Here is an old lecture PPT defining the differences between soft/hard libertarian freedom and soft/hard determinism. There are a lot of discussion points in the notes section. I ususally have a great discussion with the class when I teach this. So, for you teachers out there, feel free to use this material as you wish and, if anything, I hope it helps grow your knowledge on the subject. Feel free to follow the sources cited.
Alas, here is another PPT I’ve used in some of my lectures concerning axiology and the objectivity of moral values. In this lecture I briefly discuss the deductive form of the moral argument for the existence of God, the distinctions between different ethical theories, and the Euthyphro dilemma. I hope you find the material beneficial and edifying. Please follow through on some of the sources cited in the pages and in the notes for further information.
Definitions and distinctions:
Reblogged from Stephen A. Batzer and Evolution News and Views
If you’ve followed the ID vs. Darwinism debate at all, you’ve probably come across the term “Bayesian analysis.” This technique is the skeptic’s friend and it can actually be very simple if informally used. Englishman Thomas Bayes was an 18th-Century Presbyterian minister and mathematician. He asserted that it is rational to analyze new data based upon prior knowledge.
This is subjective probability analysis, the opposite of data analysis “in a vacuum.” Here’s a handy example. Many of us recall being asked by our parents, “If everyone were jumping off a bridge, would you do that too?” I don’t think my mother asked me again after I told her, “Almost certainly. There must be a solid reason that everyone is jumping off the bridge. You probably would, too.”
This down-and-dirty analysis isn’t absolutely reliable, but it is cogent and we all use it every day. People commonly make choices in what they believe and do for experiential reasons. Here’s another example; a bad choice is superior to an intolerable choice. In 2001, intelligent, well-educated adults jumped out of skyscrapers to certain death. Why would did they do such a thing? Because jumping was better than burning to death. When they jumped, fuel-fed flames were working inexorably up through the World Trade Center.
More on his theology: The ideal of the perfect human is in one sense innate in all humans. By living in the cat-imp, the moral reason (faith), we become Sons of God and attain perfection. Even though never named, Jesus is alluded to and made the obvious choice and is the example we are to live by as he lived the cat-imp perfectly, by adopting moral principles as your own and striving toward perfection. Jesus is the historical exemplar of the ideal that God has in his mind and is the example of attaining moral perfection. By regarding as our archetype the Son of God who assumed “sorrows in fullest measure in order to further the world’s good.” Jesus is the ultimate example of salvation.
I have an old PPT I’ve been using in my lectures on the cosmological arguments and I thought I’d share it here for others to use since I’ll be revamping them in the meantime. In this PPT document I discuss the Lebnizian cosmological argument, the Thomistic cosmological argument, and the Kalam cosmological argument. This was delivered to an introductory level philosophy course so it’s certainly not exhaustive. Feel free to use any of the material in your teaching opportunities or for your own edification.
The fundamental question raised by these postulates of special relativity is how different coordinate systems (reference frames) are related, i.e., how one transforms between them. (x, y, z, t) denotes the coordinates of some event in frame S, what are the coordinates (x’, y’, z’, t’) in the frame S’ moving at the velocity v relative to S? But first, a clarification on proper time and coordinate time:
Proper time is time measured between events by use of a single clock, where these events occur at the same place as the clock. It depends not only on the events but also on the motion of the clock between the events. An accelerated clock will measure a shorter proper time between two events than a non-accelerated (inertial) clock between the same events.
In standard special relativity, we often want to express results in terms of a spacetime coordinate system relative to an implied observer. In this case, an event is specified by one time coordinate and three spatial coordinates. The time measured by the time coordinate is referred to as coordinate time, to distinguish it from proper time.
Albert Einstein felt the strong need to affirm Galilean relativity, which applied only to mechanical laws, that he decided to extend it to include electromagnetic and optical laws. He adopted the principle that no physical experiment (mechanical, optical, electromagnetic, or any physical law whatsoever) can distinguish between a state of absolute rest and a state of constant velocity. With the help of the German mathematician Herman Minkowski (who taught us to think in terms of spacetime rather than space and time individually. Einstein introduced a new principle of relativity and revolutionized mechanics.
There are two postulates of special relativity but the consequences are profound.
- Postulate 1 (Principle of Relativity): The laws of nature are the same in all inertial frames.
- Postulate 2 (Constancy of the Velocity of Light): The speed of light in empty space is an absolute constant of nature and is independent of the motion of the emitting body.
read more »
Reblogged from Casey Luskin with Evolution News and Views.
Unfortunately most public schools do NOT teach about the flaws in evolutionary theory. Instead, they censor this information, hiding from students all of the science that challenges Darwinian evolution. But in a perfect world, if the evidence against Darwinian theory were taught, these would be my top three choices:
- (1) Tell students that the fossil record often lacks transitional forms and that there are “explosions” of new life forms, a pattern of radiations that challenges Darwinian evolutionary theory
- (2) Tell students that many scientists have challenged the ability of random mutation and natural selection to produce complex biological features
- (3) Tell students that many lines of evidence for Darwinian evolution and common descent are weak: