|February 22, 2017||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Mind, Naturalism|
Non-naturalist atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel, author of Mind and Cosmos, reviewing naturalist atheist philosopher Daniel Dennett’s Bacteria to Bach and Back at New York Review of Books: For fifty years the philosopher Daniel Dennett has been engaged in a grand project of disenchantment of the human world, using science to free us from what he […]
|February 22, 2017||Posted by johnnyb under Biology, Naturalism, Philosophy|
Just wanted to let everyone know that we have posted the abstracts for this weekend’s Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism in Biology conference online.
Atheist cosmologist warns “deeply religious” people not to put their faith in “apparent” fine-tuning
|February 21, 2017||Posted by News under Atheism, Cosmology, Fine tuning, Intelligent Design, Naturalism|
In “Physics: A cosmos in the lab,” a review of A Big Bang in a Little Room: The Quest to Create New Universes by Zeeya Merali, cosmologist Andreas Albrecht writes at Nature, The question of cosmic origins, and the possibility that humans might create new universes, can connect with religious concerns. These form a substantial […]
|February 20, 2017||Posted by johnnyb under Biology, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Philosophy, Science|
The Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism in Biology conference is this Saturday February 25th. Since the conference is online, you can attend from anywhere in the world as long as you have an Internet connection.
|February 19, 2017||Posted by News under Evolutionary psychology, Intelligent Design, Mind, Naturalism, News|
Further to Barry Arrington: Can science ground morality?, looking at James Davison Hunter’s and Paul Nedelisky’s Where the New Science of Morality Goes Wrong: Indeed, some believe that we are at the start of a new age, when the power of science will dispel myths surrounding morality and moral difference and establish a truly rational […]
|February 16, 2017||Posted by News under Cosmology, Intelligent Design, Mind, Naturalism, News|
In a universe where we did not evolve so as to understand reality, someone is supposed to have developed a theory by which we need not worry about the Boltzmann brain From Anil Anathaswamy at New Scientist: Any theory that lets bizarre brains randomly pop into existence can’t be a valid description of the universe. […]
|February 14, 2017||Posted by johnnyb under Biology, Naturalism, Philosophy|
The second Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism online conference is right around the corner! On February 25th, we will convene AM-Nat Biology, focusing on biological applications for alternatives to methodological naturalism.
|February 13, 2017||Posted by News under Big Bang, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, News|
From John Farrell, author of The Day Without Yesterday: Lemaiître, Einstein and the Birth of Modern Cosmology, at Nautilus: But Lemaître wasn’t satisfied. By 1931, he had come to believe that Einstein’s “initial condition” state could not be stable. Reaching back to Friedmann, he proposed his Primeval Atom hypothesis, essentially the Big Bang 1.0, that […]
|February 2, 2017||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Mind, Naturalism, News|
From Dan Jones, reviewing naturalist philosopher Daniel Dennett’s Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds at Nature: Dennett reprises his long-held counter-intuitive idea that consciousness is a ‘user illusion’ similar to the interface of an app, through which people interact with the program without understanding how it works. Memetic apps in our brains, […]
|February 1, 2017||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Naturalism, News, Science|
From Steve Petersen of Niagara University a paper (2014) arguing for a “normative yet coherent naturalism”: Naturalism is normally taken to be an ideology, censuring non-naturalistic alternatives. But as many critics have pointed out, this ideological stance looks internally incoherent, since it is not obviously endorsed by naturalistic methods. Naturalists who have addressed this problem […]
|January 31, 2017||Posted by News under academic freedom, Darwinism, Media, Naturalism, Science|
From Tom Bethell’s Darwin’s House of Cards: A Journalist’s Odyssey Through the Darwin Debates: “The science of neo-Darwinism was poor all along, and supported by very few facts. I have become ever more convinced that, although Darwinism has been promoted as science, its unstated role has been to prop up a philosophy—the philosophy of materialism—and […]
|January 31, 2017||Posted by johnnyb under Biology, Intelligent Design, Naturalism|
For those of you interested in the Alternatives to Methodological Naturalism series of online conferences, I thought I’d let you know that today is the last day you can submit an abstract for the conference.
Not this again?: Monkeys can distinguish large from small quantities just like “low numeracy” human cultures
|January 31, 2017||Posted by News under Animal minds, Mind, Naturalism, News|
From ScienceDaily: Adults and children in the US, adults from a ‘low numeracy’ tribe in Bolivia and rhesus monkeys ALL possessed the ability to distinguish between large and small quantities of objects, regardless of the surface area they occupy. This ability is likely a shared evolutionary trait, according to a study. This is news? They’re […]
|January 31, 2017||Posted by News under Evolution, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, science education|
Two Views: Keep requiring evolutionary explanations by Don McLeroy Last year the Texas State Board of Education formed an advisory committee to help them streamline the state’s science standards. The committee, composed of a majority of evolutionists, has ignited a controversy by urging the board to delete the only two evolution standards that require evolutionary […]
|January 30, 2017||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Mind, Naturalism, Neuroscience|
What? After all the naturalist pop psych lectures we paid good money for at the U? Well, suckers r’ us. From Medical News Today: A new research study contradicts the established view that so-called split-brain patients have a split consciousness. Instead, the researchers behind the study, led by UvA psychologist Yair Pinto, have found strong […]
|January 28, 2017||Posted by johnnyb under Naturalism, Philosophy, Science, Science, Philosophy and (Natural) Theology|
While these statistics get recompiled continually, I was pleased to wake up this morning and find that our new book, Naturalism and Its Alternatives in Scientific Methodologies is currently the #1 Hot New Release in the Scientific Research category, the #2 Hot New Release in epistemology, and the #1 Hot New Release in Psychology research.
|January 25, 2017||Posted by News under Books of interest, Intelligent Design, Naturalism|
From Blyth Institute: Many volumes have addressed the question of whether or not naturalism is a required part of scientific methodology. However, few, if any, go any further into the many concerns that arise from a rejection of naturalism. If methodological naturalism is rejected, what replaces it? If science is not naturalistic, what defines science? […]
Memos received: New Scientist to U.S. Government: Stop being anti-science = Pot to kettle: Stop rusting
|January 23, 2017||Posted by News under Culture, Intelligent Design, Naturalism|
No, really. From the home of the Boltzmann brain wars and information as a physical quality, we now learn, Protesting the incoming Trump administration’s anti-science agenda may not be easy – but it’s vital not just for the US, but the world THE stamp of jackboots, raps on the door, marches and uniforms; these are what […]
|January 22, 2017||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Origin Of Life|
At Algemeiner: Question: I’m a little confused here. You have said repeatedly in this lecture and in other lectures, and in your books, that we haven’t the slightest clue how life began. In fact, Christian de Duve himself has stated explicitly that we have no idea how life began. How, then, can he declare that […]
New Scientist: How far away are our parallel selves? But wait, what does it say about us that we even care?
|January 21, 2017||Posted by News under Design inference, Fine tuning, Intelligent Design, Multiverse, Naturalism|
From Shannon Hall at New Scientist: So where are these unseen universes in relation to ours? How many are there? What goes on inside them? And can we ever hope to visit one? Such questions might sound daft, particularly given the lack of observational evidence that the multiverse exists. And yet thanks to new ideas […]