Admit No Force But Argument

Admit No Force But Argumen

Knockdown Arguments

Two brainless curs, Alan Brinton and Douglas Walton, have recently had the impudence to suggest that several of my views on argumentum ad baculum are mistaken. While hardship and toil await them in this life and eternal damnation in the next, punishment begins with this paper. In it, I clarify my position, defend my views, and critique their arguments. Last, I argue ad baculum against both of them, threatening both with the loss of reputation, employment, and respect unless they repudiate every objection raised against me and publicly abase themselves

The Contradiction Approach to Solving Problems about Omnipotence

Some philosophers have claimed that the concept of omnipotence is implicitly inapplicable to anything. The well-known “stone problem” is an argument to that effect: whether or not a being can create a stone too heavy for him to lift, there is something that he can’t do, and so he is not omnipotent. Some philosophers have replied that no action that falls under a contradiction lies within the scope of omnipotence. This reply employs what I call the contradiction approach. Many philosophers reject the contradiction approach, arguing that there are closely related problems that it cannot solve. In this paper I argue that, duly extended and modified, the contradiction can solve many such problems and is much more resilient than many philosophers think. However, the approach is not itself omnipotent and ultimately must give to a more metaphysical approach in order to salvage the possibility of omnipotence

Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus

Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Clau