After a few weeks off getting married and cruising around the beautiful state of Alaska, I’m finally settled back at home. Thank you all for the well-wishes, and after reading through all of the comments I’m excited about all of the discussions happening around the blogosphere.
My post quoting Carrier’s God is Silent argument has been bubbling with some interesting arguments. The first part especially interests me, and I think the topic of whether or not God is just in regards to annihiliationism is an argument worth having.
I recently found this story on NPR questioning the legitimacy of a historical Adam and Eve. Nothing new, but some interesting discussion nonetheless.
Sam Harris had a post called ‘How Rich is Too Rich?‘ which was an examination of the super-rich and he had some interesting analysis. Apparently, he received a lot of fiery feedback, and made another post called ‘How to Lose Readers (Without Even Trying)‘. I’m consistently surprised at the pervasive notion that taxation is akin to theft, and that the government is merely a greedy monster that desires to take money from the successful and waste it on those lazy folks with no jobs. I’m also surprised, considering Harris’ content, that this is the issue which readers choose to rally against, especially when we have the super-rich themselves practically begging to be taxed.
cl has a post called ‘Physicalism is Meaningless‘ which relates very closely to Hempel’s Dilemma about defining physicalism. This is actually an interesting philosophical problem for physicalism and I’m quite interested in formulating a more coherent response when this issue is brought up.
‘Should the clay judge the potter?‘ is an interesting post from Mike at Foxhole Atheism which looks at whether or not we can judge God’s actions, and the underlying assumptions of saying we shouldn’t.
That’s all for now, and I’ll have a more substantial post up this weekend.