to me that those who argue for external world skepticism seem to rely on the reality of an external world, or at least our common sense notions about it.

Virtuous Faith

In his recent paper titled "Faith and Epistemology" (see here or here),  Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa gives a refreshing look at faith and it's common occurrence in everyday reasoning. The paper is open access, so please give it your perusal.

Radical Skepticism

Radical skepticism is a particularly vulgar form of certainty. It is dogmatism without content.

The Value of the Question

Is the question of God’s existence more important than the answers given?

That Which Seems True and the Phenomenology of Belief

In his defense of religious exclusivism, Alvin Plantinga gives a somewhat tangential mention of a phenomenology that attends belief (citation at end). In this post, I am not interested in speaking to Plantinga’s defense of exclusivism, but I do want to consider this phenomenology of belief he mentions. To whit, it seems to me that if we believe something, part of why we believe that something is because it strikes us as true. That is, it seems true to us. This phenomenon of seeming true (or, false, for that matter) is not wholly within our control. Why does that matter? Well, for me, I have struggled to find ways to clarify my understanding of not only the experience of belief, but also the humility that it seems should attend belief. Something Plantinga says in that defense has helped me understand these better.

Christian Epistemic Humility

Christian epistemic humility is easy to come by...

A working word that does no work

"Supervenience" is a fancy way of saying, "I have no idea how the physical and mental are related."
 

Wittgenstein: Language-games and Foundations

Do language-games need some kind of foundation?

"Certainty is as rare as the individuals who know they don't possess it."

Epistemic Humility As Disposition

With the last post in mind ( found here), I want to come to a clearer understanding of epistemic humility. I want us to think about what we are being asked to do, when asked to nurture epistemic humility. Or better, what are we not asked to do? Epistemic humility could be misunderstood as a request to both believe and not-believe what we in fact do believe. I want to show that is not the request.

Realized Ignorance

I am going to assume, for the moment, that any approach to achieving peaceful coexistence among differing cultures, religions, worldviews, ideologies, etc. will include an account for nurturing epistemic humility. As the world we inhabit “shrinks,” we must find a way to peacefully agree to disagree. More to the point, it is imperative that we realize our ignorance, both individually and as a community.

Why Believe?

I have heard it argued more than once that the sole value of any given religion is essentially a moral value.  The only good that religion, in general or in particular, has to offer is a moral code, or a moral way of life.  In fact, it is argued, there can be gleaned a common moral code from all the great religions.  If all particular religions could be emptied of their respective doctrines and belief systems, then we all could embrace essentially the same, good moral code. In this way, the world would be infinitely better.  No more differences about doctrines and beliefs, just good people getting along...finally.  I can see some sense in this argument.

Does the Scientific Method Employ a Logical Fallacy?

In The Limitation of Bacon's Scientific Method Jacob Schriftman suggests that the scientific method is based on the formal logical fallacy commonly known as "Affirming the Consequent."  If correct, this is an astounding claim.  Could it be that the scientific method is founded on bad reasoning?  In this post I will attempt to explain the suggestion made by Schriftman and then I will share my thoughts on the implications.

To the Epistemic Humility Challenged Christian

The last few posts have been focused on atheism and and the naturalistic worldview from which atheism is derived.  In the interest of fairness and epistemic humility I would like to "turn the tables" (so to speak) and focus on the worldview I function within: Christianity.

Atheism: Worldview or Objective Point of View (Revisited)

In this post I would like to explain why I do not believe atheism is the result of an objective point of view.  Also, I would like to explore at least one of the ethical implications that I believe obtain as a result of my understanding of worldviews. Lets begin with a quote from James K.A. Smith.

Worldviews, Primary Assumptions, and Certainty

In the last post ("Atheism: Worldview or Objective Point of View") I promised 1) to show why I believe that all people have a worldview, and 2) to show why I believe that all worldviews are based on primary assumptions that are not ultimately subject to evidence or reason.

Does Christian Philosophy Matter? Part I

In his recent article "Does Philosophy Matter?" found in The New York Times op-ed page, Stanley Fish argues that,

"...the conclusions reached in philosophical disquisitions...do not travel into contexts that are not explicitly philosophical (as seminars, academic journals, and conferences are), and they do not even make their way into the non-philosophical lives of those who hold them."

In Part I of this post I will address what I believe to be Fish's basic position.  Then I will show why I both agree and disagree with that position.  In Part II, I will address the not wholly unrelated question, "Does Christian Philosophy Matter?"