Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Monday, July 23, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
Are humans getting better?
Due to our up and coming Tippling Philosopher’s meeting entitled “Are humans getting better?” I thought I would put a piece together to get a few thoughts down. This is an interesting question because it promotes going down all sorts of rabbit-holes. I will try and keep my thoughts tight, however.
First of all, we are not talking about the world, but about humans which keeps things nice and specific. “Are humans getting better?” straight away implies ... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Wednesday, June 13, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
i am pretty excited about tonight's talk on free will to the Portsmouth Skpetics in a Pub group. Hopefully there'll be a good turn out. Free will seems to really be on the agenda at the moment. People are talking about it and it features on programmes such as Horizon, Radio 4 and suchlike. There is certainly an appetite fro the debate.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Wednesday, June 6, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
Recently, William Lane Craig has produced a video, based on an essay in a book he and Paul Copan have edited this year “Come Let Us Reason: New Essays in Christian Apologetics” entitled “Terrible objections to the Kalam Cosmological Argument”. I am yet to read the essay, but I must assume it to broadly follow the line of his video of the lecture “Worst objections to the Kalam Cosmological Argument”.
I have a mild obsession with the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) and am poten...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Sunday, June 3, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
As you may have gathered, I object to the Kalam Cosmological Argument. A lot. On my You Tub video about it, a Christian posted something to which i retorted. I then also sent him my extended post rejecting the KCA. He then sent me a video recently taken of Craig refuting objections by internet philosophers of the KCA.
So far I have only watched 19 minutes of it, but based on those 19 minutes, my opinion is pretty damned low. Craig's problem with the circularity picks on a rather bizarre and i... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Saturday, May 26, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
I have been discussing with someone about moral responsibility with regards to determinism, free will and compatibilism.
Compatibilists often claim, as per David Hume, that the agent has free will because they are not being physically coerced to do something by another agent. However, a hard determinist such as myself will simply claim that that coercion is internal, and not external. The causal process is what makes an agent do something, and this may take its form in other agents, genetics,... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Monday, May 7, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
Sam Harris, apparently, has recently been defending profiling. Without knowing the detail of what he says and the real context, I thought I'd give my tuppence worth in defending profiling in a basic philosophical way. Here is what I have posted elsewhere:
In really simple terms, profiling should be seen in a
consequentialist frame (IF you adhere to moral consequentialism. If not, and
you adhere to Kantian Categorical Imperatives, then profiling is likely morally
bad in and of itself since peop...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Wednesday, May 2, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
I was worried recently when I read the phrase “goal-directed
evolution” in some philosophy writing. This annoys me since it shows what I
consider to be a fundamental misunderstanding of what evolution is and does,
and philosophers should know better,
People often think, incorrectly, that genes, or chromosomes,
or animals, or evolution as a whole are invested with purpose, with agency.
This is patently false. There is no agency in the chemical make-up of genetic
material and evolution, ...
In a remote corner of the universe, on a small blue planet
gravitating around a humdrum sun in the outer districts of the Milky Way,
organisms arose from the primordial mud and ooze in an epic struggle for
survival that spanned aeons.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Thursday, April 19, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
At our last Tippling Philosophers meeting we threw into the hat the questions that we would most like answered. I compiled them all, and combined a couple (which is why number 6 is missing). What do you think? What questions would you think are the most important questions?
1. What one quality / human characteristic should we want to
prioritise in carrying forward out development / evolution?
Basically, so that we may be able to take this discussion
further towards a much-needed conclusion, this is what I think faith is:
I am going to flesh out what is essentially the dictionary
definition so that it is more philosophical and robust. But I am essentially
not redefining it too far beyond what is accepted by the majority of the world....
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Tuesday, April 3, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
I am really pleased to announce that I have another speaking engagement booked in Portsmouth, to talk to the Portsmouth Skeptics in the Pub about free will.
The Skeptics in a Pub is a growing secular movement around the country, and I must say, I am really looking forward to it!
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Friday, March 30, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
In reading Steven Pinker’s How the Mind Works, which has
been a slow burner (both in terms of time taken to read it and time taken to
get into the really interesting stuff), I have just started to read about the
importance and ontology of emotions. I came to a realisation, explicitly, that
emotions are fundamental to our lives. Fundamental by way of giving us the
reasons and desire to do all that we do. In fact, without emotion, we wouldn’t
get anything done, and would undoubtedly not exi...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Sunday, March 18, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
Here is an excerpt from my first book, Free Will? I have always been interested in consciousness and it remains a fertile battleground for many philosophers:
We have touched lightly
on naturalism and the soul, so it would be rude, and a little short-sighted, to
forget to mention consciousness. Consciousness is another sticky bog that perhaps
potentially undermines any concept of determinism. Unlike the soul, we know
consciousness, at least in some way (and possibly...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Friday, February 17, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
I was at a place called Monkey Bizness the other day with my
two 18 month old twins and my partner. Monkey Bizness is a sort of kids climbing
area with ball pits and all sorts. There is a special closed off area with a
ball pit for under 2s only. There is a clear sign on the outside of the area
and then by the ball pit which says children must be under 2 and cannot be
supervised by an older sibling but only an adult.
I say this because this place led me to the realisation that
I cannot st...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Sunday, February 5, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
Thanks to the South Hampshire Humanists who invited me to speak to them about free will last month. They have reviewed the talk in their recent newsletter:
… we were treated to an excellent exposition of the
determinist position from our member Jonathan Pearce, suitably accompanied by
slides. He began by reminding us of the three main positions — Libertarian (we
own the decisions we make), Determinist (everything we do is determined by past
conditions) and Compatibilist (Determinism and Fr...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Tuesday, January 31, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
I love this analogy for the intuitive brilliance and common sense that it makes. It exposes the explanatory weakness of supernaturalism and illustrates that it has been on the retreat ever since the new boy Science hit town. It can be found in many of Richard Carrier's writings, for example here. See what you think.
The cause of lightning was once thought to be God's wrath, but turned out to be the unintelligent outcome of mindless natural forces. We once thought an intelligent being must have... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Monday, January 23, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
For those of you who don't know, philpapers is a resource I refer to a lot because it is so damned useful and interesting. Wiki:
PhilPapers is an
international, interactive academic database of journal articles for
professionals and students in philosophy. It is maintained as a combined
project of the Centre for Consciousness at the Australian National University
(ANU), Canberra and the Institute
of Philosophy in the School of Advanced Study
at the University
of London.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Monday, January 23, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
On Sunday, I was lucky enough to have been invited by the South Hampshire Humanists (SHH) to do a talk on free will in Southampton. This was my first public speaking engagement in the world of philosophy and I was both nervous and excited. There was an assembled audience of only 20 people which was nice and intimate. I talked for about 45 minutes and then did a Q and A session afterwards.
Back some months ago I turned up to the SHH drinks in a nearby pub - a social to discuss pertinent subject... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Sunday, January 15, 2012,
In :
Philosophy
I was wondering today, as I lay there with one of my twins
in my arms, as to whether oughts can be derived from a natural pre-programmed’
behaviour. For example, if an evolved characteristic, such as aggressiveness in
males (I am generalising here, of course) or to want to eat meat, or, if it
could be proven, that it were ‘natural’ to be heterosexual was inherent in a
human, are we then obliged in some way to act in accordance with that ‘natural’
inclination?
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Sunday, December 18, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
Quite often, theists posit arguments, but when they are met with difficulties, they necessitate extra premises. This is the case in Glenn Peoples' Moral argument, as pointed out by
Stephen Law on his blog.
Here is what he had to say about what this does for the likelihood of the argument then being true:
Glenn Peoples' blog has been interesting me lately. He has just out up his version of a moral argument for the existence of God.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Friday, December 16, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
When people claim things like free will is an illusion, as i do, then critics often hit back with "Why expect something so obvious to be false? Why not accept it on face value as you do most everything else int eh world?" etc. etc. This is an appeal to intuition as being a form of (reliable) knowledge.
The issue here is that many, many things in our world are not as they seem. Our interpretation of reality is exactly that an interpretation - and there is no guaranteeing its accuracy. Let me re... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Monday, December 12, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
If a theist or God declares that I ought to do something, say A (such that it is good and I would get
to heaven, but which is supposedly intrin, out of intrinsic duty, then this
scenario seems to render that divinely inspired ought as meaningless:
If I want to go to
hell, then in what sense of the word can it be said that I ought to do A? The
duty to do good is circular so that I cannot say I ought to do good in order to
do good, since this is tautologous. I ought to put oil in the car so...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Friday, December 2, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
During William Lane Craig’s recent Reasonable Faith tour to
the UK
where he debated philosophers such as Stephen Law and Peter Millican, Craig
received a vast amount of publicity for having Dawkins refuse to debate him.
However, what was more important to me was either a severe case of
philosophical amnesia, or Craig has dropped the Kalam Cosmological Argument,
which has been a standard part of his three / four / five pronged attack for
decades. Why, I wonder. Well, let me explain.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Tuesday, November 29, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
I've recently written a new essay which I have posted here in the essay section of the website. Please read it and see what you think. Post any comments to it here. Here is the abstract to the essay:
Abstract: This essay sets out to dispel the myth that the soul can be the originator for free will. I will start the essay by establishing the Cartesian idea of what the body is and showing that Descartes and modern biology indicate that the body is a biological machine. After indicating how Desca... Continue reading ...
At some point in our evolutionary history, pre-humans made an important leap in cognitive ability. We moved from first order contemplation to second order. That is, we went from thinking to thinking about thinking. Before this leap, we were not very much different than most of the animals we’re familiar with — dogs, cats, horses. We know they can think, and they are often very good at solving problems, but it’s pretty obvious...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Tuesday, November 1, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
This, from the review by Wintery Knight, shows the refutation to the KCA that I have been banging on about for a year or so is being used against Craig in debate. Finally. Well done Peter Millican.
"1. There is no evidence that whatever begins to exist requires a cause. All the evidence we have of things beginning to exist are when something is created from rearrangements of other things that already existed.
The closest analog we have to something coming into being from nothing is quantum part...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Saturday, October 29, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
I am going to use an unlikely tool to show the philosophical
veracity of determinism – the belief that we have no free will. The evidence I
am going to bring to the stand is / are Jedward. For those who don’t know them,
they were X-Factor sensations from Ireland – identical twins who are
so similar you just can’t tell them apart. And they do EVERYTHING together.
So, let’s look at free will. I do not want to get into the
intricacies of free will here (you can read my book...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Wednesday, October 5, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
A really important point made here in the context of debating William Lane Craig:
"Additionally he has to posit that the most complex state of being possible, God, was uncaused whilst the simplest possible state, empty space, had to have been caused by god." This, as a wider point, is a really concise and acute way of putting across the idea that an eternally existing universe is no more, and even somewhat less, improbable than an eternally existing God. I like it.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Monday, September 19, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
Recently, the PFA (Professional Footballers’ Association)
has been toying with the idea of employing the Rooney Rule when shortlisting
and interviewing candidates for managerial positions in football clubs in England. The rule demands that clubs must interview at least one black person for manager when recruiting. This rule was rolled out to NFL clubs in the States in 2003 and has since been reformed to include ethnic minorities there. I
would like to look at this from a philosophical poin...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Tuesday, July 19, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
I have written a new essay on Hume's approach to inductive reasoning. Have a read here and let me know what you think by commenting on this blog post. Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Saturday, May 14, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
I was in the garden today and found a dead blackbird chick on the lawn. It was a sad sight, most probably falling out of the nest and not surviving. This made me think about the notion of life, what it is, how easy it is to lose, and whether, if souls exist, you could argue that animals don't have them.
Let me be clear, I do not believe in the notion of a soul, unless (as many do without realising it) define a soul as consciousness. I look at this bird, and got a real sense of the loss of lif... Continue reading ...
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Friday, April 15, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
I've just finished rushing off an essay about vegetarianism and veganism. This was in response to my partner's daughter who has just decided to become a vegan. This inspired me to think about the philosophical implications of such a decision.
Posted by Jonathan Pearce on Tuesday, April 12, 2011,
In :
Philosophy
I am a conceptualist who does not believe in objective
existence. The burden of proof would be on Craig to prove objective existence.
Without this, his whole argument of objective morality falls apart. This is why
he needs to debate a good philosopher who would take him to task on his
foundational assumptions.
There is no such thing as objective morality, because any
idea is subjective. Abstract ideas do not and cannot exist objectively.
It is anthropocentric. Imagine a more intellige...