Skip to main content

Talk on moral and religious education

My final talk in Romania has been posted on you tube, I've just discovered. In segments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ3UrDEh2co – ep. 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhJ_LdNpBeQ – ep. 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgqz2d2e1w8 – ep. 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmr77U3F754 – ep. 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i8WO_0TwY8 – ep. 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYrkHuJMSWQ – ep. 6
Labels:

Comments

Tony Lloyd said…
I liked the talk (hadn't thought in terms of "big A" and "little A" before.)

I do think there could be ONE dogma imposed:

"Thou shalt not chat whilst the first few questions are being asked".

Anyway I have ordered "The War.." and have (almost) persuaded my wife to choose it as the next book for her book group. I've been trying to smuggle some rationality into what are a bunch of woolly relativists for a few years. I have suggested (seriously) "The Open Society and its Enemies", (slightly less seriously) "Anarchy, the State and Utopia" and (not at all seriously) the "Critique of Pure Reason". Despite my claims that the first two are fabulous reads and, in places, laugh-out-loud funny they haven't been adopted. I've already had good vibes from the suggestion of "The War..." though. This might be fun...
May 16, 2008 at 9:52 PM
anticant said…
Why not suggest Frank Furedi's "The Politics of Fear" and "Invitation to Terror", which are among the few serious attempts I've come across at intelligent analysis of the dire state we're now in, and how we got there.
May 17, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Tony Lloyd said…
"The Politics of Fear" looks interesting. I might read it myself. I don't think I'd get my wife to choose it for the book group book though. In fact I'm now having difficulty with "The War...". Despite the fact that I read it in a weekend, gave it a rave review to my wife and despite the fact that it has "Children" in the title (it's a mothers' bookgroup) I'm facing objections.

"Its got paragraph headings!" (Yes, that's an objection. Apparently it means its a serious book or something. Why it means it's more difficult than some of the ghastly, obscure and deliberately incomprehensible fiction they often choose, I don't know).
May 19, 2008 at 7:49 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
159 comments
Read more

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist
49 comments
Read more

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o
151 comments
Read more