The Christian Vanguard

Some Catholics and Protestants believe that error has no rights, and errors concerning the faith most certainly do not have right. Errors, and some egregious sins, ought to be punished by law, with some practical exceptions. So here is a question for that position. If doubting the faith were a sin, should doubt be prosecuted? It isn't so easy to say that doubt isn't something we can control at will because faith is often regarded as a virtue. Both of these are mental states of the same sort, so if faith can be praised and be credited to us, then so can doubt, so doubt is in some sense in our control. And doubting the faith is wrong, and so is a sin, which can be susceptible to punishment. I tend to lean to a more classically liberal view on this issue. 

The following is a short paper I wrote for my metaphysics class.  Wiggins claims that space can be mapped only by reference to its occupants. This doesn’t seem to be obviously true. Consider some world that has an infinite density, not much unlike how some scientists say the first moment of our universe was like, that is, every point of space is occupied by some matter. When the available space expands and the matter remains the same, the density of the world changes. This seems coherent. To say that space expands is to say that there are two points of space opposite of each other where that distance grows. But this seems coherent even without reference to matter occupying some point. So take T1 to be time in a world with infinite density. Then T2 is that same world where the available space is then doubled so that the world is then half the density. Now suppose the same thing without any matter in it whatsoever. We know that T1 and T2 have different amounts of space, and this di