Frank

is creating effective responses to atheism and anti-intellectualism.

1

patron

$9

per month
I will debate anyone, atheist or theist, concerning the existence of God. Although a believer, I can effectively argue either side. And I will win.

Contact me at [email protected]

Discoverer of the two new deductive Prior Standards Arguments for the existence of God, and their atheistic counter-arguments. The entire issue boils down to the nature of reason and personhood.

I promote a deeper understanding of controversial issues through a thoroughgoing engagement with the latest in philosophical atheism as well as anti-intellectualism and other obstacles to wise reflection and precise analysis. Most specifically, the purpose is to carry out empirical research through dialogue with people from all walks of life, to connect the notions of criteria, standards, reason, logic, and the value of opposing viewpoints to real life values, notions which are taken for granted in daily experience, but without conscious awareness of them.

The idea is to convey to the most non-intellectual among us the value of intellect and science, especially mathematics, and why thinking with guiding rules about one's life and one's choices is important. Most importantly I want to convey the value of people and views that are actually contrary to our own, and how that increases our own individual objectivity and insures against our own notoriously biasing subjectivity. The views of others are necessary to maximize our understanding. The more we know about the entire set of cross-examinations about any issue, the less emotion there is, and a sense of unity emerges among disputants, even if no one's view has changed. Extended cross-examinations and debates can and do then become positive and unifying on many human levels.

The specific empirical goal of this research is to verify through documented conversations that the resulting anticipatory remarks work to change perspective and spark new interest in the analysis of universal claims and assumptions, as well as math and science, by simply being used in ordinary conversation at the precise known points where people typically resort to various dismissals, false arguments, and general anti-intellectual remarks that stifle intellectual motivation as well as freedom of thought.

Recognized in academic philosophy since 1982 (having barely passed only 2 unrelated college courses), and classical Indian metaphysics in 1995 (with only a 2-year degree), I have written many thousands of pages of notes on major books, professional journal articles, and dissertations, which I make available to the public domain on an ongoing basis, as well as over 1000 hours of mp3 narrations of those sources.  I'm now preparing a seminar for communicators who have to deal with controversial issues, as well as a general scientific research certification program and an intelligent agent app for discussing meta-theoretic issues in both philosophy and science.

I'm also working on the script for a video that explains everything, which is my Prior Standards Seminar, linked to below. I'm happy to respond to any question.
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/machinephilosophy...
All the best,
Frank
Goals
$9 of $100,000 per month
To eliminate anti-intellectualism in culture.
1 of 1
I will debate anyone, atheist or theist, concerning the existence of God. Although a believer, I can effectively argue either side. And I will win.

Contact me at [email protected]

Discoverer of the two new deductive Prior Standards Arguments for the existence of God, and their atheistic counter-arguments. The entire issue boils down to the nature of reason and personhood.

I promote a deeper understanding of controversial issues through a thoroughgoing engagement with the latest in philosophical atheism as well as anti-intellectualism and other obstacles to wise reflection and precise analysis. Most specifically, the purpose is to carry out empirical research through dialogue with people from all walks of life, to connect the notions of criteria, standards, reason, logic, and the value of opposing viewpoints to real life values, notions which are taken for granted in daily experience, but without conscious awareness of them.

The idea is to convey to the most non-intellectual among us the value of intellect and science, especially mathematics, and why thinking with guiding rules about one's life and one's choices is important. Most importantly I want to convey the value of people and views that are actually contrary to our own, and how that increases our own individual objectivity and insures against our own notoriously biasing subjectivity. The views of others are necessary to maximize our understanding. The more we know about the entire set of cross-examinations about any issue, the less emotion there is, and a sense of unity emerges among disputants, even if no one's view has changed. Extended cross-examinations and debates can and do then become positive and unifying on many human levels.

The specific empirical goal of this research is to verify through documented conversations that the resulting anticipatory remarks work to change perspective and spark new interest in the analysis of universal claims and assumptions, as well as math and science, by simply being used in ordinary conversation at the precise known points where people typically resort to various dismissals, false arguments, and general anti-intellectual remarks that stifle intellectual motivation as well as freedom of thought.

Recognized in academic philosophy since 1982 (having barely passed only 2 unrelated college courses), and classical Indian metaphysics in 1995 (with only a 2-year degree), I have written many thousands of pages of notes on major books, professional journal articles, and dissertations, which I make available to the public domain on an ongoing basis, as well as over 1000 hours of mp3 narrations of those sources.  I'm now preparing a seminar for communicators who have to deal with controversial issues, as well as a general scientific research certification program and an intelligent agent app for discussing meta-theoretic issues in both philosophy and science.

I'm also working on the script for a video that explains everything, which is my Prior Standards Seminar, linked to below. I'm happy to respond to any question.
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/machinephilosophy...
All the best,
Frank

Recent posts by Frank