<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Good Conference</title>
	<atom:link href="http://quodlibetalblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/a-good-conference/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://quodlibetalblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/a-good-conference/</link>
	<description>Musings from Anywhere by Dr. Richard G. Howe</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:52:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: quodlibetalblog</title>
		<link>http://quodlibetalblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/a-good-conference/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>quodlibetalblog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 02:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quodlibetalblog.wordpress.com/?p=47#comment-59</guid>
		<description>I really like D&#039;Souza, but I don&#039;t think the rigor of theistic debate is his strength. He came alive when the topic touched on the intersection of Christianity and culture (i.e., the Christian influence on mankind). Granted Shermer isn&#039;t a rigorous philosophical thinker either so perhaps D&#039;Souza was a good match. Those of us in the audience who are used to dealing with this issue more philosophically were somewhat disappointed overall. D&#039;Souza did have an occasional &quot;Kodak&quot; moment. One was when he challenged Shermer on the issue of altruism and evolution. Why would someone risk his own life (e.g., a soldier) for the good of others? Shermer suggested that evolution would select such courageous actions since such a character would be more attractive in being chosen by a mate. To this, D&#039;Souza quipped &quot;So you&#039;re saying that guys went to fight for the US in Iraq in order to get girls?&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really like D&#8217;Souza, but I don&#8217;t think the rigor of theistic debate is his strength. He came alive when the topic touched on the intersection of Christianity and culture (i.e., the Christian influence on mankind). Granted Shermer isn&#8217;t a rigorous philosophical thinker either so perhaps D&#8217;Souza was a good match. Those of us in the audience who are used to dealing with this issue more philosophically were somewhat disappointed overall. D&#8217;Souza did have an occasional &#8220;Kodak&#8221; moment. One was when he challenged Shermer on the issue of altruism and evolution. Why would someone risk his own life (e.g., a soldier) for the good of others? Shermer suggested that evolution would select such courageous actions since such a character would be more attractive in being chosen by a mate. To this, D&#8217;Souza quipped &#8220;So you&#8217;re saying that guys went to fight for the US in Iraq in order to get girls?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Kozlinski</title>
		<link>http://quodlibetalblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/a-good-conference/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Kozlinski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 04:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quodlibetalblog.wordpress.com/?p=47#comment-56</guid>
		<description>How did the D&#039;souza/Shermer debate go?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How did the D&#8217;souza/Shermer debate go?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
