The Carrier-Marshall Debate: Index
Christian historian Dr. Wallace Marshall and I have engaged a debate on whether or not enough evidence points to the existence of a god. Background and format are explained with Dr. Wallace’s opening statement. For convenience all entries in the debate will be...Why Life Must Be Complex (and Thus Probably Won’t Be on Mars)
I think it’s extremely improbable we’ll find life on Mars. Yet NASA is “well on its way” to finding life there. Or so headlines told us. The NASA head, Jim Bridenstin, who said that actually meant we were close to being able to test Martian...The Carrier-McDurmon Debate: Which Worldview Produces the Better World?
Joel McDurmon is an odd fellow. Founder of American Vision, he is simultaneously an old school arch-conservative who thinks all taxation is theft and public schools must be abolished, and a passionate, well-reasoned advocate for liberal talking points like that the...The Problem with Nothing: Why The Indefensibility of Ex Nihilo Nihil Goes Wrong for Theists
I’ve argued before that if we presume there was once absolutely nothing, we actually end up with an infinite multiverse (Ex Nihilo Onus Merdae Fit). Which eliminates the fine tuning argument, by statistically guaranteeing any universe will randomly exist, no...The Mind Is a Process Not an Object: On Not Understanding Mind-Brain Physicalism
In a recent issue of Philosophy Now, Christian philosopher Grant Bartley argues “Why Physicalism is Wrong.” In which he exemplifies why it is the critics of physicalism who are wrong. Because Bartley commits basic fallacies in understanding the issue....Dennett vs. Harris on Free Will
In January of 2014 Daniel Dennett, a philosopher and cognitive scientist who is renowned as a world’s leading authority on free will, wrote a lengthy critical review of Sam Harris’s book Free Will (Reflections on Free Will: A Review by Daniel C. Dennett). Sam Harris,...The Argument from Specified Complexity against Supernaturalism
Creationists may have bitten their own head off with their idea of specified complexity. Because there is a case to be made that if specified complexity can exist, the supernatural cannot. The creationist William Dembski famously contrived the concept of...Feser Still Can’t Read
Feser keeps trying. And keeps failing. Indeed, he is now making things worse, by demonstrating he doesn’t even understand what is going on here. To catch you up: I wrote a critique of his book. He wrote a reply. I wrote a response to that reply showing how he...Feser Can’t Read (and Other Astonishing Facts)
I had a good laugh when Feser fans claimed he “destroyed” my critique this week, and at first thought, “Oh gosh, did I get something wrong I need to correct?” And then I read his reply. Face, meet palm. Holy cow. His response is wildly inept....Superstring Theory as Metaphysical Atheism
My last article refuting Feser’s armchair metaphysical arguments for God briefly asserted that modern scientific Superstring Theory actually answers all his requirements for a godless substrate for all reality, and answers the Principle of Sufficient Reason, and...Feser’s Five Proofs of the Existence of God: Debunked!
I just completed a three-part series exposing the laughable science illiteracy of Alvin Plantinga’s “Two Dozen or So” arguments for God. I’ve now had several requests to take on Edward Feser’s Five Proofs of the Existence of God (2017)....Plantinga’s ‘Two Dozen or So’ Arguments for God: The Onto-Metaphysical Arguments
Famously, Christian apologist Alvin Plantinga once posted a lecture guide online outlining dozens of arguments for the existence of God (which was built-out a little bit in a book, and will evolve soon into an edited volume of its own). I’m often pointed to it...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...Barnes Still Not Listening on the Bayesian Analysis of Fine Tuning Arguments
Last month I caught up on an old thread with On the Bayesian Reversal of the Fine Tuning Argument by Sober, Ikeda, & Jefferys (against Barnes & Lowder). Luke Barnes has now thrown up a bunch of responses that are even more bizarre. One of the things I observed...On the Bayesian Reversal of the Fine Tuning Argument by Sober, Ikeda, & Jefferys (against Barnes & Lowder)
Clearing the dusty shelves of old unanswered things. One such is the Lowder-Barnes critique of my application of Bayesian reasoning to reverse the fine tuning argument into a case against God, rather than an argument for God. Actually this is not my argument. It is...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.
