In general, philosophers
who tend to shoot off their mouths about how breathtakingly bad the
traditional arguments for God’s existence are demonstrably do not know
what they are talking about, as we have seen here, here, and here. And they are the sorts of people who rarely want to engage the actual arguments themselves in any depth anyway. They prefer to offer elaborate rationalizations for refusing to do so. “Come on,
theistic arguments are really all about rationalizing preconceived
opinions!” – said without a trace of irony – “Besides, did this Thomist
whose work you recommend ever publish an article in The Philosophical Review? Did he teach in a PGR-ranked department?” That kind of thing. Shameless ad hominems and straw men coupled with a snarky, careerist conformism, all served up as a kind of higher philosophical method.
