Misunderstanding the Burden of Proof
In matters of knowledge and belief, everything is probability. They who do not understand this, will commit innumerable errors, and waste gobs of time arguing to no purpose. This is especially evident in debates over who holds the burden of proof in any given matter,...The Real Basis of a Moral World
What worldview is better for the world? That’s a question I debated with Joel McDurmon of American Vision just the other day in Houston. I’ll announce the video when it goes live. But one of the matters that came up centrally in that debate was moral...What’s the Harm? Why Religious Belief Is Always Bad
I’m often asked, “Christianity doesn’t really hurt anyone. Why is it so important? Just let people believe what they want. At least in religion. Why should we bother critiquing and opposing belief?” In some cases the question is terribly naive. In others,...Psychology Today: Lame Shill for Medieval Godist Dribble
Wow. Holy Archons of the Ancient Aeons. I just found out that in 2011 the online edition of Psychology Today published an article arguing Thomas Aquinas proved God exists and science can go stuff it. Called “The Scientific Atheism Fallacy: How Science Declares...James McGrath Gets Everything Wrong (Again)
Just this month Bible scholar James McGrath, whose incompetence and dishonesty I have documented several times now (example, example, example, example), posted a really foolish attempt to critique Bayesian history on his blog. Titled Jesus Mythicism: Two Truths and a...Free Ticket Contest for MythCon 2018!
Want to get into MythCon for free, both the event and afterparty? The theme this year is multiple-sides, honest dialogue. So here’s what gets you in: produce a blog, vlog, or podcast that (a) examines any secular disagreement in politics, culture, or society,...How Not to Be a Doofus about Bayes’ Theorem
I’ve been dealing with a bunch of doofuses lately. And I can’t tell if they are alone in their quackery, or if their disease is afflicting anyone else. So here’s a primer on how not to be a total doofus about Bayes’ Theorem. I define a doofus...Plantinga’s ‘Two Dozen or So’ Arguments for God: The Epistemological Arguments
Part 2. I just addressed Plantinga’s ontological and metaphysical arguments (A through I). Here I cover his epistemological arguments (J through Q). Next I’ll cover his moral and other arguments (R through Z). I’ll link those in when they go up. For...Eight Philosophical Questions We’ll Never Solve?
Years back George Dvorsky wrote a popular article at io9 titled “8 Great Philosophical Questions We’ll Never Solve.” It’s interesting because all eight are triggers for the same cognitive biases sustaining irrational theistic belief. Is it true...For the Existence of Jesus, Is the Principle of Contamination Invalid? Cavin & Colombetti vs. Law
A while back, Heythrop College professor of philosophy Stephen Law published a peer reviewed paper establishing that the Gospels actually undermine confidence in the historicity of Jesus owing to their inordinately fabulous nature (“Evidence, Miracles, and the...Why Plantinga’s Tiger Is Pseudoscience
You remember a while back when I dared to call Alvin Plantinga a terrible philosopher spewing pseudoscience? (Plantinga’s Tiger and Other Stupid Shit) Soon after, the Christian presuppositionalist Josh Sommer was having none of that. So he wrote three whole...Timothy Keller: Dishonest Reasons for God (Chapter 8)
I began my critique of Keller’s The Reason for God with an exposé of everything up through Chapter 1, then Chapter 2, Chapters 3 through 5, Chapter 6, and Chapter 7. Here I will cover Chapter 8—and some material he adds in between Chapters 7 and 8. Next...Plantinga’s Tiger and Other Stupid Shit
In the course of composing my critical series of Timothy Keller’s Reason for God, I noticed his reliance on that awful philosopher Alvin Plantinga at a key point, warranted an article all its own. It’s an argument you’ll have heard many times before,...What Is Bayes’ Theorem & How Do You Use It?
Bayes’ Theorem is just a logical formula. Like any logic, it can be used to argue silly things (like Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory trying to predict the future of physics on a whiteboard). Because bad premises, always lead to bad conclusions, even with...Two Lessons Bart Ehrman Needs to Learn about Probability Theory
A reader pointed something out to me that was a fantastic facepalm moment. It’s another demonstration of how Bart Ehrman doesn’t know how epistemic probability works, and not only hasn’t read On the Historicity of Jesus, he doesn’t even know...Get Dr. Carrier’s Latest!
About the Author
Richard Carrier is the author of many books and numerous articles online and in print. His avid readers span the world from Hong Kong to Poland. With a Ph.D. in ancient history from Columbia University, he specializes in the modern philosophy of naturalism and humanism, and the origins of Christianity and the intellectual history of Greece and Rome, with particular expertise in ancient philosophy, science and technology. He is also a noted defender of scientific and moral realism, Bayesian reasoning, and historical methods.
Support Dr. Carrier
Books by Dr. Carrier
Explore C.H.R.E.S.T.U.S.
