Advertisement · 728 × 90

Posts by Benjamin Blake Speed Watkins

Anselm is right not because inconceivability is itself a great-making property, but because, in any possible world, excellence that surpasses our comprehension is surely greater than any excellence merely within it, and God is supposed to be “that than which no greater can be conceived.”

7 months ago 2 0 0 0

Lord, not only are You that than which a greater cannot be conceived, but You are also something greater than can be conceived. For since it is possible to think that there is such a one, then, if You are not this same being something greater than You could be conceived.

#Anselm

7 months ago 0 0 1 0

Suppose Anselm is right that maximal greatness entails that God’s excellence necessarily surpasses all finite human conception. Theists cannot coherently claim that:

(1) God exists.
(2) God is comprehensible—we can conceive of God’s nature.
(3) God is that than which no greater can be conceived.

7 months ago 1 0 2 0

Since miracle reports are spread across many religions, with no single tradition exceeding all others in miracle reports, it follows that most religious miracle testimonies are false. Hence, the false positive rate for religious miracle testimony is not low but middling to high.

7 months ago 0 0 0 0

Given that traditional religions are mutually exclusive, at most only one can be true. The point of miracle testimony has historically been to establish the truth of the religion it supports, so if that religion is not true, then its miracle testimony is false.

7 months ago 0 0 2 0

When faced with miracles we readily dismiss; we recognize them as the result of credulity, piety, and love of wonder—their falsehood is no greater a natural impossibility. But the Gospels differ only in degree, not in kind. It’s easier to see the mote in thy brother’s eye than the beam in thine own.

7 months ago 0 0 0 0
Preview
Can’t take it with you I am in hospice care and reflecting a lot on what a good life is.

Latest post. Don’t know how many I have still in me

helendecruz.substack.com/p/cant-take-...

10 months ago 645 158 60 42
Post image

There are big “if you don’t struggle, it will hurt less” vibes radiating from this.

🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩

1 year ago 6 0 0 0
Post image

Had a great time celebrating this lovely lady’s birthday.

1 year ago 3 0 0 0
Advertisement

We could have had less wealth inequality, leadership on the world stage, and democratic norms and institutions, but instead we got trade wars, oligarchary, and Putin’s useful idiots. We are so cooked.

1 year ago 4 1 0 0
Post image Post image

Who wore it better? Rubio or Stańczyk?

1 year ago 3 0 0 0
Post image

Fun Fact: Lucretius’ “On The Nature of Things” is “Metal.” 🤘🏻

1 year ago 34 7 5 1
Post image Post image

Happy Valentine’s Day to the woman of my dreams and the mother of our children. 😘

1 year ago 1 0 0 0

“Is the world considered in general, and as it appears to us in this life, different from what a man or such a limited being would, beforehand, expect from a very powerful, wise, and benevolent Deity? It must be strange prejudice to assert the contrary.” (DNR, 11.4)

1 year ago 2 0 1 0

The question is not whether or not you love your wife. You surely do. Nor is the question whether or not you are limited in power. You surely are. Rather, the question is one best articulated by David Hume:

1 year ago 1 0 1 0

A mighty God could stop it, could ease their agony, yet it moves on in blood and silence without end, swallowed by the indifferent sky. And so, the truth settles in, as cold and unyielding as stone: there is no God. There never was.

#RealAtheology

1 year ago 3 0 1 0
Post image

The world is a place where pain lingers, untended. A loving God would end such suffering, but it persists—babies wail with hunger, animals are torn apart in the wild, and the sick die in their solitude. The earth is full of grief that has no cause, no justice.

1 year ago 4 0 2 0
Advertisement

The album is a masterpiece

1 year ago 0 0 0 0

I’m here for this discussion!

🍿

1 year ago 3 0 0 0

(A) Minds lack spatial location.
(B) Bodies have spatial location.
(C) Minds and bodies causally interact.
(D) What lacks spatial location cannot causally interact with what has spatial location.

All x4 claims cannot be true. We must give up at least one. But which one? I say give up (A).

1 year ago 2 0 8 1

✅Superman
✅Rachel Brosnahan
I’m pumped.

1 year ago 1 1 0 0
A framed picture of a woman in a short skirt sitting with her legs apart in a suggestive pose while smoking. The text around the image says "Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant"

A framed picture of a woman in a short skirt sitting with her legs apart in a suggestive pose while smoking. The text around the image says "Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant"

I have this artwork in my house and I'm not even sorry

1 year ago 148 16 11 6

I am past scorching; not easily can’st thou scorch a scar.

—Captain Ahab

1 year ago 0 0 0 0

Wonderful picture!

1 year ago 7 0 1 0
Post image

#barbie #swwlds

1 year ago 420 65 10 1

I remember this one. Great discussion!

1 year ago 1 0 1 0
Advertisement
Ontology and materialism | Daniel Kaufman & Massimo Pigliucci [Sophia]
Ontology and materialism | Daniel Kaufman & Massimo Pigliucci [Sophia] YouTube video by NonzeroClips

From back in the old podcast days: a conversation with Massimo Pigliucci about ontology and materialism.

#philsky

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfFW...

1 year ago 5 2 1 0
Post image

Haters gonna hate

1 year ago 11 1 0 0