Skip to main content

Thought for the Day

I recently did an alternative "Thought for the Day" for the HSS. You can hear my effort here, along with those from A.C. Grayling, Stewart Lee, Arthur Smith, Nigel Warburton and many others.

They are offered, of course, as an alternative to the T4TDs on BBC Radio 4, from which humanists and non-religious folk are banned.


Anonymous said…
errrmmmm is that why Richard Dawkins very famously just did a BBC Thought for the Day?
Anonymous said…
I didn't realise Dawkins was religious!!! Oh yes, I remember he's a humanIST. Aren't those the ones responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th century? Oh yes I thought so.
Stephen Law said…
oops oh yes he did a "secular thought for the day" as a one-off, for the Today programme, so people could hear what a non-religious one might sound like. Not sure if it qualifies as an official T4TD though.

Mind you, his is a just an anti-religious rant, which is fun, but not really what the HSS wanted.
Unknown said…
Notice also that religious commentators always give a placid "Let's all love everyone" type message. It's a bit repetitive frankly.

Would liven it up a bit to have Dawkins or a religious commentator of similar bent.

Thought of the Day just reminds me that I'm late, it's not actually worth listening to.
David B. Ellis said…

I didn't realise Dawkins was religious!!! Oh yes, I remember he's a humanIST. Aren't those the ones responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th century? Oh yes I thought so.

You actually don't know the difference between a humanist and a communist, Do you?

Popular posts from this blog


(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

What is Humanism?

What is Humanism? “Humanism” is a word that has had and continues to have a number of meanings. The focus here is on kind of atheistic world-view espoused by those who organize and campaign under that banner in the UK and abroad. We should acknowledge that there remain other uses of term. In one of the loosest senses of the expression, a “Humanist” is someone whose world-view gives special importance to human concerns, values and dignity. If that is what a Humanist is, then of course most of us qualify as Humanists, including many religious theists. But the fact remains that, around the world, those who organize under the label “Humanism” tend to sign up to a narrower, atheistic view. What does Humanism, understood in this narrower way, involve? The boundaries of the concept remain somewhat vague and ambiguous. However, most of those who organize under the banner of Humanism would accept the following minimal seven-point characterization of their world-view.

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