Special pleading...

 

I like what I have read of the guy.

6 philosophers Bertrand Russell didn’t like

(Bertrand Russell speaking about St. Thomas Aquinas:)

"Before he begins to philosophize, 

he already knows the truth; "

(...and?...

What if he is right? )

"it is declared in the Catholic 

(Christian)

 faith. 

If he can find apparently rational arguments for some parts of the faith, 

so much the better; if he cannot, he need only fall back on revelation."

(...and?...)

"The finding of arguments for a conclusion given in advance is not philosophy, but special pleading." I cannot, therefore, feel that he deserves to be put on a level with the best philosophers either of Greece or of modern times.” 

It's not science either the:

"finding of arguments 

for a conclusion given in advance"

Russell died in 1970.

 I do not know how much he knew about redshift, CMB, and the abundance of light elements in the early universe.

I do know that he missed out on a lot of developments/discoveries 

we have had in the areas of:

Evolutionary microbiology.

Quantum physics

and

Cosmology

How is ignoring the evidence  

that science is pointing to 

(in various fields of study no less)

  not:

special pleading?

I got a chair, I promise you I do.

:-).

Given what we now know?

I wonder what Mr. Russell 

would think about the

"Multiverse Hypothesis"?

Here is whats happening:

The Scientist of today?

(some of the most influential ones anyway)

are doing the special pleading

("this particular universe 

just happened to get it all right" 

so to speak)

that the philosophers of old 

used to accuse 

the theologians of doing.