Creationists believe that the Biblical account of the creation of the universe is literally true. God brought into existence the Earth and all its life forms in just six days. According to creationists, this event took place less than ten thousand years ago (they base their calculation of the age of the universe on the number of generations listed in the Bible).

Creationists have succeeded in persuading large swathes of the general public that their theory is at least as scientifically respectable as the Big Bang/evolution alternative. A recent Gallup poll indicated that about 45% of US citizens currently believe that God created human beings ‘pretty much in [their] present form at one time or another within the last 10,000 years’.

Two states, Arkansas and Louisiana, have even passed ‘balanced treatment’ laws requiring that creationism be taught alongside evolution in all state public schools. It was in Auburn, Alabama, shortly after that state required that a piece of paper be pasted into every biology school text book explaining why evolution is merely a ‘theory’ — and a highly questionable theory at that — that Richard Dawkins delivered the impromptu speech which forms the basis of the following.

Some argue that genetic engineering and other scientific practices are morally wrong because they are ‘unnatural’. Prince Charles took this line in his 2000 Reith Lecture. But as Mary Warnock here points out, attempts to justify the moral condemnation of a practice on the grounds that it is ‘contrary to nature’ are notoriously difficult to sustain.

This article explains the various techniques that psychics can use to convince both their clients and themselves that they really do have occult powers. Tony Youens, the author, regularly demonstrates these techniques, and usually succeeds in convincing his audience of his amazing psychic abilities before he reveals all. On one recent TV show, a person who uses psychics was asked, after a long session with both Tony and a ‘real’ psychic, which of the two had genuinely psychic powers. They chose Tony.

Edward Do Bono argues that while traditional logical thinking of the sort developed by the ‘Gang of Three’—Socrates, Plato and Aristotle—is immensely valuable, it is, by itself, inadequate. In this article, De Bono explains why he believes other, more creative forms of thinking need to be developed as new ‘software for the brain’.

Is it reasonable to believe in God? Many suppose that belief in God is a matter of faith, not reason. Here, Richard Swinburne, Nolloth Professor of the Philosophy of the Christian Religion at Oxford University, argues that there are a number of arguments which, taken together, actually provide good grounds for supposing that God exists.

The year is 2100. Geena is the proud new owner of Emit, a state-of-the-art robot. She has just unwrapped him, the packaging strewn across the dining room floor. Emit is designed to replicate the outward behaviour of a human being down to the last detail (except that he is rather more compliant and obedient). Emit responds to questions in much the same way humans do. Ask him how he feels and he will say he has had a tough day, has a slight headache, is sorry he broke that vase, and so on. Geena flips the switch at the back of Emit's neck to ‘on’. Emit springs to life.

In many academic circles today, Susan Haack observes, we encounter a ‘new almost-orthodoxy’ which distrusts the notions of truth, fact and evidence and rejects such ideals as honest inquiry and respect for evidence. Supporters of this ‘Higher Dismissiveness’, noting, correctly, that ‘truth’ is very often only what the powerful have managed to get accepted as such, draw the mistaken conclusion that those who still speak of knowledge and truth are guilty of naivete and ‘white male thinking’.

In this paper Haack argues that the Higher Dismissiveness is not only confused, but dangerously so.

In this regular series Michael Clark, editor of the philosophy journal Analysis, presents a number of the most intriguing philosophical paradoxes. We begin with The Ship of Theseus.

Thinking Tools is a regular feature that introduces tips and pointers on thinking clearly and rigorously. Here we get to grips with two everyday reasoning errors.

In this article, John Hyman argues that beauty does not consist in mathematical perfection; that Hume was mistaken in claiming that beauty exists only in the mind; that we can discover what is really beautiful by learning to give reasons for our preferences; and that some things in the world are beautiful—probably many more than we imagine.

Many try to justify their moral positions — whether on murder, infanticide, homosexuality or abortion — by appealing to the Bible. But to what extent can we rely on what the Bible has to say about morality? In this paper, James Rachels, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, raises questions about the legitimacy of such Biblical justifications.