I specialize in the areas of scientific materialism and consciousness described as a materialist epiphenomenon. Also can answer questions pertaining to general atheism, atheist-agnostic differences etc.
I have been an atheist for over 36 yrs. and have written four books on the subject: 'The Atheist's Handbook to Modern Materialism'(2000), and 'Atheism" A Beginner's Handbook', 'Dialectical Atheism' (2011), 'Beyond Atheism, Beyond God' (2013)
Intertel, Mensa, American Mathematical Society, American Astronomical Society, American Geophysical Union
Atheist articles: 'The American Atheist' magazine, assorted U.S. newspapers (e.g. Baltimore Sun, Denver Post); papers-articles published in Intertel's Journal: Integra. Books: 'The Atheist's Handbook to Modern Materialism'(2000), 'Atheism: A Beginner's Handbook' (2007), 'Dialectical Atheism' (2011), 'Beyond Atheism, Beyond God' (2013)
Master of Philosophy in Physics. Also took more than 3 yrs. of theology and metaphysics courses at a Catholic University (1964-67) - before I became an atheist. Thus, I have much more religious familiarity & background than many atheists.
Writers' Digest Award for the essay 'The Atheist in America' (2000), Government of Barbados research in solar physics award (1980-84), AAS Solar Physics Award (1984)
American Atheists, Barbados Philosophical Society, Harrison College- Barbados, Colorado Springs Freethinkers
Atheism-materialism is a useful subject to provide an antidote for so much of the religious nonsense that abounds today. The trick is to get people to listen, to read - or at least ask questions!
Develop a model of consciousness based on non-linear quantum mechanics.
There are many prominent atheists out there. People don't know about them, usually until they die. Such atheists have included: Katherine Hepburn, Carl Sagan and Isaac Asimov. Einstein himself was an "agnostic atheist".
In a recent opinion poll, 52% of Americans said they would not vote for a "well-qualified" atheist, if one were to run for public office.
|Hiram Cortes||03/08/16||10||10||10||Thank you! I will include your thoughts .....|
|Charles||02/10/16||10||10||10||Thank you Mr. Stahl.|
|Charles||06/05/15||10||10||10||Thank you for your answer. Consciousness exists .....|
|Charles||06/04/15||10||10||10||Thank you. That is extremely interesting, weird .....|
Just a word of note: If you wish me to continue answering your questions I will expect you to give ratings for my answers as per the ratings choices. Is that understood? I think an excellent book for
As I pointed out earlier, it is not specifically "morals" (which has too great a generality), but practical, utilitarian ethics. I noted: "We can determine a relatively objective ethics (morality
Doesn't change the gist of the argument at all. One finding at Duke U. - no confirmation as yet, and admittedly "based on circumstantial evidence". Besides, millions have to have this organ removed each
Hello, Apart from the fact the hypothetical is totally absurd "if it can be proved" etc. it would still not meet the criteria I provided for an objective ethics. That is, it would destroy human community
Hello, We could determine a relatively objective ethics (morality is much more general) by appeal to scientific materialist criteria. I set out many of these both in a book published in 2000 (Ch. 6
Answers by Expert: