Lisa Bortolotti introduces the arguments about whether dogs can have beliefs.

The first six articles in this issue of THINK have the theme “Good without God”. Here, Richard Swinburne argues that the existence of God is not a precondition of there being moral truths, but his existence does impact on what moral truths there are.

Simon Blackburn responds to the preceding article by Richard Swinburne.

What explains our moral intuitions?

Richard Swinburne responds to Simon Blackburn.

Dorothy Sayers' Gaudy Night, published in 1936, explores still-topical questions about the relation of epistemological and ethical values, and about the place of women in the life of the mind. In her wry reflections on the radical differences between today's feminist philosophy and Sayers' no-nonsense observation that “women are more like men than anything else on earth,” Susan Haack draws both on this detective story and on Sayers' wonderfully brisk essay, ‘Are Women Human?’

Alasdair Richmond introduces some famous paradoxes about time travel.

Is something good because God wills it, or does God will it because it is good? This lies at the heart of our debate on “Good without God”. Here Tim Mawson explains how he thinks the theist can solve it.

In the fifth of our articles on “Good without God”, Richard Norman explains why he believes we can be good without God.

A strange story about time travel.

Paul Kurtz recommends we subject religious claims to proper critical scrutiny. He believes that when we do, we will discover that skepticism is the only sensible position to adopt.

It began with a lie. Perhaps not a big lie, at least I didn't think so at the time, but a lie nevertheless. My Vicar had taken me for an interview with our Bishop following my application, supported by him, to undergo ordination training. My Vicar had prepared me well except that he never warned me that I would be asked if I was sure that I had a vocation. I had to hazard a guess at what this question meant. I wanted to be a clergyman like the Vicar and I sensed that if I answered: “No”, to the bishop's question, I probably wouldn't be proceeding much further. So I said “Yes”, not really knowing what I was committing myself to. Later I worked out that the question was meant to reassure the bishop that I had had a word from God. At the end, many, many years later, when I admitted to myself that there really wasn't a god, it was the same question that rose up to meet me. By then I had to admit that I had never, ever had a word from God.

This thought-provoking piece by philosopher Colin McGinn is an unusual in that it is not, strictly speaking, a work of philosophy. It is, rather, a true story – a story that raises some important philosophical questions. It is the kind of story that those who use philosophy in the classroom often present as a catalyst for discussion. It is in the same spirit that I offer it here. Some sample questions are included at the end.

In our seventh and final piece on the theme “Good without God”, Jonathan Ives argues that reliance on God as an external source of moral authority leads to a kind of moral cowardice.

Thinking tools is a regular feature that offers tips and pointers on thinking clearly and rigorously.

The first of three articles discussing the Israel/Palestine conflict and the charge of anti-semitism. The second article is a response by Tamar Meisels, and the third a reply to Meisels by Klug.

Geoffrey Madell introduces the puzzle of personal identity.

Tamar Meisels responds to the preceding article.