Skip to main content

HEAVY DEXTERS last year


At the Oxford festival - me on drums.

Comments

Unknown said…
Funky sheeet!?

As an aside, was just wondering about the thinking behind the title 'Believing Bullshit'?

Was singing the book's praises to a mate last night, and how the arguments are laid out in a clear, non-pretentious and non-directive way; but we both accepted we couldn't recommend it to some of our more ardent believer friends, as we'd offend them almost immediately. It seems a shame, as the mood and implication of the title isn't necessarily extended into the rest of the text (though I'm only halfway). Was just wonderring whether you have any other feedback that the title might be a bit of a barrier in reaching the very people who might benefit from it?

Ta.

Adzcliff

P.S. We conceded we couldn't come up with an equally engaging and impactful title, and suspect this was a balance you and/or your publishers had to consider?
February 16, 2012 at 9:39 AM
krissthesexyatheist said…
I like the percussion break down. Over all it's what the cool kids call acid jazz. If y'all ever get to Northern California in the summer...there are hella festivals and your sound would go over very well. awesomeness,

Kriss
February 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM
Alex said…
Good stuff! Is there some other video or recording where the sound is better? I think your snare sounds good, but have nothing to go on with toms and bass. What's your setup?

(Btw, on that second tune, tell your perc to use bells instead of bongos on that opening ... would be awesome!)
February 16, 2012 at 11:52 PM
Stephen Law said…
Adzcliff - it's swings and roundabouts with title. Maybe recommend the book as a book about supernatrual stuff/conspiracy theories... which it is, of course.

Alexander - It's not v good recording I'm afraid. That kit was DW collectors with Brady jarrah ply snare (with wood hoops).
February 17, 2012 at 9:49 AM
Unknown said…
Cheers Stephen!

Hopefully they'll get far enough before they realise we're talking about them...
February 17, 2012 at 6:12 PM
Anonymous said…
you and Dave Chalmers should start something..you can call yourself ZombiePhilos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiEVkDdmIF8&feature=related
February 18, 2012 at 9:32 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