There's a talk I gave as an avatar on moral and religious education available here. It is based on my book The War For Children's Minds. About 50 mins long. Obviously the book goes into more detail. This is merely a short taster...
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...
Comments
An authoritarian believes that some external agent should dictate the operating parameters of an individual. Does that believer also accept, that it is I who should define those parametric delimiters? I once heard a mother, who had cracked it, talking to her offspring. She issued directives. But had taught her infant to respond with the simply beautiful query: “Because?”
Why not a simple set of universal “laws” that all religions, science, and even Asimov himself might subscribe to. The “Species Law” perhaps.
p.s. Richard is in the wrong station of your cross. Because he blanks questions that he has never asked of himself.
p.p.s. Next Big Question time. Please ask Nicky to back off the volume on the lady with hers cranked up to 11. (Shout, and they will better understand?)