Since it looks like this subject would benefit from its own thread, here it is.
Sunday, 31 August 2014
In the "everything requires a cause" thread especially, and also to some extent in other threads, there have been some rather egregious comments (many from Flynn, but he's far from the only offender) indicating complete ignorance of particle physics or nuclear physics. This post is for pointing them out in the comments, and supplying corrections (and/or appropriate mockery).
(Errors primarily caused by adherence to Aristotelian physics can go in the other thread.)
Friday, 29 August 2014
Given the boringness of other recent threads, I thought we might try an experiment.
The rules of this game are:
- Quote (preferably with link) to some particularly egregious Aristotelian or Thomist claim about cause and effect, formal or final causes, natural law ethics or whatever other obsolete concept shows up. This can be from the SN comments or from any other site.
- State a simple counterexample, either in the form of a physical object or process that violates the claimed principle, or in the form of an equally good Aristotelian explanation of why the opposite result should occur instead.
- Other commenters can then agree or disagree with the validity of your example.
- Please only do one example per top-level comment, and please don't do top-level comments otherwise.
I'll probably do a few to kick off...
Wednesday, 27 August 2014
And today's post is another Feser article, desperately trying to save the cosmological argument:
Tuesday, 26 August 2014
Saturday, 23 August 2014
Wednesday, 20 August 2014
Today's post, plumbing new depths of wrongness: