From Lewis's the Poison ol Subjectivism

 After studying his environment man has begun to study himself. Up to that point, he had assumed his own reason and through it seen all other things. Now, his own reason has become the object: it is as if we took out our eyes to look at them. Thus studied, his own reason appears to him as the epiphenomenona which accompanies chemical or electrical events in a cortex which is itself the by-product of a blind evolutionary process. His own logic, hitherto the king whom events in all possible worlds must obey, becomes merely subjective. There is no reason for supposing that it yields truth. As long as this dethronement refers only to the theoretical reason, it cannot be wholehearted. The scientist has to assume the validity of his own logic (in the stout old fashion of Plato or Spinoza) even in order to prove that it is merely subjective, and therefore he can only flirt with subjectivism. It is true that this flirtation sometimes goes pretty far. There are modern scientists, I am told, who have dropped the words truth and reality out of their vocabulary and who hold that the end of their work is not to know what is there but simply to get practical results. This is, no doubt, a bad symptom. But, in the main, subjectivism is such an uncomfortable yokefellow for research that the danger, in this quarter, is continually counteracted.

C. S. Lewis's De Futilitate

 Here. 

This includes different forms of the argument from reason than found in Miracles. Anscombe's rebuttals don't apply to some of what we find here. 

What was Anselm's argument for God?

 Here

Do you misgender your pet? Shame on you!

 

User Illusion

 Perhaps the idea of a mentalistic explanation requires some explanation. A moment ago I went out to get the mail. I believed that getting the mail would be a good thing, I know where the mailbox is, and so I fulfilled my intention to go out to the mailbox and get the mail. My actions had a purpose which I fulfilled. My feet moved, due to signals sent from my brain, but the ultimate reason why the atoms in my brain did what they did is that because they were directed by something possessing a purpose. Or, perhaps the atoms themselves had an inherent purpose. Something desired by some entity brought it about that the atoms moved the way they did.

            But these types of explanations are typically excluded from basic physics. In fact, not only purpose, but intentionality or about-ness, normativity, and first-person perspective are also excluded.  The four fundamental forces postulated by physics, gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces, are blind forces, which do not act for reasons. If gravity operates on boulders falling in an avalanche, they will neither avoid my head to spare my life nor strike me to punish my wickedness.  No, the gravitational force has no mental life, and genuinely physical particles have no mental life either. But what happens at the mindless level of basic physics, according to materialism, determines what goes on at all levels. It is true that physical events sometimes produce results that an intentional agent would choose, indeed that is how natural selection works. But in the final analysis, if materialism is true, it looks as if the idea of intentions or purposes or desires or motives producing actions is bound to be an illusion. 

In honor of my Arizona Diamondbacks in the World Series--Sister Wynona Carr's The The Ball Game.

 

The rise and fall of the new atheism

Feser on eliminativism

 Here.