Since I study Thomas Aquinas and am a Catholic Christian, I mentioned above that you and Father

White might expect that I'm going to argue here that atheism is irrational. On the contrary,

I want to say that by and large, atheism is not irrational. Indeed, properly understood, it is

rational. Aquinas, following Aristotle Aristotle holds that no position is so false

that there is no element of truth to be found within it.

Well, if that commitment to considering the views of those with whom one disagrees

extends even to atheism, then we should be able to find some truth in atheism. But if there is truth in atheism, it cannot be irrational.

That's actually a nice little argument if you think about it,

and it's, I promised, very few arguments in this, so, but I do have one or two.

So the first premise, an intellectual position in order to be holy or partially true,

cannot be irrational. Second premise, but there is truth in the intellectual position of atheism.

Conclusion, therefore atheism cannot be irrational. Notice what I've done here. Philosophers will say that

in the first premise I've said that truth is a sufficient condition for not being irrational, and that not being irrational

is a necessary condition for truth. What I have not claimed, however, is that not being

irrational, or better, being rational is a sufficient condition for truth. To put it otherwise, you cannot turn around and say that because some intellectual position is rational, it is true.

So in particular, you cannot say that because atheism is rational, it is true.

That just doesn't follow.

So the first thing I want you to take from this talk is that

Professor John O'Callaghan of the University of Notre Dame did not claim that

atheism is true because it is rational. If I were more famous, such a claim would

likely make the New York Times which all which will always publish something by

someone from Notre Dame asserting

...