Skip to main content

Very Short Introduction to Humanism published


My Oxford University Press Very Short Introduction to Humanism was published on Thursday.
Labels:

Comments

The Atheist Missionary said…
Congratulations. Just pre-ordered on amazon.ca. Not available in Canada until the end of February. Estimated delivery March 2, 2011. Hate to wait that long because I would like to submit a review to Free Inquiry.
January 29, 2011 at 1:23 PM
Fergus Gallagher said…
Suggest add a direct (Amazon?) link.
January 29, 2011 at 3:45 PM
Stephen Law said…
I thought I had, Fergus. Can't you see it?
January 29, 2011 at 3:47 PM
Unknown said…
Excellent Stephen, this will be another great read as your other books. Ordering it now.
January 30, 2011 at 3:40 AM
Paul P. Mealing said…
Just checked it out on Amazon UK, where I procure most of my reading in science and philosophy.

Will probably order it when I've finished my current one, Why Beliefs Matter; Reflections on the Nature of Science by E. Brian Davies, Professor of Mathematics at King's College, London. More than half way through and a very stimulating read.

Regards, Paul.
January 30, 2011 at 6:00 AM
Anonymous said…
Congratulations!

The link is both visible and works from Norway.

Cassanders
In Cod we trust
January 31, 2011 at 9:40 AM
Tim Stephenson said…
Stephen, I have begun your new book. Firstly, most of us who who "organize under the banner of Humanism" have used the capital H for some time. I assume you adopted the small h for a reason? (maybe you explain this later in the book).
February 4, 2011 at 9:19 PM
Tim Stephenson said…
What is the difference between a "non-natural mathematics" and a "natural mathematics". Surely all Humanists are committed to some form of pluralistic naturalism.
February 4, 2011 at 9:39 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
159 comments
Read more

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist
49 comments
Read more

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o
151 comments
Read more