I'll Be Speaking for the CFI of Indiana
Plan on coming out if you can this Saturday or Sunday. I'd like to meet my readers.
Click on the image to blow it up.
I'll be speaking about my book, Why I Became an Atheist. If you're part of a freethinking group and want a good speaker I know of one *ahem*. ;-) If you're part of a Christian group and want to see a good debate, ask me!
Click on the image to blow it up.I'll be speaking about my book, Why I Became an Atheist. If you're part of a freethinking group and want a good speaker I know of one *ahem*. ;-) If you're part of a Christian group and want to see a good debate, ask me!
12 comments:
On Saturday the 13th I'll also be speaking for the Secular Alliance of Bloomington, at IU.
I'd come but I'm too many states away.
The IUB event went well! I recommend catching him tonight to anyone who's in the Indy area! (Or inviting him to your town if you're too far.)
Sorry I missed when you were here in Indiana. Maybe next time.
I do hope to read your book, and blog about it once I do.
If you're interested, you are welcome to do the same with my latest. I'd be very curious to hear what you'd make of my combination of skepticism and faith...
James, thanks my friend. I wish I could do likewise, and maybe I can, but I'm going to be doing a somewhat detailed chapter by chapter review of John F. Haught's book. I think he's a liberal like you, although a Catholic. But I'm fairly sure you would like his critique. There are some good things in it too. I'm going to use it to further discuss and clarify the ideas in my book.
*ahem* so far I think I've escaped his criticisms (I'm on page 27 though).
The meeting went well. There's a hunger for good information that debunks primarily the evangelical mind, and secondarily the religious mind.
You can read a write-up of one of my talks here.
BTW BH, agnosticism does indeed have to do with the assurance that a person has when claiming to know something. An agnostic then is someone who is a true skeptic, unwilling and unable to make any affirmative metaphysical claims. Now it can be said that every person who affirms a metaphysical claim will be somewhat of an agnostic, since no one can be certain of any belief system. That's why there are skeptical (or agnostic) theists, as well as agnostic atheists. But the agnostic (qua agnostic) is skeptical about all metephysical claims. Her skepticism is total.
Does this make better sense?
Oh, and BH, that's why I maintain that agnosticism is the default position. Anyone who moves off the default position has the burden of proof, for that person is making an affirmative metaphysical claim.
Boring
John,
When you define terms that way, we're in agreement. I just prefer to completely separate beliefs from knowledge, which leads me to having different definitions among other consequences.
Also, my schedule's full of reading for class and research, but I have the Larmer article bookmarked. I'll send you my response when I've read it.
BH, okay, I'll look for it.
One other thing though, the distinction between knowledge and belief is a blurred one.
Knowledge, after all, is usually defined as "justified true belief."
Post a Comment