Comments for Richard Carrier Blogs

Comment on Ehrman on Jesus: A Failure of Facts and Logic by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 18:01:53 +0000

It actually says “rebuild the temple”?

Comment on Interview with Susan Haack by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:59:07 +0000

Funny you should mention that. I read and blurbed her latest book for her and was planning to blog it next month. Asking her for an interview is a good idea. I’ll do that.

Comment on Ex Nihilo Onus Merdae Fit by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:54:08 +0000

That’s irrelevant. Again you are losing track of the argument. Theists aren’t arguing from a loose nothing point floating around outside of time. So the existence or non-existence of such a thing is moot. They are saying our timeline begins at a nothing point, and (if god does not exist) must have done so. They are wrong, but that’s not the issue I tackle in detail. I instead analyze what follows if they are right.

Comment on Interview with Elizabeth Anderson by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:48:57 +0000

First, what one’s degree is in is not that important. Otherwise there would be no such things as degrees in medieval Icelandic literature or Shakespearean studies. Any college degree can be leveraged into almost any career. My wife has a theater arts degree and became an accountant. Most employers really don’t give a shit what your degree was in. They just care that you can read, write, study, discipline yourself, and do all the other stuff required to get a four year degree at a modern school. That college degrees aren’t getting people jobs has more to do with the fucked economy than the employment value of a college degree.

Second, philosophy Ph.D.s have many career options that even use their degree. Lawyer and author, for example.

Third, economics are not the sole arbiter of your life goals or human worth. If you want to be a philosopher, you want to contribute to human knowledge and understanding (as well as your own). You aren’t looking to get rich. That’s the whole point: doing philosophy is for many people an end in itself. Their future income is largely irrelevant.

Indeed, I think serious but unemployed philosophers should take this fact itself seriously and stop assuming they need a high paying job or professorship or have to live in an expensive place. Philosophy can be done from nearly anywhere. And you can get by on basic part time work, if you are frugal and smart about where and how you live. Or find a patron or partner.

Philosophy is about philosophy. Not making money.

Comment on Ex Nihilo Onus Merdae Fit by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:39:13 +0000

Then you are just speaking a different language than me or anyone else. Translate and you’ll be up to speed.

Comment on Ehrman’s Dubious Replies (Round Two) by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:37:55 +0000

I cite both in Proving History.

Comment on Ehrman on Jesus: A Failure of Facts and Logic by Thom

Thom — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:33:45 +0000

At the time Daniel 9 was written, the temple HAD BEEN handed over to the enemy and polluted (the sacrifices to Zeus were already well underway). Given that the temple was occupied by Seleucid soldiers, the (false) prediction of its destruction makes sense.

The Targum says that the servant will rebuild the temple, which for the same reason points to a post 70 date, or at least a date during the war.

This is the same reason scholars date Mark no earlier than 65. But you know this.

Comment on Interview with Elizabeth Anderson by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:32:14 +0000

Certainly. I don’t expect anything to be closed, not in science or history, or philosophy. But philosophers won’t even follow Newton’s methods: he formed logical syllogisms that were valid and whose premises were observably true. Scientists thus accepted his conclusions until they found some of the premises were false and in need of revision. That’s how science works. It’s how philosophy should work, too.

Comment on Interview with Elizabeth Anderson by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:29:04 +0000

This blog is for my readers. Who want to know where I agree or disagree with the person I am interviewing and how they influenced me as a philosopher. And why I am asking the questions I am. Where I publish has nothing whatsoever to do with that. Or anything, really.

Comment on McGrath on the Amazing Infallible Ehrman by Richard Carrier

Richard Carrier — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:27:19 +0000

And as I am saying, your method doesn’t work. For the very reason I explained. Context, not frequency elsewhere, determines what words mean.