Four Representative Examples of Roman Attitudes Toward Infanticide
In my recent article on Orphans (What About Orphans, Then?) I mentioned the following: Contrary to lore, the ancients did not just chuck unwanted infants into the wilderness to starve. While “exposure” as this was called was legal until Christians got sterner about it...What About Orphans, Then?
I get constant attempts to salvage something, some desperate crumb of Western moral decency or innovation, that can be credited to Christianity. They always end up mythical, or too trivial to impress. As I explain in No, Tom Holland, It Wasn’t Christian Values That...Bayesian Analysis of Faria Costa’s Theory of Group Agency
Last September I ran a project testing the merits of peer-reviewed history articles, by selecting three articles at random and analyzing their methodology and its underlying Bayesian logic (because, really, all sound epistemic reasoning is Bayesian: see A Bayesian...How A Personal Fear of Death Might Also Be Driving the Anti-Abortion Delusion
I had a thought recently about abortion ideology that I wanted to explore. I used to think the only prime driver of anti-abortionism is literally just Christian patriarchy (predominately in the West at least; elsewhere it might be Islamic patriarchy). In other words,...Dear Christian: You Might Be Worshiping the Antichrist
In recent years I came to a revelation: Christians are actually worshipping the Antichrist. Not all Christians, of course. Consider, for example, the Christian youth who come out to me after a presentation to a church group to explain their disappointment with their...Antinatalism Is Contrafactual & Incoherent
Antinatalism is the view that the human race should let itself go extinct; more particularly, it should do so because that outcome is “better”; and therefore having children is immoral (there is a decent entry on this in the Internet Encyclopedia of...Some Ancient Chinese Philosophy on Why We Ought to Be Moral
When looking for “the objectively correct” answer to the question of why we should be moral, we also should look to what the ancient Chinese had to say on the matter. Not because it is any more likely to be correct than Western answers; but because ancient...Justin Brierley and the Folly of Christianity
This is the final entry in my series on Justin Brierley’s book Unbelievable? Why After Ten Years of Talking with Atheists, I’m Still a Christian. You can read my general summary of this book; where also at the bottom is a TOC linking to all the follow-ups, in...Justin Brierley on Moral Knowledge & the Problem of Evil
“But why exactly do we believe that human life should be valued?” Justin Brierley asks (p. 52). Nowhere in his quest for an answer does he ever resort to asking experts in moral psychology or sociology what science has found the answer to this question...Erik Wielenberg and How Atheists Keep Missing the Point of Grounding Morality
In 2009 philosopher Erik Wielenberg published “In Defense of Non-Natural, Non-Theistic Moral Realism” in the journal Faith and Philosophy. The abstract claims: Many believe that objective morality requires a theistic foundation. I maintain that there are...More Hosing of Thought Experiments: Pereboom’s Manipulation Argument Against Causal-Chain Free Will
I’ve been asked to discuss what’s wrong with Derk Pereboom’s so-called “Manipulation Argument” (or “Four Case”) argument against Compatibilism, which is of course the view that causal determinism is compatible with free will....Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? Dr. Carrier’s Third Reply
This continues the Carrier-Bali debate. See introduction, comments policy, index, and Bali’s opening statement in Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? A Debate with Paul Bali; after that is my first response, Bali’s first reply; my second; and...Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? Dr. Bali’s Second Reply
This continues the Carrier-Bali debate. See introduction, comments policy, and Bali’s opening statement in Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? A Debate with Paul Bali; and after that is my first response, Bali’s first reply; and my second. To which...Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? Dr. Carrier’s Second Reply
This continues the Carrier-Bali debate. See introduction, comments policy, and Bali’s opening statement in Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? A Debate with Paul Bali; as well as my first response to that In Defense of the Scientific Use of Animals, and...Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? Dr. Bali’s First Reply
This continues the Carrier-Bali debate. See introduction, comments policy, and Bali’s opening statement in Should Science Be Experimenting on Animals? A Debate with Paul Bali; as well as my first response to that In Defense of the Scientific Use of Animals....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.
