It’s that time of year again when we all get to sing a round of “Happy Birthday” for Incinerating Presuppositionalism. At sixteen years of age, this blog is eligible for a drivers license… at least in some states. Just don’t cause an accident!
If my goal is to go a full twenty, I’d say I’m on my way. And for those of you who actually read any of my entries, you have my enduring gratitude! Even more so if you comment! You know who you are. (Yes, I do read your comments.)
As I always do on my blog’s birthday, I list out the entries I posted over the previous year. Then this entry itself goes up in the sidebar section named Blog Chronology. This navigation section used to be really helpful for me – for I had always had it in my mind when I had posted a certain entry I was looking for, and this made it easy to find. But nowadays, I have to stop and think “Was that in Year Seven, or Year Nine? Hmmm…. Let me see….” And then I fumble around until I realize it was in Year Four! My blog is more faithful than my own memory sometimes. But I still think these anniversary pages serve a good purpose, so here goes:
478. Incinerating Presuppositionalism: Year Fifteen - March 26, 2020
479. WSIBC: “God and Mind” - April 22, 2020
480. WSIBC: “God and Science” - May 18, 2020
481. WSIBC: Presup Enters Rehab - May 26, 2020
482. Reader Email Backlog - June 28, 2020
483. WSIBC Jump Page - July 28, 2020
484. My Refutation of STB: Ten Years On - August 27, 2020
485. Presuppositionalism and Induction - September 28, 2020
486. Presuppositionalism and Induction: Apologists Courting Hume - October 25, 2020
487. Presuppositionalism and Induction: Exhuming Hume - November 28, 2020
488. Presuppositionalism and Induction: The Humean Condition - December 30, 2020
489. Presuppositionalism and Induction: Thoughts on the Uniformity of Nature - January 28, 2021
490. Anderson versus Materialism - February 25, 2021
In November 2019 – back in Year Fifteen, I had posted the initial entry of my multi-post series examining James Anderson’s book “Why Should I Believe Christianity?” I did not complete this within the period covered in Year Fifteen, nor was that really my intention. But I did complete it in Year Sixteen – I even posted a jump page for this series, probably the longest on my entire blog. So readers can go there and access every installment, if they so choose. I am pleased with this work and provide it as evidence to support my contention that, if apologists think they can vindicate the Christian worldview, they need to take a different path. Judging by the view count of several of the installments, I’m guessing that some readers may think similarly.
In the latter months of Year Sixteen, I began a loose series discussing various aspects of induction and how this amazing cognitive ability relates to presuppositional apologetics. Apologists following Greg Bahnsen and his fellow-travelers have taken Bahnsen’s assertions about induction at face value in a most unself-conscious manner. I admit that I find it gratifying to point this out. Even more intellectually fulfilling is pointing to the conceptual basis of induction as the source answering Hume’s canard. I’ve often noted that Objectivism has the answers apologists wish they could call their own, but cannot, given their allegiance to the primacy of consciousness metaphysics. Since induction is a special interest of mine, I may revisit related issues and continue that series at some point.
My work has involved me in numerous engaging projects over the past several months, some which are more complicated than first supposed, and some with looming deadlines. So while I intend to keep some activity going here on IP, I’m afraid I cannot promise twelve entries per day. Most recently I interacted with the first of several objections which James Anderson has raised against materialism. I have received some positive feedback on that and am encouraged to explore more of Anderson’s objections in future posts. Let’s see what that might raise to surface!
So here’s to another year of Incinerating Presuppositionalism!
by Dawson Bethrick
10 comments:
Congrats on another fine year. I hope my blogs live as long!
I've compiled all the IP listings into one big page of links here
http://mentalconflux.com/ip/
Might be useful for others.
Hey Dawson!
You wrote: "At sixteen years of age, this blog is eligible for a drivers license."
Ha! And I'm glad to hear that you plan to keep motoring on for a few more years!
Happy anniversary!
Ydemoc
Wow! Has it really been 16 years.
Justin!! You're back! This made my day! Very happy to see your comment!
@Bahnsen Burner. Yes I am back. I am going to be active online again. I relaunched my blog. However I suspect a more profound impact will be accomplished by producing video on youtube. Sadly people don't much read blogs anymore and well I am not that good of a writer. Even after a great deal of practice I will never achieve the level of Proficiency you display. Anyway I will be posting now and again over here. Mostly questions I imagine.
Congratulations. What you have done is very important and it is one of the best resources on Objectivism on the web in my opinion. I think I've read just about every entry and there is a lot that I go back to and re-read often.
I really appreciate all that you do. So thank you very much.
P.S.: I don't think your entries are too long. In fact, I'm usually sorry when I reach the end and can't wait for the next one.
Robert Kidd
Thank you for your comment, Robert. I'm glad you find this blog valuable. It is a labor of love! My entries in recent months have not been quite as "long-winded" (as critics often put it) as I have so many responsibilities competing for my time these days. I am a very, very busy man! But I still try to devote some time here and there to my writing.
And thank you Jason MC for the marvelous archive! That's quite a tribute and a handy resource as well! I have bookmarked it for future reference... for those times when I think to myself "I know I've written on that topic somewhere..."!
I see that the initial comment in this thread has been removed. I did not do that. I can only guess that the commenter removed his (?) own comment. But don't panic, folks! I have a copy of it in my own archives.
Regards,
Dawson
Post a Comment