On Independence Day, it’s appropriate to review the sources of our rights as citizens.
I was flattered to learn that Dawkins felt it necessary to come to the aid of his friend Lawrence Krauss in Krauss’s dispute with me.
Some form of dualism may well be a properly basic belief, justified by the universal human experience.
Bishop and O’Connor claim that in Darwin’s Doubt, my “analysis assumes that… mind is fundamentally immaterial.”
O’Connor and Bishop offer no evolutionary mechanism as an explanation for the origin of the information necessary to produce novel forms of life.
Bishop and O’Connor claim there is no objective, scientific basis for privileging, or focusing on, “life” in my analysis.
Philosophers of science analyzing scientific arguments make a clear distinction between what needs to be explained and the competing explanations.
Philosophers Robert Bishop and Robert O’Connor offer a cleverly titled joint review of Darwin’s Doubt and Signature in the Cell.
Scott Walker is not the only Republican hopeful to have stumbled on this question.
President Deborah Haarsma suggests that I mischaracterized the perspective of the organization’s reviewers in my response to them.