Blind Watchmaking

Here are some more critical links on the design argument for God's existence.

• Here is an audio interview on Hume's criticisms of the design arg.
• One philosophers' take on the debate between evolution and intelligent design.
• Is our universe fine-tuned for life? Maybe not.
• Wait, can science even judge religious claims, or are they talking about different things? Maybe an inference to the best explanation can help us...
• What about all the "design flaws" in nature? Are they evidence against a supreme designer?
• In the video below, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson points to all kinds of "design flaws" in the universe.

Like a Machine, Only More So

Here are some links on the design argument for god's existence.

• Here is a nice explanation of the design argument, along with an explanation of the ontological argument that we just finished studying.
•  Here's an audio interview with Elliott Sober (a philosopher we'll be reading soon) on the design argument:
  
• Here's a long-ish video lecture on the notion of fine-tuning.

10/26 Class Canceled

I'm sick, so Wednesday's class is canceled. This confuses a few things logistically, so here are the changes:

• The midterm will be moved back to Wednesday, November 2nd. 
• We'll be reviewing for it in class on Monday, October 31st.

Think [Tap-Dance] God

Here is some stuff on the ontological argument:

• This article by philosopher Alex Byrne contains the best explanation of the ontological argument I've read.  Here's another good one.
• the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry
• the Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy entry
• the entry on St. Anselm
• Logician and mathematician Kurt Gödel came up with an impressive version of this argument based on modal logic.  Check out a formalization of it below.

Bro-ing Out

Philosophy Bro is a website devoted to summarizing classic philosophical texts in bro-speak.  Recently, P-Bro tackled Aquinas's Five Ways as well as the ontological argument (warning: the summaries contain curses).

Why Is Anything Anything?

The website Closer to Truth has a ton of short interviews with modern-day philosophers (and other smart people) on their thoughts about god. For instance, there's an entire episode on the cosmological argument titled "Did Our Universe Have a Beginning?" and an entire section titled "Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?" Here are some related videos:

• Theist John Leslie says God best explains why there is something.
• Theist Peter van Inwagen believes in God, but doesn't like this arg.
• Atheist Colin McGinn thinks it's a meaningless question.
• Physicist Steven Weisberg says we should wait for science's answer.
• Apatheist Master Shake uses it as an excuse to be lazy.

Speaking of silly jokes, here's one of my favorite responses to the cosmological argument (from Gerald Dworkin's list of philosophy quips:)

When a philosopher announced that the title of his talk was “Why is there Something rather than Nothing?” Sydney Morgenbesser said to the man sitting next to him, “If there was Nothing he would still complain.”

And here's a video on the relationship between philosophy and religion:

• Does Philosophy Illuminate Religion?

Hey, where's the interview with an agnostic? Oh, here it is!

• Nick Bostrom (the author of "Do We Live in a Computer Simulation?") argues for agnosticism

Philoso-felines

Cute cats and philosophy captions? You know I can't resist:

Virtual Dinosaurs

Here's a more advanced version of the Nick Bostrom article we passed out in class about the potentially high probability that we're actually living in a Matrix-like virtual reality. If you get really into Bostrom's argument, there's a whole website devoted to debating it (including a FAQ written by Bostrom).

Of course, T-Rex has read this article, too:

McGurk

Here's a neat video on an optical illusion called the McGurk effect:

My favorite illusions are the ones that still work even after you realize they're just illusions.

New Due Date: Paper #1

Just a reminder that the deadline for the first paper has been pushed back.  It's now due at the beginning of class on Friday, October 14th. 

If you're looking for more stuff on external world skepticism for the paper, this entry on skepticism might be helpful. It's a bit more accessible than other entries in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and it includes several attempts to combat arguments for skepticism, including the fallibilist and contextualist strategies we'll discuss in class on Wednesday.  You don't have to use this source, but if you do, be sure to cite it.

I'm Certain I'm Doubting

Here are some links related to our discussion of René Descartes and skepticism from class.

• Optical illusion time! Here is a pair of collections of Julian Beever's sidewalk art that looks three-dimensional when viewed from a certain angle. That's a picture of one of his creations above.
• The search for truth is tough. Let's get the FBI on the case!
• Here's an audio interview about Descartes's famous argument that he's certain he exists.
• Can we be abolutely certain of math claims like 2 + 3 = 5? This cartoon dinosaur says we can't.

By the way, if you have any links you think I or others in class might find interesting, let me know. And feel free to comment on any of these posts.

Group Presentation Research

Here are some helpful starter links on your topics for your group presentations. I don't expect you to read them all, but you should at least browse them to see what you might be interested in specifically regarding your topic. 

Team Philosophy of Mind
[dualism: intermediate, advanced] [identity theory] [functionalism: intro, advanced] [consciousness: lengthy overview, intermediate, advanced] [what's it like to be a bat?] [zombies!] [panpsychism?] [why are most scientists physicalists? (audio)] [the extended mind] [more topics] 

Team Philosophy of Art/Aesthetics
[beginner] [intermediate] [defining art] [judging art] [music] [conceptual art] [philosophers' views on art]


Team Personal Identity
[intermediate] [advanced] [summary of "A Dialogue on Personal Identity & Immortality"] [identity in general] [Ship of Theseus] [personal identity & ethics] [cool video] 

Pascal's Wager
[beginner (plus lots of links)] [intermediate] [advanced] [fun links] 

Team Faith and Reason
[intermediate] [nonevidentialism] [evidentialism: intermediate, advanced] ["Believing Without Evidence"] ["The Ethics of Belief"] ["The Will to Believe"] [Flew, Hare (reply), & Mitchell (summary)] [lots of links] 

Team Meaning of Life
[intermediate] [religion links] [Camus's "Myth of Sisyphus"] [Nagel's "The Absurd"] ["Love and Death"] [42?] 

Team Rationalism vs. Empiricism
[advanced] [Chomsky's "Poverty of the Stimulus" argument for rationalism] [Pinker for rationalism] [counterexample to Chomsky? (more) (rationalist responses)] [Chomsky's mistake (video dialogue)] 

Team Pragmatism
[intermediate] [advanced] [other theories of truth] ["Believing Without Evidence"] [William James] [James's "The Will to Believe"] [criticism: "The Ethics of Belief"] [John Dewey] [Charles Sanders Pierce] [pragmatist feminism] [Richard Rorty]

Group Presentations

Here are the group assignments. If you're not in a group yet, let me know as soon as possible so we can get you in one.

Team Philosophy of Mind (1st on Friday, December 9th)
Amber C., Ashley, Brenda, Erin, John, Laura

Team Philosophy of Art/Aesthetics (2nd on Friday, December 9th)
Elliot, George, Holly, Lois, Nzinga

Team Personal Identity (3rd on Friday, December 9th)
Ben, Dan Mc., Jeremy, Katie, Nick

Team Pascal's Wager (1st on Monday, December 12th)
Anthony, Dan Mo., Ryan, Steve

Team Meaning of Life (2nd on Monday, December 12th)
Andre, Amber D., Dillon, Helema, Kyle, Manny

Team Rationalism vs. Empiricism (1st on Wednesday, December 14th)
Dustin, Greg, Max, Zack

Team Pragmatism (2nd on Wednesday, December 14th)
Allwell, Blake, Celia, Derek, Tom

During the last week of the semester (December 9th, 12th, and 14th), groups of 4-6 students will present 10-15 minute presentations on specific topics that their members have researched on their own during the course. Students will choose to present on specific philosophical topics that we have not explicitly studied in class.

Each group must present on a different topic. There will be some time set aside in class for groups to research and prepare for their presentations; however, you should also meet outside class to work on this presentation. I will be helping you with your research, but you should research on your own, as well.

Groups are free to choose how to present their topic to the rest of the class. Be creative! Think about puppets, posters, songs, skits, whatever. Part of your grade will be based on how creative your presentation is. Remember, though, the rest of the class will probably not be familiar with the material you are presenting. I recommend incorporating class participation of some form into your presentation. At the end of each presentation, the group will answer questions from the rest of the class.

The presentation is worth 150 points (15% of your overall grade). Except in unusual circumstances, each group member shall receive the same grade. Attendance is mandatory for each day of the group presentations. If you don't attend on either the days your group isn't presenting (and your absence isn't excused), your own personal presentation grade will drop. Each day you don't attend will lower your grade by a full letter grade.

We're All Skeptics Now

Here are some links related to our discussion of knowledge and skepticism from class.

• What are the philosophical implications of the movie The Matrix?
  
• Here's a summary of a cool argument (pdf) for an interesting version of skepticism I call "unsettled debate" skepticism. There's also an entire book on it.
  
• I recently interviewed the author of that book for the Owning Our Ignorance club. Here's the audio interview.
  

K = JTB?

I wonder whether Plato would agree with T-Rex's analysis of knowledge:


In panel 5, Utahraptor is bringing up a Gettier case counterexample to the claim that knowledge = justified true belief.  If you're looking for FUN TIMES, ask me about the Gettier problem in class!