I argue, from premises accepted by every educated person, that there must have been a first human generation, contrary to what Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett have prominently claimed.

In this letter to the general public, received by Think some time ago, God complains that the growth of science has made it progressively more difficult to communicate with everyone as much as he would like. He then apologizes for not anticipating that scientific explanations would always be preferable to appeals to miracles in accounting for strange or unusual phenomena.

I argue that there is an important emotion for which we do not have a name.

Death's inevitability is not in question, but its mystery is one that is equally unavoidable and the questions we are likely to have about what then unanswerable. Traditionally we have tended to be concerned with what – if anything – might happen to us personally after we pass away, but that is not our question here. Rather we wish to contemplate what a knowledge of what will happen to the others in our lives may do to us while we are yet living. If we could know before we die the events that will befall our loved ones and/or our communities how might we react? Would that knowing be a comfort or a curse? Moreover, what might our contemplation on this query teach us about death more generally? Such is our concern in the discussion below.

Athlete Caster Semenya's successes have, in conjunction with her appearance, led to an inquiry. She appeared to have high levels of testosterone; it was decided that she had to reduce them if she wanted to race against other women. I argue that the recognition of the difference between Caster Semenya and her competitors should not result in this outcome: similar differences exist (in all sports), which are accepted as such. It would be inconsistent to focus on this advantage if one disregards others, while the alternative to realize an outcome in which all differences are removed would yield absurd results.

This dialogue presents a substantive account of the nature and aim of ontology.

Over the last few decades, several scientific studies have attempted to measure the effectiveness of prayer in bringing about healing. But can we really test the therapeutic effect of prayer in the same way that we test conventional medicinal treatments? On the contrary, in this article, I present three arguments in support of the conclusion that such attempts to measure the effectiveness of prayer are based on flawed assumptions. One implication of this is that the failure to draw a positive statistical relationship between prayer and healing does not constitute good evidence against the value of prayer.

An introduction to the role of U. T. Place in the development of modern physicalism.

The recent explosion in the discovery of exoplanets and our incipient ability to detect atmospheric biomarkers recommend reflection on the conceptual implications of discovering – or not discovering – extrasolar life. I contend that evidence for intelligent extraterrestrial life is evidence against the existence of God, because if there are intelligent extraterrestrials, there are likely to be evils in the universe even greater than those found on Earth. My reasoning is based on Richard Gott's Copernican Principle, which holds that in the absence of information to the contrary, we should take ourselves to be typical observers.