Truth Claims
The Maverick Philosopher is a very wise man:
The point is that for a typical religious claim R and a typical political claim P, there is what I will call evidential parity: R and P are on a par with respect to the question of whether or not there is sufficient evidence for their truth. Therefore, either there is insufficient evidence for both R and P, or there is sufficient evidence for both R and P. What cannot be allowed as true is what van Inwagen calls the Difference Thesis, namely, that religious claims are different from non-religious claims in respect of their belief-worthiness. Accepting the Difference Thesis is just to employ a double standard. One sets religious beliefs a test they cannot possibly pass, all the while exempting our other beliefs from this exacting standard.Also from the Maverick- a Stanford grad proves that HATE is alive and well on the campus and it gets a big soft pass from the media. Apparently in the snot world of big US Universities, advocating the killing people because they disagree with you is A-OK. I missed that memo. It just goes to prove that a university degree proves nothing, no matter the "stature" of the school. Stanford boy's argument is full of piss and more holes than ten pound block of swiss cheese. I can't wait to see his book in the remainder bin at Zellers.
Comments