Skip to main content

PLACES AVAILABLE NEXT FRIDAY FOR A LEVEL CONFERENCE

Hear Stephen Law, Nigel Warburton, Chris Horner and Michael Lacewing.

Due to last minute cancellations we have several places available at the Heythrop College A Level Philosophy Conference, suitable for those doing A Level Philosophy or Religious Studies incl philosophy, or indeed anyone interested in philosophy!

The venue is Heythrop College, Kensington Square, London W8 5HN. It runs from 10.30am to 4pm.

Cost is just £12 for students, £15 staff and any one else (free sandwich lunch for staff). I organize the event. Here's the programme. Let me know asap if you want to come. I'll be giving the "evil god" talk. Or email direct to book: alevelconferences@heythrop.ac.uk

A-Level Philosophy Conferences
Friday 18 or Friday 25 March 2011
HEYTHROP COLLEGE University of London
Kensington Square, London W8 5HN Tel: 020 7795 6600 Fax: 020 7795 4200
E-mail: alevelconferences@heythrop.ac.uk www.heythrop.ac.uk
HEYTHROP COLLEGE
University of London
10.30 – 10.50 Registration and Coffee
11.00 – 11.50 Personal Identity, Nigel Warburton, Open University, Author of Philosophy: The Basics; Thinking from A to Z
12.00 – 12.50 Why Should We Be Moral? Chris Horner, Co-author of Thinking Through Philosophy
13.00 – 14.00 Lunch Break
14.00 - 14.50 The Problem of Evil, Stephen Law, Heythrop College, University of London Author of The Philosophy Files; The Philosophy Gym; Editor of THINK
15.00 - 15.50 Tolerance, Michael Lacewing, Heythrop College, University of London, Director of ALP; Author of Philosophy for AS, Philosophy for A2: Unit 3 and Philosophy for A2: Unit 4
16.00 Conference Ends
N.B.
• The same programme applies to both days
• Heythrop College reserves the right to alter the programme due to changing circumstances
• Heythrop College cannot arrange for the provision of transport or accommodation

Comments

Poppy said…
I would like to come. I would also like to bring another person so I don't look like a total loner! How do I book/things? I'll know for definite whether I *can* come tomorrow dependant on whether school agrees on day off...
March 21, 2011 at 11:44 PM
Stephen Law said…
Poppy - just email alevelconferences@heythrop.ac.uk
and say you want to come and how many. They'll sort you out. See you there I hope!
March 22, 2011 at 9:11 AM
Anonymous said…
My nameis Scott Andrew REctor i HAVe a limited education i wont reveal until Stephen Law or another Philosophy teacher comments About the answer to a easy philosophical comment made by John LockeHe states the color of the ocean is created when we look at it I am curious to see another Persons belief ifthat is true or not i have the answer and would love to see if anyone can get it right my answer is easyly understandable
September 3, 2011 at 2:26 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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