Skip to main content

Newsweek Magazine - interview

I just did an interview for Newsweek magazine (based in New York), which should come out in next month or so. The theme was bullshit. Creationism came up.

Comments

John Danaher said…
That's cool. You seem to be getting good media coverage on this one.
June 28, 2011 at 5:04 PM
The Atheist Missionary said…
Just imagine how well you'd be doing if you had entitled it f&&**ing bullshit!
June 29, 2011 at 4:29 PM
Stephen Law said…
Dammit AM - if I only I'd though of that! Maybe if there's a second volume....

Actually John, media coverage has been rubbish except for New Scientist and Newsweek magazines. Maybe it's the title, actually? No newspaper reviews at all, in either UK or US.
June 29, 2011 at 5:57 PM
Paul P. Mealing said…
I read the New Scientist interview - I thought it was very good.

I like the photo as well - you look like a man on a mission :)

Regards, Paul
June 29, 2011 at 9:07 PM
Anonymous said…
It's a shame that the book has received so little formal publicity. Much of the content overlaps with A Level Philosophy of Religion courses, which would guarantee a few sales once word got around. However, I can see a few eyebrows being raised by the title. Personally, I quite like the idea of my Sixth Form students wandering around with copies but I'm not sure whether other teachers would appreciate the subversive appeal of your writing.
June 29, 2011 at 9:27 PM
John Danaher said…
Hadn't subscribed to follow-up comments so I never spotted these. Anyway, to me, coverage in New Scientist and Newsweek seems pretty impressive, but a lack of newspaper reviews is certainly disappointing.

Is it the title? I don't know. I'd be lying if I said I liked it. I preferred the original (Intellectual Black Holes, wasn't it) and the metaphor associated with it. I think that better captures the message of the book. And I think like anonymous that the current title might close off a certain class of readership.

Anyway, I'm reading the kindle edition at the moment and enjoying it quite a lot. So that's something.
July 8, 2011 at 10:44 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