O / P / Q / R




O




Author: Tim O'Neill (atheist, "Armarium Magnum")

Updates:(http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that Show Jesus Never Existed at All by David Fitzgerald
Location: http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/2011/05/nailed-ten-christian-myths-that-show.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that Show Jesus Never Existed at All


Title: The Jesus Myth Theory: A Response to David Fitzgerald
Location: http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/the-jesus-myth-theory-reponse-to-david.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Nailed: Completely Brilliant or a Tragic Waste of Trees? YOU be the Judge...


P



Author: Roger Pearse ("Preterist Archive")

Updates: (custom google search, http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/?s=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Eusebius the Liar?
Location: http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/e/eusebius.html#cant%20he%20lie
Type: Web archive
Merit: Important
Target: The Formation of the New Testament Canon

Title: Dark ages, middle ages, and how it’s all the fault of the Christians
Location: http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/?p=3578
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Flynn's Pile of Boners



Author: Glenn Peoples ("Say Hello to My Little Friend, The Beretta Blog and Podcast")

Updates: (http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/index.php?s=richard+carrier, http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/tag/richard-carrier/, RSS)

Title: Richard Carrier on the Resurrection part 1
Location: http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/richard-carrier-on-the-resurrection-part-1/
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Why I don't Buy the Resurrection Story

Title: Richard Carrier on the Resurrection Part 2
Location: http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/richard-carrier-on-the-resurrection-part-2/
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: General Case for Insufficiency: The Event is Not Proportionate to the Theory



Author: Nick Peters ("Tekton Ticker")

Updates: (http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier,http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/search/label/Richard%20Carrier, RSS)

Title: Broken Vector's Christmas Whoosh
Location: http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2010/12/broken-vectors-christmas-whoosh.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Santa Lives!

Title: Carrier's Christmas Whoosh, Part 2
Location: http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2010/12/carriers-christmas-whoosh-part-2.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Santa Lives!

Title: Carrier's Christmas Whoosh, Part 3
Location: http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2011/01/carriers-christmas-whoosh-part-3.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Santa Lives!

Title: Carrier's Christmas Whoosh, Part 4
Location: http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2011/01/carriers-christmas-whoosh-part-4.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Santa Lives!

Title: Carrier's Christmas Whoosh: Finale
Location: http://tektonticker.blogspot.com/2011/01/carriers-christtmas-whoosh-finale.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Santa Lives!


Author: John Piippo

Updates: (http://www.johnpiippo.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Richard Carrier... A Suggestion
Location: http://www.johnpiippo.com/2009/03/richard-carrier-suggestion.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Craig Debate Wrap

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Why not argue that Jesus didn't exist?
  • Response: The mythicist case is too complicated and unestablished to get into for a lay audience in a short amount of time.

Title: Bill Craig - Richard Carrier Debate (Listened to...)
Location: http://www.johnpiippo.com/2009/03/bill-craig-richard-carrier-debate_20.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Craig Debate Wrap

  • Consult:
  • Argument:
  • Content: Claims Carrier "does not have epistemic access to the information Craig has," is "out of his league," is "like a fish out of water," was "unprepared," and claims
  • that Carrier was foolishly trying to debate inerrancy.
  • Response: Carrier was debating the issue of the unreliability of the gospels from a historical perspective and this has nothing to do with inerrancy. If an author is busted on ignoring history for the sake of constructing myth, then the probability and burden of proof changes for a circumstantial case for a miracle in another part of the same gospel.

Title: Richard Carrier Commits the "Pet Analogy" Fallacy
Location: http://www.johnpiippo.com/2009/03/richard-carrier-commits-pet-analogy.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Am Not a Christian

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Carrier attacks a straw man version of Christianity in terms of the problem of evil.
  • Content:
  • Response: As Carrier said, to redefine God as something other than "good" is to destroy Christianity and this is exactly what Piippo does. Piippo doesn't bother to defend his own version of a supposedly "good" god which would better represent how amoral, immoral, and all around dysfunctional the Bible's own claims about its deity really are.


Author: Jason Pratt ("Christian CADRE")

Updates: (http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Jason Pratt responds to Keith Parsons Part II
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2006/04/jason-pratt-responds-to-keith-parsons_29.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5

  • Consult: Spiritual Body FAQ
  • Argument: 1 Cor 6:13a doesn't fit well with Carrier's spiritual body interpretation, and Carrier provides no textual or archeological evidence for his interpretation of belief at that time.
  • Content: Pratt seems to be under the impression that the spiritual body is not a body, seems to think that Paul would be familiar with what is actually going on in terms of seeds and plants, seems to think that Mark and Matthew are opponents, and yet agree that there was a missing body, and that this is a better place to start understanding the early Christian belief rather than in Paul.
  • Response: The textual evidence is provided by Paul himself who says point blank that the body sown is not the body that will rise. What archeological evidence is there of the orthodox interpretation of the passage? Shouldn't we be fair? Carrier does not argue Paul believes in disembodied souls, but rather that Paul thinks he will get a brand new body made of heavenly materials and hence the digestive system is no longer required. It would not have been a valid argument to sell prostitutes in the first temple just because there would be another, or just because Jesus was meant to be the "real" temple in heaven. So 1 Cor 6:13a fits perfectly well with Carrier's understanding of Paul. Pratt seems to be relying on modern understanding of what happens to a seed, when the appearances of what happens to a seed would have been more relevant to Paul's understanding and usage in metaphor form. Matthew and Mark as ideological opponents is interesting and plausible, but ultimately they could both be taking a later legend (part of it anyway) equally for granted and the evidence from the epistles as Carrier lays out in chapter 5 of the ET is much more relevant since it is earlier and we know more about those authors (like Paul) and their arbitrary mystical methods for acquiring certain kinds of truth claims.

Title: A Contra-Positive Deductive Anti-Theist Argument from Suffering
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2009/03/contra-positive-deductive-anti-theist.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Naturalism vs. Theism: The Carrier-Wanchick Debate (2006)

Title: Commentary on A Contra-Positive Deductive Anti-Theist Argument from Suffering
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2009/04/commentary-on-contra-positive-deductive.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Naturalism vs. Theism: The Carrier-Wanchick Debate (2006)


Author: Chris Price ("Layman," and "Christian CADRE")

Updates: (http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Paul's Belief in a Bodily Resurrection
Location: http://www.christianorigins.com/resbody.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: General Case for Spiritual Resurrection: Evidence Against Resurrection of the Flesh

Title: The Miracles of Jesus: A Historical Inquiry
Location: http://www.christianorigins.com/miracles.html
Type: Web article
Merit: Important
Target: Kooks and Quacks of the Roman Empire: A Look into the World of the Gospels

  • Argument: Price: "...there is a pattern here. A Jewish leader arises, claims to be the Messiah, and promises to do miracles. The Jewish leader is stricken down, the followers abandon the cause, and no miracles are reported. This is the opposite of what happens with Jesus. Jesus is stricken down, but followers continue with his mission. His followers and non-followers alike preserve multiple traditions about Jesus' miracle working. Accordingly, Carrier's article does more to add to the uniqueness of the reports of Jesus' miracles than he does to counter them." "Carrier's comments highlight the incongruity of comparing these pagan shrines and healing gods with the Gospels' presentation of Jesus. He is referring to "centuries" of traditions accumulated around a Greek god of healing, not one man's actions in a set period of time." "Even if we take Carrier's arguments at face value—that the ancients were more gullible than we are today—this only adds to the impressiveness of the reports about Jesus. If people were so gullible, why did Jesus leave such a stronger tradition about his miracle working than any other figure of his time?"
  • Response: Price's argument presupposes that all bogus messiah's will be equally unsuccessful. Why not "trial and error" between the whole lot of them where one of them happens to be saying the right thing, at the right time, in the right place, and duping the right people to the extent a grander mythology snowballs around him or in his wake? Perhaps it's unique in its own way, but every religion is unique for something.

Title: Is The Acts of the Apostles Dependent on Josephus?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2004/10/is-acts-of-apostles-dependent-on.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Luke and Josephus


Title: Faith Under Fire: Richard Carrier and William Lane Craig Debate the Resurrection of Jesus
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2004/10/faith-under-fire-richard-carrier-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Faith Under Fire

Title: According to Alan Segal, recommended to me on the subject by Richard Carrier, Carrier is Wrong: Paul Believed in a Bodily Resurrection
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2005/02/according-to-alan-segal-recommended-to.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About what the Sadducees Believed?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/01/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-what.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5

  • Consult: Spiritual Body FAQ
  • Argument: Price claims that Acts 23:8 has been misinterpreted by Carrier to mean the Sadducees didn't believe in any spirits or angels. He says they accepted the 5 books of Moses which have many angels, and that the best interpretation is that the Sadducees denied all possible versions of resurrection including spirit form.
  • Content:
  • Response: Price might be correct, but it seems like nitpicking. Carrier's general point is that there is diversity of Jewish belief at the time and even if Price is correct, Carrier's important conclusion still holds. Further, just because a religious group accepts the 5 books of Moses doesn't mean they interpret them how we might expect. Plenty of Christians believe in the inerrancy of Genesis and Exodus, but don't believe it teaches young earth creationism, for example.

Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About what the Herodians Believed?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/01/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-what_21.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5

  • Consult: Spiritual Body FAQ
  • Argument: Herodians were more likely political supporters of Herod and not even a religious sect who believed Herod was the Christ. The many sources Carrier mentions are all too late to have any special access to the correct information and probably rely on the spurious "Against All Heresies." Price claims Josephus spends plenty of time describing the Herodians but never mentioned the messianic nature of their group.
  • Content:
  • Response: Theologician and Price both agree that there is plenty of early Jewish diversity of religious beliefs (even though Price seems to argue that important scholars concluded otherwise based on extensive immersion in Jewish texts), and Carrier allows for both the most extreme and the minimalist approach. He specifically says, "who appear to have believed Herod the Great was the Christ" as though there is some room for doubt.

Title: The Assumption of Moses
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/01/assumption-of-moses.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong about the Scribes?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/02/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-scribes.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong about the Qumran Community?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/02/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-qumran.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About The Translation of Paliggenesia in Philo?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/02/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5

  • Consult: Spiritual Body FAQ
  • Argument: Price: "the secondary source [F. Burnett, "Philo on Immortality: A Thematic Study of Philo's Concept of paliggenesia," CBQ 46 (1984), pages 447-70] relied on by Mr. Carrier contradicts his translation. Philo refers to rebirth or regeneration as the process of the soul escaping the dead body. I could find no support for Mr. Carrier's translation in the New Testament, the Apostolic Fathers, the LXX, or Josephus. Philo does not appear to refer to resurrection linguistically or conceptually."
  • Response: In any event, the note is not crucial to Carrier's main argument.

Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About What Philo Believed?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/04/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-what.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About Paul and the Pharisees?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/09/is-carrier-wrong-about-paul-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About Origen and Paul?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2007/03/is-carrier-wrong-about-origen-and-paul.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: What is the Deal with Anthony Flew's Conversion to Theism?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2007/11/what-is-deal-with-anthony-flews.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

Title: Plutarch and Richard Carrier's "Kook and Quacks"
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2008/03/plutarch-and-carriers-kook-and-quacks.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Kooks and Quacks of the Roman Empire: A Look into the World of the Gospels

  • Argument: Plutarch writes 500 years after the events he is chronicling and hence is not comparable to the gospels which even if dated "late" are still much closer to the alleged events.
  • Response: Price misrepresents the nature of Carrier's comparison. Here's the rest of the Carrier passage that Price fails to quote: "What is notable is [...] that [Plutarch] felt it was necessary to make such an argument at all. Clearly, such miracles were still reported and believed in his own time." [emphasis mine]

Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong About Romans 8:11 and Bodily Resurrection?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2008/07/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-romans.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Dr. Richard Carrier Wrong about the End of the World?
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2008/09/is-dr-richard-carrier-wrong-about-end.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5


Title: Is Richard Carrier Wrong about the End of the World? (Part 2)
Location: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2009/02/is-richard-carrier-wrong-about-end-of.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond The Grave, chapter 5

  • Consult: Spiritual Body FAQ
  • Argument: Price claims that Carrier misrepresents other passages besides Paul in the NT that support the notion that the early church believed the world would be destroyed and replaced with a new one.
  • Content: Quotes half a footnote on page 211 of the ET though not the lengthy list of other references provided in the rest of the footnote other than 2 Peter 3:5-13 to point out that they didn't think the Flood destroyed the whole world, uses Discourse on the Resurrection by Bishop Methodius to reiterate the traditional understanding of the continuity between worlds, 1 John 2:15-17 to show that it couldn't mean the whole world was destroyed if it is a gradual metaphor, Heb. 12:26-29, 13:14 only to merely assert Paul has no comparable Platonic ideas to what is found in Hebrews, uses Luke T. Johnson's Hebrews, A Commentary, pages 335-36 to try to spin the passage a different way.
  • Response: The main theme of the response appears to be a misrepresentation of Carrier's view on Paul's doctrine (though the quoted aspect of Carrier's footnote "the present world would be annihilated and replaced with a new one" could be more clear on that count if I am correct). Obviously Carrier says that Paul says there is still some continuity on the inward sense (or else there is no you!), though the outer layer gets totally replaced (similar to what might happen in a global Flood with newly deposited sediments). It is a metaphor and metaphors aren't necessarily perfect. Paul would have to believe the earth was a living soul (like Gaia, or something) in order for it to be 100%. As it is, the kernel/shell analogy would seem to be a more literal transfer to the earth destruction scenario.


Q




R




Author: Randal Rauser

Updates: (http://randalrauser.com/tag/richard-carrier/, RSS)

Title: The End of Christianity? A Skeptical Review (Part 3)
Location: http://randalrauser.com/2011/08/the-end-of-christianity-a-skeptical-review-part-3/
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target:


Author: ("The Refiner's Fire")

Updates: (custom google search)

Title: An Open Letter to Atheists
Location: http://therefinersfire.org/atheist_richard_carrier.htm (see also http://www.conservapedia.com/Richard_Carrier)
Type: Web article
Merit: Lame
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story



Author: Victor Reppert ("Dangerous Idea")

Updates: (DI1, http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Updated reply to Carrier
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2005/03/updated-reply-to-carrier.html and http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2006/12/updated-reply-to-carrier.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument:
  • Content:
  • Response: The "unbridgeable chasm" between "genuine reason" and simulated reason is indistinguishable from a fallacy of composition. See Reply to Reppert.

Title: Dialogue with Carrier Part I
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2005/03/dialogue-with-carrier-part-i.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Carrier's bit on Pyrrhonian skepticism is a puzzling side track. We have to use arguments to even establish PS, and there the conversation is meaningless.
  • Content: Gives some difficult quotes from Carrier, clarifies the purpose of his work in contrast to Carrier's evaluation (again), and decides that Carrier is too rigid of a foundationalist to make any sense.
  • Response: I tentatively agree with Reppert and think the focus of the debate (while perhaps technically accurate) is unfruitful, but then again, Carrier says later (link) this is the least important criticism of the AfR.

Title: Arguments from Reason and Arguments from Consciousness
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2005/05/arguments-from-reason-and-arguments.html and http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/01/arguments-from-reason-and-arguments.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Morality, consciousness, and reason are incompatible with naturalism.
  • Content: Reppert cycles through a moral argument, an argument from consciousness, and an argument for consciousness through reason. He merely asserts that there are common sense salient features of consciousness (not described) that popular works like Daniel Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" "explains away."
  • Response: Since it is the understanding of morality, consciousness, and reason that is in question, it is merely asserting the magical conclusion to apply a logical proof on top of what has not been defended. Surely if such things are magic, then yes, that's incompatible with naturalism, but has it been shown that they are magic? Hardly.

Title: A secular debate about abortion
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2005/06/secular-debate-about-abortion.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Is There A Secular Case Against Abortion? The Carrier-Roth Debate


Title: The Argument from the Reliability of our Rational Faculties, or Should We Attack Water Balloons?
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2005/07/argument-from-reliability-of-our.html and http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/10/old-post-on-reliability-of-our.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "The possibility that false beliefs can promote reproductive fitness seems impossible to deny."
  • Content:
  • Response: Reproductive fitness can take many paths (all of which are possibilities) in the millions of branches of evolutionary history including but not limited to the applicability of generating a true-belief-finding mechanism in a least some instances. Reppert's argument, if valid, would apply to every other selected trait ever since it would also always be "possible" that evolution wouldn't select for whatever given example one can come up with. So yes, in a technical sense, it is "impossible to deny." It's also irrelevant.

Title: Aristotle, Bush, Rational Inference, and Richard Carrier
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2005/10/aristotle-bush-rational-inference-and.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Irrational or untrue (political) premises do not mean rational inference is not at play on top of that.
  • Content:
  • Response: I'll have to check the context of Carrier's quote, but I think Reppert and Jason Pratt are correct here, though I'm not entirely certain they are actually disagreeing with Carrier.

Title: Carrier on intentionalityunintentional_bullets.jpg
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2006/07/this-is-redated-post-on-carrier-on.html and http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/02/carrier-on-intentionality.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "Can’t we describe my brain, and its activities, without having any clue as to what my thoughts are about?"
  • Content: Seems to be cycling through his favorite quotes against materialistic interpretations of intentionality.
  • Response: We can do the same with a computer. Therefore your desktop is magic?

Title: The Brain Fallacy (or, "The Argument from Mental Causation")
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2006/12/brain-fallacy.html and http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/02/argument-from-mental-causation-third-of.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "I think that a many people fail to see the difficulties posed by the arguments from reason because they think they can just engage in some brain-talk (well, the brain does this, the brain does that, etc.) and call that good. I call that the brain fallacy."
  • Content:
  • Response: Perhaps so, but on the other hand, it seems that its pretty easy for advocates of the AfR to merely be stumped by a complicated issue and fall back on the catch-all non-explanation of magic and call that good despite the accumulating mountain of evidence from neurobiology and computational science that will in no way be impeded by the philosophical misconceptions of supernaturalists. We can call that the magic fallacy, if it needs a label. Or double standards. Whichever.

Title: Why only mentalistic monism or dualism will do
Location: http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/09/why-only-mentalistic-monism-or-dualism.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: If reason is mechanical, reason has not been explained, because in that case no one can say they actually do things because of their reasons.
  • Content:
  • Response: From a physicalist perspective, the mechanics still constitute reason and so all we are doing is understanding our label for what turn out to be sophisticated mechanical "logic gates." It is incoherent to ask where reasons are in the physicalist's account after reason has been explained. The incredulity presupposes the reason we wanted to explain couldn't have been mechanical in the first place.

Title: Flew and the Burden of Proof, or the Presumption of Competence
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2007/11/flew-and-burden-of-proof-or-presumption.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "Atheists, don't accuse people of fraud unless you really do have good evidence for fraud."
  • Response: I agree. Carrier seems too quick to conclude conspiracy from the standpoint of what it would mean from his perspective if he were in their shoes, when it seems just an honestly different perspective is at work. The same thing seems to be going on with Carrier's evaluation of J. P. Holding, David Wood, and David Marshall.

Title: Carrier on Flew
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2007/11/carrier-on-flew.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of, Antony Flew's Bogus Book , and Craig the Annoyed

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "I would not have expected a cutting edge defense of theistic arguments from Flew at this stage of his life, so the fact that he doesn't provide that would[n't] prove fraud."
  • Response: I agree.

Title: Virtual models.
Location: http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/11/virtual-models.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Guwvwp0uSU8
  • Argument: Reppert: "If I see a green pine tree, where is the green thing in my brain the represents the green pine tree?"
  • Content: Quotes Carrier's critique, sets aside Carrier's claim that computationalism has been proven, and focuses on his inability to grasp what things like "green" mean in computational terms.
  • Response: If a computer program is programmed to differentiate between colors coming in from a video feed, where is that recognition in the computer?

Title: Armchair science
Location: http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/12/armchair-science.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "...there is a logico-conceptual chasm between the physical and the intelligible world."
  • Content: Blows off all the data of neuroscience or accommodates it and claims there's a fundamental conceptual problem.
  • Response: There is a "logico-conceptual chasm" between airplanes that fly and every single one of their non-flying parts.

Title: Darek Barefoot's argument from Mental Causation
Authors: Victor Reppert, Darek Barefoot
Location: http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2007/12/darek-barefoots-argument-from-mental.html and http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/darek_barefoot/dangerous.html#causation
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument:
  • Content: Reposts a selection of Barefoot's essay.
  • Response:

Title: C. S. Lewis as Philosopher: Truth, Goodness and Beauty, 3. Defending the Dangerous Idea: An Update on Lewis's Argument from Reason (pgs 53-67)
Location: http://www.amazon.com/C-S-Lewis-Philosopher-Goodness/dp/0830828087/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1245975153&sr=8-1
Type: Book
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

Title: The Unity of Consciousness (again)
Location: http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2008/06/unity-of-consciousness-again.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "...if there is really no one individual who thinks the thoughts we think, then it follows straightforwardly that no one performs any rational inferences, including the rational inferences that have been used to reach the conclusion that the unified self is a fiction."
  • Content: Addresses the claim that the AfR is really an argument from consciousness, alludes to Daniel Dennett's perspective in "Consciousness Explained," quotes Susan Blackmore and Steve Pinker, lays out William Hasker's formalization of the argument, and concludes all the evidence in the world from neuroscience would not impact his perspective.
  • Response: Rational inference is simply not being understood in the loop of physicalist terms and Reppert presupposes the negation of his magic account of inference takes with it what is actually going on. Reppert merely asserts that this isn't a FoC by saying, "But I am not talking about a unity of function that can exist in a braking system, I am talking about a unity of perspective experienced by the thinking agent itself." Yes, he's not talking about a flying machine made up of all non-flying parts, he's talking about a completely different fallacy of composition.

Title: The Richard Carrier Fallacy
Location: http://dangerousidea2.blogspot.com/2008/07/richard-carrier-fallacy.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Important
Target: Critical Review of Victor Reppert's Defense of the Argument from Reason

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "If these cognitive abilities presuppose intentionality, then we are shuffling intentional concepts around and calling it an explanation of intentionality."
  • Content: Reppert is responding to Norma Jean, Doctor Logic, and Blue Devil Knight and politely relabels "the brain fallacy" the "Richard Carrier fallacy."
  • Response:

Title: The Anybody Who Is Anybody Fallacy
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2010/08/anybody-who-is-anybody-fallacy.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: The Christian Delusion

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: "...if being a credentialed Bible scholar is so important, why are you and Richard Carrier speaking about these subjects at all? Neither of you are credentialed Bible scholars."
  • Response:

Title: Pratt on Pervo on Theudas
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2010/09/pratt-on-pervo-on-theudas.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: 7. Was Christianity Highly Vulnerable to Inspection and Disproof? Luke and Josephus (2000)

  • Consult:
  • Argument: Reppert: " [Carrier] points out that this was just means [Luke] was good with public information, as opposed to having a good idea of, say, whether the apostles might have hallucinated the risen Jesus. But he makes no attempt to explain how Acts came to have so much accurate detail, [...] Does he really think this information would have been easy for someone in the second century to get?"
  • Response:

Title: Where will YOU spend Eternity?
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2010/10/where-will-you-spend-eternity.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target: Sense and Goodness Without God

  • Argument: After quoting Carrier's position on naturalistic immortality through mental upload into computers, Reppert says: "...I thought atheists all thought that everlasting life would be boring."
  • Response: Everlasting life worshiping a deity (especially the Christian god) might be boring. Any kind of everlasting life might be inevitably boring, but that doesn't mean we don't necessarily want to live for a really long time until we actually reach that point. Regardless, Carrier, to my knowledge hasn't made the common atheist argument in the first place.

Title: Was the McGrews' article on the Resurrection Not Even Worth Citing?
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2011/01/was-mcgrews-article-on-resurrection-not.html
Type: Blog
Merit: Lame
Target:

  • Argument: Reppert: "If I could get Richard Carrier or anyone else to raise their probability for the resurrection from 1% to 10%, I'd consider it an enormous accomplishment."
  • Response: It may well be a *relatively* enormous and yet still irrelevant accomplishment if the net probability is still strongly against the supernatural conclusion.

Title: Carrier on Science and Medieval Christianity
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2011/03/carrier-on-science-and-medieval.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Science and Medieval Christianity

  • Consult: Dr. Richard Carrier On the Dark Ages
  • Argument: 1. Reppert: "...the major advances of modern science, when it became clear that science could really make a difference not only in the way we view the world, but also the way in which we live our lives, happened in Christian Europe, not Hindu India, or Buddhist Japan, or Islamic Arabia. To say that it would have arisen in Ancient Greece if things had been different strikes me as sheer speculation." 2. Repert: "...a polytheistic view would have made it impossible to formulate, say, a law of universal gravitation. If Zeus is in control of the sky, but Poseidon is in control of the sea, then to me it just wouldn't make sense to say that the same law of gravity operates in both realms."
  • Response: 1. Isn't it just as much speculation to say that Christianity was the necessary element for the genesis of modern science rather than accident? Carrier documents other world views that have the necessary values, so why not historical happenstance given the other elements of "Christian Europe?" 2. If there were different laws for different realms, monotheists would merely comment on their god's creativity. Is the diversity of the living world between plants and animals evidence for polytheism? Second, there's no reason polygods can't cooperate on some things they happen to agree on. The explanatory advantages of either "hypothesis" in either event is negligible.

Title: Defending Carrier Against Me
Location: http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2011/12/defending-carrier-against-me.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Reply to Reppert



Author: ("Ron's Book Corner")

Updates: (http://ronsbookcorner.blogspot.com/search?q=richard+carrier, RSS)

Title: Critique of Richard Carrier’s Essay “Why I Don’t Buy the Resurrection Story”
Location: http://ronsbookcorner.blogspot.com/2009/01/critique-of-richard-carriers-essay-why.html
Type: Blog
Merit: So-so
Target: Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story



Author: Jerry Russell

Updates: (http://caesarsmessiah.com/blog/category/richard-carrier/, RSS)

Title: Reply to Richard Carrier
Location: http://caesarsmessiah.com/blog/2013/11/reply-to-richard-carrier-by-jerry-russell/
Type: Blog
Merit:
Target: Atwill's Cranked-up Jesus