Philosophers’ Carnival #127

Welcome to the June 27, 2011 edition of Philosophers’ Carnival.  First those blog posts which were actually submitted will be listed, followed by blog posts which were gleaned.  If you submitted a good post that was not included, please know there has been a glitch with blogcarnival.  Email me and it will be remedied.

Submitted:

epistemology

Aaron Rathbun presents Obama’s Birth Certificate and Epistemology posted at theology+culture, saying, “This post is about postfoundationalist epistemology. “Birthers” doubting Obama’s birth certificate will never have any sufficient amount of evidence to prove them otherwise, because our presuppositional commitments shape how we filter the evidence to begin with.”

Matt Flannagan presents In Defense of Reasonable Disagreement by Andrew, posted at MandM.

logic and language

Tristan Haze presents Sketch of a Way of Thinking about Modality – Part 1 posted at Sprachlogik.

metaphysics


Michael S. Pearl presents Matters of Choice and Free Will posted at The Kindly Ones, saying, “This actually relates to logic and epistemology as well.”

mind


gualtiero piccinini presents 
Was Psychosemantics a Failure? posted at Brains.

Christopher Norris presents Outside the Box:  on the ‘extended mind’ hypothesis posted at Ichthus77.

moral philosophy

Richard presents The Normativity Objection to Metaethical Naturalism posted at Philosophy, et cetera.

Greg Nirshberg presents What we miss in the free will debate posted at Cognitive Philosophy.

Matt Flannagan presents Lawful Authority and Just Wars posted at MandM.

Jeremy Pierce presents Abortion and Incurred Responsibility posted at Parableman.


Gleaned:

Physicalism by Nick Smyth on Yeah, OK, But Still, on John Danaher’s articles of the same topic.

Is there a best possible multiverse?  by Alexander Pruss on Prosblogion.

Omnipotence and failure by Kenny Pearce.

How am I not myself? by Greg Nirshberg on Joshua Knobe and Mark Pierpoint’s articles.

Examples of errors in reasoning by James W. Gray on Ethical Realism, as well as an overview of the major theories in Ethics.

The anatomy of intentional action by Dan Jones on The Philosopher In the Mirror explaining “The Knobe Effect”.

Susan Wolfe and Meaningfulness by

You can’t get an ought from an is – but Cameron’s trying to do just that by Richard J Murphy on Tax Research UK.

Moral Absolutes and the Humpty Dumpty Fallacy by Matthew O’Brien and Robert C. Koons at Public Discourse, the second article in a series of three on The Uses of Philosophy.

Doing Away with God by Ian Kluge at Common Ground on Hawking and Mlodinow’s “The Grand Design”.

Mailbag Monday:  What is the Greater Good? on Philosophy Bro.

The Language of Responsibility by JP on Philosophy Talk.

Academic ethics under competition by Thomas Rodham on The Philosopher’s Beard.

philosophical divisions by Gary Sauer-Thompson.

Equal weight and asymmetric uncertainty by Brian Weatherson on Thoughts, Arguments and Rants.

Two Problems with Kripkenstein’s Argument for Meaning Skepticism by Jason Streitfeld at Specter of Reason.

The animal you are by Paul Snowdon on The Philosophers’ Magazine.

A short introduction to the philosophy of artificial intelligence by Anderson Brown.

Distinguished woman philosopher 2011 by profbigk on Feminist Philosophers.

What do diversity and inclusion mean at Cisco systems? by Tom Gilson at Thinking Christian.

Victor Stenger responds to “Who Made God?” by Edgar Andrews

Why do people completely misunderstand the word ‘faith’? by Eric Chabot at Ratio Christi.

The problem of miracles by Max Andrews on Sententia.


That concludes this edition. Thankyou to those who submitted blog posts.  Submit your blog article to the next edition of philosophers’ carnival using our carnival submission form. Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.  “Like” us and stay updated on Facebook.

Posted in Carnival, Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | 23 Comments

Philosophers’ Carnival call for submissions

I’ll be hosting the next Philosophers’ Carnival on June 27 (submit by June 25).  Email submission if need be.
.
Some topics I’d like to see in the submissions:
  • How can an objectively true moral ‘ought’ correspond to the ‘is’ of reality?
  • Is free will scientifically possible?  Is moral responsibility possible without it?
  • Respond to this:  If the strong sociologist counters with the argument from error, they are affirming a realist premise, since “they rely on the assumption that some past theories were true (or scientifically warranted) despite the weight of received opinion at the time,” (Christopher Norris, Epistemology, Postscript II).
  • Respond to this: Admitting that false grounds are false grounds is admitting they are non-justifiers, so that Gettier’s problem examples do not involve instances of justified, true belief, and so do not challenge Plato’s justified-true-belief account of knowledge.
  • Does “God commands in accordance with his good nature” and Plato’s justified-true-belief requirement for knowledge show Euthyphro’s Dilemma to be a false one?
  • Hume’s fork:  What, if any, is the connection between Hume’s is-ought problem (is this really a problem?) and his problem of induction (is this really a problem)?  Did he see a connection?
  • Why is there something, rather than nothing?
  • Why is every major theory in Ethics compared to the Golden Rule in my Intro. to Ethics text, yet the Golden Rule is not considered as a theory in itself?  Is this common to introductory Ethics texts?
  • Why should any and/or every person care about philosophy?
  • Show how your favored theory in Ethics is superior to the others by applying each to a current event or common moral dilemma.  Top it off with the first question in this list.
  • Feel free to reply to this blog post and submit your own with other good ideas.
Posted in Carnival, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Golden Rule, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Natural Law and Divine Command, Norris' Epistemology, Predestination, Reviews and Interviews, Sam Harris | Leave a comment

Christian Carnival CCCLXXXIV

Welcome to what should have been the June 15, 2011 edition of christian carnival ii.

There was a glitch with blogcarnival, so Fish and Cans is rescheduling for a later date.  All apologies that this was not posted Wednesday.  All Things New is up for Wednesday the 22nd.

KAZBullet presents What I’m Thinking: Caprice/Son? posted at Bullet’s Brain, saying, “Is God a capricious God? Does He change his mind? That’s what this blog post addresses. Thanks!”

Cowboy Bob presents Opinions, Traditions or Convictions? posted at A Soldier for Jesus, saying, “Hello, I’m new here. Do I wait until I’m approved before I put the widget on the post? Thanks for your time. Hope you like it. Cowboy Bob”  Answer:  No, go ahead and slap that widget on your post.

Jeremy Pierce presents Abortion and Incurred Responsibility posted at Parableman, saying, “on sex and consenting to care for resulting children”

Kaleb presents Only the Players Get Paid posted at W2W Soul: Windows to The Woman’s Soul, saying, “If you have ever gone to a college or professional basketball or football game where the arena or stadium is sold out, you know the spectators far outnumber the players.”

Dan Lower presents Dan Reads the Catechism: Paragraph 103 and the Kneeling Argument posted at keyboard theologians, saying, “An interesting [post] about presences…”

loswl presents Scientific Accuracy in the Bible Revealed posted at INSPIKS, saying, “The Bible is not primarily a book of science, but it does contain numerous scientific facts. We laugh at some of the scientific data that was available just a few hundred years ago. If man alone were the author of the Bible, we would expect to find many such errors contained in it.”

michelle presents contentment is a choice? posted at going into all the earth….

Russ White presents Sheep and Shepherds posted at Thinking in Christ.

Dave Taylor presents The rise of the holier-than-thou post-evangelical posted at Letters from another life, saying, “It’s become trendy and fashionable in some circles not to call oneself an evangelical. Are we supposed to believe this signals improvement, or is it just another form of sanctimony?”

Josh presents Bible Verses For Encouragement: 20 Great Scripture Quotes posted at What Christians Want To Know, saying, “We all need encouragement and the Bible provides this. Check out these great encouragement Bible verses.”

Ridge Burns presents Obey Even When It Hurts posted at Ridge’s Blog.

Kaleb presents Give Me Patience—Right Now! | W2W Soul posted at W2W Soul: Windows to The Woman’s Soul, saying, “To coin a beloved phrase by Joyce Meyer: “ I’m not where I need to be but thank God I’m not where I used to be!”

Diane R presents How Socialist Movements REALLY work posted at Crossroads: Where Faith and Inquiry Meet, saying, “Today we have another group of socialist-oriented Christians that really think they can help the poor, but they will end up hurting them just like their predecessors.”

I present San Francisco Atheists interested to see Dawkins debate Craig and Central Valley location of first CAA chapter posted here at Ichthus77.

That concludes this edition.   Submit your blog article to the next edition of christian carnival ii using our carnival submission form.   Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.  “Like” us and stay updated on Facebook! :)

Posted in Carnival | 1 Comment

Central Valley location of first CAA chapter

Have you heard of Christian Apologetics Alliance (CAA) yet? CAA is a recently formed group of Christian bloggers started by Scott Rachui (The Christian Worldview) and Chris Reese (Cloud of Witnesses). The Central Valley is the location of CAA’s first local chapter.

Dedicated to sharing their faith in Jesus Christ by engaging others on a wide range of subjects related to apologetic and theological principles, the goal of CAA is to demonstrate that faith is based in evidence and reason. With this in mind they are collecting together the various blogs published by their membership, which continues to grow.

CAA will provide a list of these blogs and will share the latest posts from each of them** in a weekly round-up on the CAA blog. They have a Facebook fan page which is open to any sort of apologetics-related question one could ask as well as a private Facebook group which provides a Gospel-centered on-line community where apologetics-minded Christians from a variety of denominations and stances (on Calvinism, evolution, etc.) can collaborate on events, share resources, provide constructive criticism and joke around. You can also follow CAA on Twitter.

A few local CAA members are beginning a Central Valley Chapter, including Brian Vallotton, Dr. Kenny Rhodes (Scofield Seminary, sermon podcast, Reason for Hope podcast, sermonaudio.com sermons), Peter Sean Bradley (Lex Communis), Jonathan Deundian (Defeating Defeaters), Mikel del Rosario (Apologetics Guy), Dave Brown (the philosoraptor) and myself (Ichthus77).

All local apologists, whether in training or seasoned, are invited to join CAA Central Valley Chapter to organize apologetics events in local churches and gather to attend more distant events, like the upcoming EPS conference in Berkley.

To join CAA, send email to caaliance@gmail.com. Once a member of CAA, contact ichthus77@hotmail.com to join CAA Central Valley Chapter.

Featured resource: How to get apologetics in your church

**the preceding adapted from the CAA website.

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

I will return to this every morning until I become it.

Let my heart be your dwelling place
Indwell me, dwell in my heart
Let me find my acceptance in you
and share your acceptance with others
We cannot deserve or earn what we already have
Especially when at an impasse–
Let my will be your will
Let my happiness be your happiness
Let me treat others as you (Matthew 25:40)

Posted in Apologetics | 1 Comment

New Christian Carnival is…

here! :)  Features my latest ‘deconstruction‘ of Sam Harris’ “objective moral truth”.

Posted in Carnival | Leave a comment

Why Sam Harris’ "objective moral truth" hovers over an abyss…

Let x be any concept that refers.  See Jime’s comment here for background on Sam Harris’ use of the word “objective”.

P1:  Every possible meaning of x is subject to change unless there is a being to which an unchanging definition of x corresponds.

P2:  If every possible meaning of x is subject to change, x lacks meaning that is not subject to change.

P3:  If x lacks meaning that is not subject to change, x has no objective meaning.

***

Let “GPWB” be Sam Harris’ concept of objective moral truth (Greatest Possible Well Being).

P1a: Every possible meaning of GPWB is subject to change unless there is a being to which an unchanging definition of GPWB corresponds.

P1b: Harris denies the existence of a perfectly good/well being to which GPWB corresponds.

P1c: [P1a, P1b.]  Every possible meaning of GPWB is subject to change.

P2a: If every possible meaning of GPWB is subject to change, GPWB lacks meaning that is not subject to change.

P2b:  [P1c, P2a.]  GPWB lacks meaning that is not subject to change.

P3:  If GPWB lacks meaning that is not subject to change, GPWB has no objective meaning.

C:  [P2b, P3.]  GPWB has no objective meaning.

***

This post also appeared on Examiner.com.

Posted in Examiner.com Articles, Sam Harris | 4 Comments

New Christian Carnival is…

here.  My Facebook poll on the grounding for objective moral truth is featured.

Posted in Carnival | Leave a comment

New Philosophers’ Carnival is…

here.  It features my book discussion of Christopher Norris’ Epistemology.

Posted in Carnival, Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment

Norris’ Epistemology book discussion.

Christopher Norris

The following has all been moved from here.

Norris’ Epistemology; starting point, updates 

Norris’ “Epistemology” Intro. I

Norris’ “Epistemology” Intro. II
Norris’ “Epistemology” Intro. III
Norris’ “Epistemology” Intro. IV

Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch1.I
Norris’ Epistemology Ch1.II-III

Norris’ Epistemology Ch2.I
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch2.II
Norris’ “Epistemology Ch2.III
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch2.IV

Norris’ Epistemology Ch3.I
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch3.II / Part 1: Duhem
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch3.II / Part 2: Koyré
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch3.III
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch3.IV / Part 1: Bachelard
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch3.IV2-V: Derrida

Norris’ Epistemology, Ch4.I-II
Norris’ Epistemology, Ch4.III
Norris’ Epistemology, Ch4.IV
Norris’ Epistemology Ch4.V-VI

Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch5.I
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch5.II
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch5.III
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch5.IV
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch5.V
Norris’ “Epistemology” Ch5.VI

Norris’ “Epistemology” Postscript I
Norris’ “Epistemology” Postscript II

Posted in Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | Leave a comment