Essay On John Ellis

If the goal of an introductory text for students is to introduce a topic in an evenhanded and unbiased manner, then this book is an abject failure. It is presented as a primer on the scientific method, but in reality it is an anti-religious polemic trying to pass itself off as an impartial discussion. At every turn there are omissions, inaccuracies and straw men that leave readers with a highly misleading impression of contemporary philosophy of science. This book was not written to help students form their own ideas, but to convert them to the author's point of view. John Ellis denies any such intent in the Introduction, piously claiming that his only goal is for people "come to their own conclusions" (xxiii). Such dishonesty is evident throughout the remainder of the book, in

Hundreds of peer-reviewed papers are still published each year in attempts to prove and disprove the existence of God, using reason and logic in vigorous debates. Either Ellis is unaware that they exist or he is aware of them and deliberately chose not to mention them. All that said, Ellis also seems to have little familiarity with contemporary arguments in favor of his position, making the absurd claim that metaphysical naturalism is untestable because "it is not logically possible to disprove a negative proposition" (4). This is especially bizarre of the hoary old misconception that nobody can prove a negative, which has been severely criticized by contemporary naturalist philosophers. Even without knowing such works, it is possible to refute Ellis' claim simply by stating "there’s nothing in my pocket" and then finding a coin inside it. Congratulations, you've just disproven a negative proposition! Another example is Ellis' discussion of whether or not an omnipotent, benevolent god "can permit horrible things to befall innocent people"