New Post: Fine-Tuning Part I

I have just posted part one in a planned two-part series of essays on the so-called Fine-Tuning Argument. As I was writing my response to this argument, I realized that the supposedly fine-tuned parameters that are part of this argument really fall into two broad categories: those that are so obviously not fine-tuned that claiming they are should be embarrassing, and those about which there is legitimate, interesting debate about. Since the response was getting quite long as I wrote it up, I decided to split the essay in half based on these two broad categories. So I now present, The Fine-Tuning Argument, Part I: Parameters that Make You Say, “Really?”

As always, I welcome questions, comments, suggestions, and rebuttals.

Contemplating the next few posts

I have probably two, maybe three more posts in my series on ethics, which will together serve as my response to the so-called moral argument for God. Before I write those essays, I will probably take a break from ethics briefly to address the fine-tuning argument, one of the two most prominent arguments-from-design.

While I have several other essays in mind to follow those that I just listed (a discussion of the scientific method, a more detailed discussion of evolution, addressing some specific ethical issues such as abortion, gun control, prayer in school, etc.), it occurred to me that even without those follow-up essays I will by that time have hit the major arguments for God.

Am I missing one (or more)? Please let me know in the comments, so that I can get anything I’ve missed onto the agenda.

New Essay (Social Evolution: The Origins of Ethics)

While I am not making this a New Years resolution, I am planning to post more frequently this year than I did over the last couple of months. Today, I am continuing my exploration of ethics by posting an essay concerning social evolution. This is part of an ongoing series that explores ethics from an atheistic perspective. In this essay I develop some thought experiments concerning killing others and explore the implications of various possible rules for when one should kill as a case study in how ethics develop at a societal level.

Moreso than many of my other essays, I expect that readers of mine who are atheists will likely find no new ideas here. I plead patience from such readers, because the clear bafflement of theists who try to understand how an atheist could have ethics at all demands that these obvious-to-us ideas be explicitly stated.

As always, I welcome all comments, suggestions, questions, and challenges about these ideas. Thank you for reading!