Skip to main content

Liverpool talk May 17th



Merseyside Skeptics Society
Skeptics in the Pub: Stephen Law
Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole
by Stephen Law
When: Thursday, May 17th, 2012 8.00 – 11.00 PM
Where: The Head of Steam, 7 Lime Street, Liverpool
Info here.

Wacky belief systems abound.
Members of the Heavens Gate suicide cult believed they were taking a ride to heaven on board a UFO. Muslim suicide bombers expect to be greeted after death by 72 virgins. And many fundamentalist Christians insist the entire universe is just 6,000 years old. Of course its not only cults and religions that promote bizarre beliefs significant numbers of people believe that aliens built the pyramids. How do such preposterous views succeed in entrenching themselves in the minds of sane, intelligent, educated people and turn them into the willing slaves of claptrap?

Believing Bullshit is a witty and insightful critique that will help immunise readers against the wiles of cultists, religious and political zealots, conspiracy theorists, and various other nut-cases by clearly setting out the tricks of the trade by which such insidious belief systems are created and sustained.

Comments

Anonymous said…
A bit off topic, but Dr. Craig takes a stab at your argument pertaining to the resurrection:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/stephen-law-on-the-non-existence-of-jesus-of-nazareth?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ReasonableFaithNews+%28Reasonable+Faith+News%29&utm_content=FaceBook
April 23, 2012 at 5:33 AM
BenYachov said…
Jesus Myters are the Young Earth Creationists of Atheism and about half as smart.

Anyone who takes their point of view seriously should be laughed at loudly and with great cruelty.
If I denied the existence of God I would still hold the Jesus Myters with great contempt like Tim O'Nell.

OTOH even I as an intellectual exercise might lightly philosophically "defend" YE creationist or OE ID'ers. Given the omnipotence of God he could have created a Young Earth that looks Old but I would have to give up my Moderate Realism to do it.

But I don't take it seriously anymore then I do Mytherism.
April 23, 2012 at 5:55 PM
Ophelia Benson said…
I've met some of the Merseyside Skeptics, when I was at QED in Manchester. Lovely people. Manchester Skeptics and Merseyside Skeptics collaborated in organizing QED.
April 29, 2012 at 12:28 AM
Andy said…
What's up with that photo? You look like you're thinking "I hate that tree!"
April 30, 2012 at 12:39 AM
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

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
446 comments
Read more

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...
250 comments
Read more