Method of Engagement
1. Present the topic. 2. State the atheist view. 3. State the theist (Catholic) view. 4. Analyze and compare. 5. Ask for feedback. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Essays will follow the following basic format. This way decisions can be made about what constitutes a reasonably sized topic and how we agree to define terms. Look for the following five steps, clearly labeled, in each post.
1. Present the topic.
We’ll take this in short topics and defined boundaries and terms. Topics can be sliced and diced in various ways. For example, we can take a single refutation to a proof of God’s existence and, through discussion, decide to narrow down on certain specifics, such as the meaning of a term. We can also analyze terms that cut across all arguments for and against the existence of God, as well as get into topics about the argument tactics themselves. Whatever it is, I will do my best to state it clearly.
2. State the atheist view.
This is my personal challenge. I want to be able to state the atheist view correctly, even where there may be disagreement among atheists. So, hold me accountable. I have read the work of some of, what I consider, the best arguments for philosophical atheism around today. These are not the so-called “New Atheists” but the ones who came after them, the contemporary writers on the issue who take a serious philosophical approach. I am open to recommendations.
3. State the theist view.
This is also a personal challenge, but it is one I have devoted considerable time to studying both philosophically and theologically as a Catholic convert (who was first a chemist). For the theist view, I will refer to Scripture, Magisterial documents, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and mostly the works of St. Thomas Aquinas as well as the early Church Fathers and ancient Greek philosophers on whom he built, particularly Aristotle. I welcome your analysis of a text if it is different than mine.
4. Analyze and compare.
Then I’ll get out the analytical-intellectual tools and tell you what I think of both views as I’ve presented them. You are totally invited to poke at my analysis but be prepared to clearly pinpoint where I go off the rails in your estimation. Am I biased? Have I used terms equivocally? I am not hiding the fact that I am a practicing Catholic in good standing with the Church and intend to keep it that way. This actually liberates me to take an honest look at the arguments themselves. If I thought there was nothing to attack, refute, or correct in the Catholic presentation, I’d just go on memorizing the arguments. I actually think they have some problems, especially where the philosophy and theology intersect with science (atoms are my thing). Understanding the atheist view can strengthen them or allow us to cut away parts of the arguments that do not work. I consider 99% of analysis to be ongoing.
5. Ask for feedback.
I’ll ask for specific and general feedback on questions or ideas I’d like to understand better. The free subscription does not allow comments, but you can send me emails. Paid subscribers are able to leave comments on the posts and join the community engaging philosophical atheism in a professional manner. They also can access the full archive of posts at any time. Founding members will additionally be invited to private leadership discussions to plan the direction of this project.
I ask you to support this work. I believe in the effort to raise the level of engagement. Please consider subscribing. Click this button to review the options. Thank you!