I have an essay partly done on Intelligent Design, but instead of finishing it for this week I decided to spend my time responding to a fascinating article that a reader pointed me to. This was in response to my essay on Free Will, Determinism, and Culpability (take a look at the comments section both for the article and for my over-long response). The article was primarily addressing the “problem of evil,” which is certainly a different argument from the one that I made, but it nonetheless directly analyzed many of the points that I went into, and provided an interesting rebuttal to my position. Ultimately, I was not convinced. The author seemed to argue essentially all the way through to what should have been the same conclusion that I drew, but then threw rationality out the window on a single point. The tortuous attempts at logic on that one point really seemed to me to illustrate that the conclusion was driving the argument rather than the argument determining the conclusion.
It may not be a popular decision for lurkers on my blog for me to respond to this article rather than composing a new essay; however, since my main goal for this website is to engage with people that can teach me where my arguments are weak or faulty, I think it is more in keeping with that purpose for me to respond as I did.
Next week I will hopefully have my post on Intelligent Design ready. As always, thanks for reading!