The very idea of a noncomputable universe creates considerable anxiety among not a few cosmologists and mathematical theorists. This brief paper offers some suggestions as to why noncomputability constitutes a threat to a certain philosophical mentality.

The late I. J. (“Jack”) Good, a British mathematician, played a significant role at Bletchley Park in breaking the German Enigma code and therefore contributed mightily to the allied victory in World War II. Though not a Christian believer, Good’s approach to epistemological issues and his understanding of probability offer valuable insights to those engaged in a serious Christian apologetic. Moreover, Good’s relationship with Marcello Truzzi, critic of naïve thinking in parapsychology and the occult and who directly influenced skeptic Carl (...) Sagan, makes Good of more than passing philosophical interest. (shrink)

One of the perennial defenses of God’s existence is the ontological argument, associated particularly with St. Anselm. Ontological arguments are generally discounted in today’s philosophical circles, but a remarkably sophisticated version was developed by the preeminent mathematical logician Kurt Gödel. This short paper evaluates the major objection to ontological proofs and finds Gödel’s formulation convincing.

When a religious believer presents to an unbeliever evidence on behalf of his or her claims, there may be a response in somewhat the following terms: “Fine. However, I simply do not find the evidence sufficient to make a commitment.” This paper deals with the question of the sufficiency of evidence, that is, what evidence should be regarded as adequate to change one’s religious perspective. Reliance is placed on the legal categories of burden and standard of proof, and a construct (...) is offered to assist in establishing reasonable expectations in the presentation and marshaling of apologetics evidence. (shrink)

The philosophy of religion section of John Hospers’s Introduction to Philosophical Analysis provides an opportunity to see the kinds of endemic error rampant in secular attempts to discount the value of miracle evidence supporting religious claims. This brief article examines Hospers’s treatment in detail.