Earn $5,000?

Embed from Getty Images


Dear colleague,

 Identity Proofs are a new kind of proof for the existence of God.

 Basically, Identity Proofs argue that God is identical with something that obviously exists, therefore God exists.

 I would like to present Identity Proofs in the upcoming special issue of Inquiry on new work on the existence of God. But rather than just present the Identity Proofs themselves, I would also like to invite you to write an article about Identity Proofs from your own specialism. You are entirely free with regard to the angle and stance towards Identity Proofs. Possible topics/angles include:

– Are Identity Proofs really new? Or are there others who already presented similar arguments?

– How do Identity Proofs relate to Kant, e.g. ‘The only possible ground of proof for demonstrating the existence of God’?

– How do Identity Proofs relate to Thomas of Aquino’s claim that ‘Deus est ipsum esse subsistens’?

– What role, if any, may Identity Proofs play in the current philosophical debate on the existence of God?

– How do Identity Proofs relate to other (e.g. classical) proofs and arguments for the existence of God?

– Is the, somewhat odd, logical form of the Identity Proofs valid?

– Is the simplicity and directness of Identity Proofs an advantage or disadvantage?

– Can Identity Proofs benefit from a more sophisticated treatment?

– Is the key-premise that ‘God is being’, of the first Identity Proof, credible, supported by scripture, mystics, etc.?

– Is the key-premise that ‘I am God’ (i.e. ‘divine union’), of the second Identity Proof, credible, supported by scripture, mystics, etc.?

– Is the idea of God being attributeless (e.g. unknowable, incomparable, incomprehensible) consistent?

– What may Identity Proofs mean to theists, atheists, agnostics, and/or ignostics?

– New variants of Identity Proofs? (I.e. alternatives for that which is identical to God and obviously exists)?

– And so on.

Thanks to a generous offer from my sponsor, LINEA RECTA LIMITED, I am ready to pay $ 5,000.- to anyone whose article on Identity Proofs is published in the upcoming special issue of Inquiry on new work on the existence of God, under the following conditions:

– An abstract of the article is to be sent to me, ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com, latest by November 30, 2016.

– The article, abstract, and keywords are to be sent to me, latest by January 31, 2017.

– The article, abstract, and keywords are to be submitted to Inquiry via Taylor and Francis’ online submission system: http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=sinq20&page=instructions, latest by January 31, 2017, while mentioning that the article is submitted for the upcoming special issue of Inquiry on new work on the existence of God.

– A grand total of $ 50,000.- is available. If more than 10 articles about Identity Proofs are published in the upcoming special issue of Inquiry on new work on the existence of God, the reimbursement per article will be lowered to: $ 50,000.- divided by the number of articles about Identity Proofs that are published in the upcoming special issue of Inquiry on new work on the existence of God.

You can download a copy of the (background) paper on Identity Proofs from:


or https://sites.google.com/a/linea-recta.com/fp/a-new-proof-for-the-existence-of-god

Please feel free to contact me with questions/comments about the content of the paper and/or about your ideas for your article, ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com

If you would like me to keep you up to date on developments, if any, please let me know, ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com

If you would like to receive a MS Word version of the background paper (to easier navigate, insert comments, track changes, copy from), please let me know, ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com

For any other queries, please contact me, ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com

Kind regards,


Ruud Schuurman | ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com
INSTITUTE OF FIRST PHILOSOPHY | www.linea-recta.com/fp

Sunday’s Sermon

Bible Book


  Listen to a CBC Interview with the author.

Comments on the book.

Featured on The Brights’ List


Click on cover to purchase.

Brief Reviews of RTB

from Dr. John A. Black:
“Lucid and provocative…Reading the Bible will appeal to both the religious and the secular: the first will be challenged, the second enlightened, by this erudite presentation of a fresh view of ancient tradition.”

READING THE BIBLE: Intention, Text, Interpretation was exactly the text I wanted to bridge the ever-widening gap between the ancient stories and contemporary students. I used the book in a second-year university course which studied the influence of the King James Bible on two 20th-century fiction writers: Howard O’Hagan (Western Canada) and Flannery O’Connor (Southern U.S.). Robert Lane has a unique gift for both interpreting key passages/motifs, and putting them into 21st-century perspective. Virtually every student in the class at some point remarked that this book made it possible to finally understand where much of our modern literature comes from. Lane’s style—a combination of meticulous scholarship and humourous personal anecdote—makes it accessible to all students and does much to correct the woeful ignorance in our society about this critical topic.  I highly recommend this text for any university course, including graduate level, which is concerned with the literary, cultural, and mythological aspects of the Bible.

Reviewed by Richard Arnold, Ph.D., Professor of English, Vancouver Island University

On purpose

Oxford University Press

Oxford University Press (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Tim Mulgan

Purpose in the Universe: The moral and metaphysical case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism

Tim Mulgan, Purpose in the Universe: The Moral and Metaphysical Case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism, Oxford University Press, 2015, 435pp., $85.00 (hbk), ISBN 9780199646142.

Reviewed by Joshua W. Seachris, University of Notre Dame

In this ground-breaking, far-reaching, and carefully-argued book, Tim Mulgan puts a previously underdeveloped view on a conceptual-dialectical map largely dominated by theism and naturalism. This view he calls “ananthropocentric purposivism” (AP). AP is the view that, contra atheism, the universe has a purpose, but, contra benevolent theism (BT), that purpose is non-human-centered. Put simply, there is a cosmic purpose, but humans are irrelevant to that purpose. Mulgan contends that we live in a religiously ambiguous universe where the available evidence reasonably can be understood in profoundly different ways by humans (hence, the presence of both theistic and atheistic interpretations of the world). He claims that a more careful look at that evidence should prompt us to take AP seriously, and may even tip the scales in favor of AP over both BT and atheism. In Purpose in the Universe he takes this more careful look.

Read the review here!


Autumn 1986 Number 77 (Vol 19 No.3)


By Bob Lane

It might be useful to consider the questions of political theory, and the language used in the answers offered over the centuries. “How can we explain why it is that the great majority of people seem to voluntarily accept their inequality?” is the central or crucial question in the field of political theory. This question, as Hume noted, comes from the observation that, in fact, it is so easy for the few to rule over the many.

Why is this the case?

Sometimes the answer is offered that we have an obligation to obey the State. What is the nature of this obligation? Where does it come from? Can we reduce all political obligation to the application of a formula?

As Thomas McPherson puts it in his book Political Obligation: “The philosopher’s interest in political obligation has been mainly in the problem of the grounds of political obligation — that is, in the questions: “Why ought we to obey the government?”(p. 4) And, if we cannot find a ground in political obligation then we have anarchy.

First, notice the difference between:

(1) Why ought we obey the government? and

(2) Why do we obey the government?

. . .

Read more? Oh, yes, please!!

God and the Multiverse

God and the Multiverse
Humanity’s Expanding View of the Cosmos
By Victor J. Stenger
Review by Bob Lane on Tue, Jun 30th 2015.
God and the Multiverse by Victor J. Stenger “I believe there is no source of deception in the investigation of   nature which can compare with a fixed belief that certain kinds of   phenomena are IMPOSSIBLE.”  – William James

“Modern science should indeed arouse in all of us a humility before the   immensity of the unexplored and a tolerance for crazy hypotheses.” –          Martin Gardner

All the world says: yes we know what’s written in the books but now let’s see what our eyes tell us.” ― Bertolt Brecht, A Life of Galileo *******
Click here to read the full review!