tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24419680483450001222012-02-16T09:20:29.051-06:00Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.comBlogger161100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-56901805766571999692010-04-01T12:34:00.011-05:002010-07-05T23:15:56.296-05:00

"You would not get out of your chair and walk across the room, if Nature had not her bag of illusions."—YeatsUnder atheist metaphysics, there was no Creator, Designer, or even pantheistic personality such as Mother Nature to give the universe any kind of overarching purpose, design, direction, intent, or outcome. Is there anything under atheist metaphysics that could have designed or

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-75463605368544462522010-03-27T13:51:00.005-05:002010-07-05T16:50:49.334-05:00

In a recent debate between atheist Dan Barker and Cardinal George Pell, Barker asserted that the retort, "Who caused God?" is a sufficient refutation of the cosmological argument. Does this even address the cosmological argument? The cosmological argument says that everything within the universe is a receiver of existence; it comes into being and, as such, has a cause. Even if the "chain" of

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-17997933690783822032010-01-22T16:00:00.007-06:002010-07-05T16:51:46.553-05:00

"Pacifism is a serious subject for sweet adolescents, or a way of life for certain eccentric sects; who, it must be noted, survive because they live among non-eccentric sects who reject pacifism and fight to keep those little sects alive and free. ". . ."The international community is a state of nature--a Hobbesian state of nature--with no universally recognized norms. Anarchy is kept in check

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-73437875569178132372009-12-30T04:52:00.008-06:002010-07-05T23:15:56.297-05:00

For too long, I've been mulling over (and procrastinating) a response to a friend who wants to know how the lack of a deity effects her morals, specifically the values of care and respect. Some questions I'm pondering:If there exists no deity and therefore nothing transcendent, then aren't we without any standard outside of evolutionary change by which we can judge evolutionary change? Are

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-61702353908861447372009-11-17T12:52:00.006-06:002010-07-05T23:15:56.298-05:00

I have better morals than half the religious people out there, thank you very much.Atheist voted "No" to the question "Do you believe atheists are immoral?" along with 38,969 other people.Keith Rickert Jr.: Atheists can be moral, they just don't have a raison d'être for being so.Buddhist: Because it's right is reason enough to do the right thing. you don't need some promise of reward or

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-54216742490487197782009-06-15T21:11:00.007-05:002010-08-12T06:09:21.233-05:00

During Eucharistic adoration today, I was daydreaming about the atheist view of love as I heard it from the Atheist Experience television show and podcast. I supposed it would be called a reductionist view, i.e. love is just biology—chemicals, instincts, and the like which Mother Nature has put into us to keep the game going. Yet, according to these atheists, love is still meaningful. I beg to

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-20146871593421404222009-06-11T07:15:00.005-05:002009-12-10T12:23:12.006-06:00

"Modern 'broadmindedness' has a quality that can only be called sneakish; it endeavors to win without giving itself away, even after it has won. It desires to be victorious without betraying even the name of the victor. For all sane men have intellectual doctrines and fighting theories; and if they will not put them on the table, it can only be because they wish to have the advantage of a

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-55064034288439552312009-04-05T07:33:00.007-05:002009-06-20T05:40:18.183-05:00

In my previous post, The New Athiesm (Ho-Hum), I was challenged by a commenter who goes by the the moniker "mathyoo":You claim that Dawkins arguments are fallacious and his presentation of the theist arguments and positions are wrong, yet you fail to provide any examples or your own counter-arguments. What are your counter arguments?Here's a couple examples for you mathyoo:First, a false

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-30334914991272704352009-03-26T16:09:00.005-05:002009-06-20T05:40:18.183-05:00

My comment on this great essay, by Edward Feser, about the new atheistsGreat post. I just ordered your book (from the library :). I used to listen to a lot of atheist audio in my mp3 player in an attempt to find intellectual stimulation--Point of Inquiry, Atheist Experience, Free Thought Radio. Recently, though, I gave it up because their infallible inability to get theistic arguments correctly

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-54443434504692642362008-11-28T13:01:00.013-06:002011-07-31T04:31:27.738-05:00

Per a friend's recommendation, I recently watched director Luc Besson's latest effort, Angel-A (pictured). I liked his other movie, The Fifth Element, which I watched during a time of spiritual wandering (an extended outback expedition for sure). That film stirred up inklings of sehnsucht, most probably due to the aesthetic produced by Besson's heroine (played by Milla Jovovich), which was, for

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-66592198724992021882008-10-16T15:19:00.006-05:002010-07-05T23:15:56.301-05:00

In a recent blog post titled "Those Mysterious Atheists", Maclin Horton wrote about the incompatibility of morality and atheism:Anyone who wants to take a serious look at atheism and morality must ask this question: on what grounds can one say that even physical survival, much less co-operation, altruism, or any other mode of behavior, is good in any definite and permanent way?. . .Evolution

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-41547626296366812802008-10-05T12:39:00.002-05:002010-07-05T16:53:39.350-05:00

This is a good reminder with all the political discussions going on these days.The Five Ways to Respond to an ArgumentThe first three are based on the three essential checkpoints in the structure of any logical argumentTerms: Are the terms accurate or ambiguous?Premises: Are the premises true or false?Reasoning process: Does the conclusion logically follow from the premises?All the check points

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-65826987280555261852008-09-10T12:55:00.005-05:002010-05-02T10:41:18.603-05:00

Dear -----------, Because I haven't seen the video in question, I can't speak to that; but I'd like to respond to some of your thoughts on abortion. I'm pleased to know that you consider yourself pro-life, and that you "clearly feel that abortion is immoral;" but, I have to disagree with your assertion that abortion is not more of a pro-life issue than war or political policies that would

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-83445412911787438192008-07-06T10:26:00.008-05:002010-07-05T16:54:25.672-05:00

I'm the kind of person who thinks he can 'carry his own' in casual debates about philosophy, theology, and Catholic apologetics. But it seems that every now and then I am reduced to silence by an innocent question from someone seeking a real answer. This happened the other day when a friend who is trying to find a church to attend asked me why there are so many Christian denominations. Oh, I

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-16940253399314437132008-04-28T13:02:00.005-05:002010-07-05T16:54:35.729-05:00

I saw Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed last weekend with my daughter. It's Ben Stein's documentary about the discrimination by the scientific community against proponents of the theory of Intelligent Design. The film is engaging and funny, easy to watch and enjoyable, and it effectively tackles the subject matter. Overall, the film exceeded my expectations; however, I think it is guilty of

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2441968048345000122.post-66075373738121261292008-04-16T15:41:00.024-05:002010-07-05T16:54:59.670-05:00

This is my reply to a person from a Pentecostal background who asked, on a secular discussion forum, how one would know if she was in the wrong religion.: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :I commend you for asking these types of questions. It's tough, and even scary, if you've been raised in a tradition that doesn't encourage them. Be at peace. I don't think

Keithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05854814785393574799noreply@blogger.com2