Home » Library » Authors » Keith Augustine

Keith Augustine

Born: 1976

Title: Executive Director & Editor-in-Chief, Internet Infidels

Education:

  • M.A. Philosophy, University of Maryland, College Park, 2001
  • B.A. Philosophy, University of Maryland, College Park, 1998

Books:

Chapters:

  • "Near-Death Experiences are Not Evidence for Either Atheism or Theism" in Theism and Atheism: Opposing Arguments in Philosophy ed. Joseph W. Koterski and Graham Oppy (Farmington Hills, MI: Macmillan Reference USA, 2019): 594-596.
  • "Introduction" in The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case Against Life After Death ed. Michael Martin and Keith Augustine (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015): 1-47.
  • "The Dualist's Dilemma: The High Cost of Reconciling Neuroscience with a Soul" (with Yonatan I. Fishman) in The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case Against Life After Death ed. Michael Martin and Keith Augustine (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015): 203-292.
  • "Near-Death Experiences are Hallucinations" in The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case Against Life After Death ed. Michael Martin and Keith Augustine (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015): 529-569.

Articles:

Other Projects

Blogger for the Secular Frontier, the official blog of Internet Infidels.


Keith Augustine is Executive Director and Editor-in-Chief of Internet Infidels. He holds a masters degree in philosophy and has a special interest in the philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, philosophy of religion, and metaethics. In addition to various articles published on the Secular Web, he has contributed to Skeptic magazine, the Journal of Near-Death Studies, and the Journal of Scientific Exploration. He also published an anthology with Michael Martin titled The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case Against Life After Death, and has worked on and off on a cross-cultural survey of disbelief in an afterlife throughout human history for the Secular Web.


Published on the Secular Web


Modern Library

Are Survivalists Unable to Answer Their Critics?

In the last quarter of 2024 four articles on survival after death were published online ahead of print in the International Review of Psychiatry. Two of these included gratuitous attempts to discredit the work of a well-known survival critic. After correcting these misrepresentations, in this response Keith Augustine lays out how those who appeal to survival research to support their beliefs bungle their purportedly scientific assessments of the evidence concerning whether or not individual human minds survive death in a discarnate state (without a normal physical body). The response also lays out why the still-common arguments that the late eminent thanatologist Robert Kastenbaum offered in favor of a discarnate afterlife are fallacious. It canvasses erroneous tropes about discovering white crows and the supposed impossibility of proving negatives, how scientific facts are established as highly probable, how psychical research is grounded on fallacious arguments from ignorance, and when all else fails, how survival researchers resort to psychologizing their critics rather than address their critics' arguments. Their collective failure to engage their critics' actual arguments raises the issue of whether survival proponents are able to adequately answer them—and if not, why not. Augustine submits that they are unable to answer their critics because the scientific evidence against their afterlife beliefs is incredibly strong.

Christian vs. Survivalist Apologetics

In a 2022 critique of the Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies essay competition on the "best" evidence for life after death ("the survival of human consciousness") and in replies to two commentaries on it, Keith Augustine made passing reference to the parallels between the arguments provided by survival researchers—psychical researchers ostensibly investigating evidence for an afterlife using scientific best practices—and the well-worn fallacies repeatedly committed by creationists and other Christian apologists. In this essay, Augustine highlights several parallel fallacious arguments found among both those at the forefront of "scientific" research into an afterlife and those engaged in Christian apologetics.

Hallucinatory Near-Death Experiences

This essay has been significantly revised to reflect updates that were published in the Journal of Near-Death Studies in 2007. Several points have been streamlined for clarity and to remove unnecessary verbiage. The section on psychophysiological correlates has been rewritten to be much more accessible, and now ends on a discussion of what is implied by the influence of medical factors on NDE content. A discussion of circumstantial evidence of temporal lobe instability among NDErs has been added to the section on the role of the temporal lobe in NDEs. A few points have been incorporated into the main text from Augustine's replies to Journal commentaries where they elaborate on points in the lead essays, such as a discussion of why cross-cultural diversity undermines a survivalist interpretation of NDEs. That argument is followed up by a similar one, cut for space from the Journal discussions, about the meaning of the apparently random distribution of pleasant and distressing NDEs. Additionally, a large number of new endnotes have been added to this essay. Most of these summarize the most important points of the Journal exchanges (notes 1-6, 10, 17, 20, 23, 28, and 30-32), but a significant number also concern other issues or recent developments (notes 5, 7, 8, 11-16, and 22).

A Defense of Naturalism

The first part of this essay discusses what naturalism in the philosophy of religion should entail for one's ontology, considers various proposed criteria for categorizing something as natural, uses an analysis of these proposed criteria to develop theoretical criteria for both the natural and nonnatural, and develops a set of criteria for identifying a potentially supernatural event in practice. The second part of the essay presents a persuasive empirical case for naturalism based on the lack of uncontroversial evidence for any potential instances of supernatural causation, with particular emphasis on the lack of evidence for supernatural causation in our modern scientific account of the history of the universe and in modern parapsychological research.

Can Mystical Experience be a Perception of God? A Critique of William Alston’s Perceiving God

William Alston's Perceiving God argues that some mystical experiences should be regarded as perceptions of God analogous to the perception of physical objects in sense experience. I conclude that there are several reasons for doubting that mystical experience generally—or Christian mystical experience specifically--can be a form of perception, even given Alston's epistemic commitments.

The Case Against Immortality

An analysis of the philosophical arguments and scientific evidence against life after death, one which weighs the parapsychological evidence for survival of bodily death against the physiological evidence for the dependence of consciousness on the brain This essay is divided into four main sections: Defining the Problem; The Philosophical Case Against Immortality; The Scientific Case Against Immortality; and Postscript on Survival.
Kiosk Article

Death and the Meaning of Life

This essay considers whether life is inherently meaningless if death is the permanent end of our conscious existence and our lives are not part of a higher purpose. If a sentient God existed, Augustine argues, then the value that he would attribute to our lives would not be the same as the value that we find in living and thus would be irrelevant. Therefore, we must create our own meaning for our lives regardless of whether or not our lives serve some higher purpose.
Kiosk Video

Veridical Near-Death Experiences (Real Seekers)

Atheist and Executive Director & Editor-in-Chief of Internet Infidels (the maintainers of the Secular Web for nearly three decades) joins Dale Glover's Real Seekers podcast to provide his own skeptical take on near-death experiences (NDEs). The dialogue includes a review of neutral ways in which near-death researchers can collect testimony of near-death experiences (NDEs) that could provide compelling evidence that something leaves the normal physical body (or that some other paranormal process occurs) during such experiences—though such tests also have the potential to fail to do any such thing.

Interview with Philip Goff on Panpsychism

Tune in to Freethinker Podcast with host Edouard Tahmizian for an about an hour-and-fifteen-minute interview with panpsychist philosopher of mind Philip Goff as Tahmizian, Keith Augustine, and Jason Thibodeau query Goff about his reasons for embracing panpsychism, the view that all matter has some degree of a conscious or experiential element to it. Goff expertly fields questions from all three interlocuters about how his panpsychist views differ from those of other philosophers of mind and his rationale for taking this position. He suggests that "physicalist" Galen Strawson holds substantially the same view that he does, their differences largely being semantic ones about the meaning of the term physicalism (or materialism). Goff also responds to criticisms (like those of Massimo Pigliucci) that his picture of the mind is unscientific. He canvasses the hard problem of consciousness, structuralism about physics, why he favors taking the Russellian monist theory of mind in a specifically panpsychist direction, and what it might even mean to say that something like an electron has experiences. Goff also discusses whether arguing from a "top down" cosmopsychism (i.e., that the universe as a whole has experiential aspects, and divides down into our individual consciousnesses) is less problematic than arguing from the "bottom up" that the most fundamental constituents of matter have simple experiential aspects that somehow combine into our more complex, but unified, individual consciousnesses. The discussion then turns to Goff's take on the (classic, Plato-inspired) divine command theory of ethics, fine-tuning arguments, whether there's a middle way between traditional omni-God theism and traditional atheism that may be more attractive than either of those binary choices, whether libertarian free will exists given the possibility of determinism, and how his broader philosophical views impact the question of life's meaning. Check out this wide-ranging interview with a renowned philosopher of mind who has become increasingly prominent in public debates about these issues over the last several years!