Diligently Seek

Philosophical Arguments Against Theism I am gradually going to use this post to collect my thoughts on the reasons that God's nonexistence is the most parsimonious on the topic. The Cosmological Argument : All extant things have a cause, the universe is extant, therefore the universe has a cause. Since the universe has a cause, the universe itself cannot be that cause. Therefore, the universe has a cause other than itself. Given that the universe is a physical reality, however, phenomena within it can be used to determine the cause of the universe. Cosmological inquiries into the question have been unable to detect any evidence of supernatural causes, therefore it is unlikely that a supernatural cause can explain the universe. This makes the most reasonable conclusion from cosmological evidence regarding the non-existence of God, the one that is most probably true. This probability can be established by considering whether any physical theory or theological theory

He That Increaseth Knowledge Increaseth Sorrow : How Hamlet Demonstrates That Conscience does Make Cowards of Us All  It is among the most pleasurable, and the most maddening, enterprises in life to read The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark by William Shakespeare. Pleasurable because of its inexhaustible depth, its perfect turns of phrase, and its expansion of the art form that is the English language. Maddening because of the impenetrable layers of madness throughout the text, and within its many characters. At the end of the play, one is left feeling that something profound has been said, but that one is powerless to reiterate what it was. In Stephen Greenblatt’s seminal treatment of Hamlet he identified eleven essential unanswered questions in the play, among which are, “Why does Hamlet delay avenging the murder of his father by Claudius, his father’s brother? How much guilt does Hamlet’s mother, Gertrude . . . bear in this crime? How trustworthy is the ghost of Hamlet

Faith is a squirrelly term. One uses it in many contexts and causes it to mean many things. This is true of most terms, and it only is a problem when one does not clarify the sense one intends with one's usage. An example I can think of occurred in a debate between Rabbi Wolpe and Christopher Hitchens. In that debate, Wolpe told Hitch that he is a man of great faith. According to him, Hitch has a great faith in freedom, equality, morality, love, and reason. Hitch could not object, but what was he saying? That there are unseen things he loves without evidence? If so, I am sure Hitch would deny it. I accept that list of principles based on evidence, I do not posit some independent medium of trust as evidence for the existence and goodness of love for example. I experience it. I test it. I accept it only until it is disproven, and the continued strength of the principles, given the evidence, increases my acceptance. Really Wolpe was playing a trick. He associated the princ

John Taylor wrote a hymn with which you ought to be familiar. Mormons most often sing Praise to the Man by W. W. Phelps, though it is possible that this hymn was actually written by Eliza R. Snow, to commemorate Joseph as the prophet. But John Taylor was actually at Carthage, he actually became president of the church, and he never left it. Yet his hymn is not in the present hymnal. One wonders why. There is an excellent arrangement of this song by Rob Gardner that I love and have performed many times. I have no answer as to why this song is not an official part of correlated Mormonism today, but what I want to discuss is the significance of this song to me as an ex-mormon. I love the prophet. I love the honest 14-year old who was too honest to pretend religious certainty and persisted until he gained that for himself. I love the brave screaming child who refused whiskey when undergoing a brutal prairie surgery on his leg bone and was more worried about his mother's disp