http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

Nothing much happening here, but you’re welcome to come over and read the latest there.

according to P, it doesn’t matter what the content of a belief is, just so long as the mechanism is working.

Right. But the chameleon whose belief about the correct way to flick out its tongue to catch a flying insect is false won’t last long.

P is correct that the belief doesn’t have to be correct … but it does help.

The core of P’s argument is about the relationship between belief and action. Beliefs have two things, mechanism and content. Now, as your chart shows, it just so happens that the content matches the action. But naturalism conjoined with natural selection has no explanation for this. Belief content is an abstract entity to be distinguished from mechanism. It has no causal powers. Thus it cannot be a factor in natural selection. It’s the mechanism that does the work. And, according to P, it doesn’t matter what the content of a belief is, just so long as the mechanism is working.

Here’s something that might help: zombie “beliefs.” Imagine a philosophical zombie with no conscious mind, but a brain with all the mechanical/biochemical functions we have. That zombie wouldn’t have belief contents as we do, though it’s brain’s mechanism would function. We can tell an evolutionary story of this zombie’s origin terms of mere biochemical function, without mentioning beliefs once.

So on naturalism/materialism, we have no explanation of why contents of beliefs are matched with survival.

Plantinga, true, does mention the possibility of our belief contents being somehow causally involved in our survival (which is in no way implied by naturalism, given the above); this is where he mentions the far-out examples of false beliefs producing survival behavior. If Plantinga is right, then true contents are still not required for survival. Now it just so happens that our contents are matched with survival. But unguided natural selection has no explanation, as other content combinations could also lead to survival.

If homosexuality were to be correct among our species, the universe would of made sure that reproduction was possible through homosexuality.

(1) This has nothing to do with morality. (2) Hundreds (perhaps thousands) of animals have homosexuality, and it hasn’t made any of them extinct.

don’t give me the speech about how it’s right and should be accepted as normal. It’s not, and we all know it.

I’m giving you a speech arguing that it’s natural (rather than abnormal), like left handedness. It doesn’t hurt anyone, so who cares if someone else is homosexual?

it would of been impossible for human life to continue existing if the human was meant to be homosexual.

I’ve written a post that responds to most of your points at the new site. Give that post a read and comment there (this site is a dead end now).

Christians are not persecuting anyone.

Well, at least some of them are standing in the way of people who love each other and want to get married. (Seems to me that there are better ways to spend their time, particularly from a PR standpoint.)

The term Marriage is ordained by God not gov’t.

Let’s be clear about what grounds laws here. Religion in the US has the freedom it has thanks to the US Constitution.

Only God can sanction marriage and changing the meaning through gov’t doesn’t ordain it.

God is cool with polygamy. I gotta disagree there.

There is absolute truth.

Oh? I’ve seen no evidence.

BTW, the blog is ended here. Its new home is:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

You’re welcome to come over and participate there.

Thanks for your input. The blog has moved: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/. You’re welcome to come on over and see what’s new.

Best regards,
Bob

I almost feel embarassed for those who walk around with old traditional thought, centuries removed from the common era to still believe in things they cannot answer. Adults who have had jesus and god slammed down their throats in their youth but never told how to defend it. You can’t. You were never taught how. So when someone says there is no such thing as gods, the ignorance response is has the disbeliever do the work. No! That’s the point. You can’t delclare gods or anything exists unless you’ve used the scientific method to prove it. Which obvioulsy all Christians Catholics and dumbasses have already done. You say God, and I say show me.
You don’t punish people for challenging truths, you show it to them.
All anyone can do is show the truth and let others interpret it. What Aquinas failed to do is start with what god was. God is real is not science. It’s a claim.

Don’t stop at believing. That’s just a small step in the process of truth.
Research God over and over then show him or her or it to us all, and we all shut up. That is if you’re a real Christian or Catholic. Too many of you are now fake. You don’t do what the bible tells you and you make up life as you see fit.
And that prohibits you to study God like those before you did. So you can’t even prove god exists because you can’t prove you’re a Bible Christian/Catholic. You’ve broken the rules. You’re modern-day christians. What the f is that anyways? Sex before marriage? Sin sin sin. And then God forgives you? No wonder. You had to change God because get ready for it, you f’ing evolved. You realized God did not kill or send you to hell for giving into urges while you stood infront of his presence and declared your love for the tenth woman you’ve had sex with. Right. God sent you on a path that involved the holiest of pleasures, sex, only to let you do it over and over without punishment until what made it right was asking for a hand in marriage with last person you decide to have sex with? Rediculous.

Which is further proof that gods do not exist. None of us would change the rules of the bible if we feared someone punishing us for doing so. Obvious you aren’t being punished.

Let’s remember people, these are proofs based on why you should BELIEVE in god. Mathematical proofs can be easily experimented and proven correct.
I can’t experiment Aquinas’ proofs. No one can. Because thoughts have no mass. To conduct experiments on a proof of god would be freezing/stopping a thought in someone’s brain and examining it. But that’s impossible since thoughts have…… NO MASS! THERFORE GOD HAS NO MASS. GOD DOES NOT EXIST!

I was never taught at any level of education that if I believed something existed I should do the lazy thing and make everyone else my bitch by simply stating “prove to me it doesn’t exist.”
That’s dumb. And horribly unproductive.
“Hey I walked on water once. And I can prove it. But don’t bother asking me because even though you weren’t there to witness it you have to believe it because apparently some god gave me the power to do it. And deargod, don’t ask to proof of this god who gave me the powers, that’s absurd. God works in mysterious ways, so don’t be skeptical about mysteries. They only come from him, somewhow. God breaks all physical properties. He is neither there or here, but everywhere, but I really don’t know any of this because God works on levels beyond human comprehension. But I know something about God because I believe in him. You know nothing about God because you simply don’t believe.”
Now who sounds stupid……

Star Wars:
“Who’s the fool? The fool or the fool who follows?”
God was a fool, thus we……….

Sounds like a difficult process. I’m sorry to hear of your loss.

I support your right to tell your story and argue whatever you think best on the abortion issue. What I disagree with is your imposing your views on the rest of the country by law.

The blog has moved. C’mon over to the new location:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

Trust me, I will never allow this to happen again. I broke up with the evil woman, even though she claimed she was having regret and remorse, and I hope it scars her for life. She deserves as much sadness as she can have, because of the life she took. Now, I refuse to date any murderers, so even if another HAPPY accident comes along, I will not have my child stolen from me without my knowledge or consent.

Maybe you shouldn’t make stupid assumptions about people you don’t know before you comment.

(The new site is here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/. C’mon by sometime.)