{"id":729,"date":"2019-09-09T10:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-09-09T09:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/?p=729"},"modified":"2019-09-03T07:04:13","modified_gmt":"2019-09-03T06:04:13","slug":"i-am-an-atheist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/i-am-an-atheist\/","title":{"rendered":"I am an atheist"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I am an atheist.\u00a0 That is, I believe that God does not exist.\u00a0 I don\u2019t make a point of telling people this (except when I\u2019m writing a philosophical piece like this), but when I <em>do<\/em> tell people this, I get strong, often accusing reactions.\u00a0 People challenge my moral character (\u201cSo you don\u2019t believe in right or wrong?\u201d), my amiability (\u201cI hope you\u2019re not one of those <em>militant<\/em> atheists?\u201d), and my motives (\u201cAre you trying to undermine my faith?\u201d).\u00a0 Such reactions are irritating, and occasionally disturbing (why would I want to undermine your faith?), but in some ways they bother me less than the challenges that focus on my <em>reasonableness<\/em>:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cHow could you possibly know? You can\u2019t prove a negative, you know.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cDon\u2019t you mean you\u2019re an <em>agnostic<\/em>? That\u2019s what <em>I <\/em>\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cYou probably think that only idiots believe.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Comments like these are evoked (or provoked) by the topic of atheism, but the challenges they raise involve epistemological issues that are quite general.\u00a0 Outside of the context of religion, I don\u2019t think that many people would endorse the epistemological positions that these remarks presuppose.<\/p>\n<p>Consider the \u201ctruism\u201d that you can\u2019t prove a negative.\u00a0 In non-religious contexts, no one believes this.\u00a0 Adults deny the existence of Santa Claus all the time, and generally without censure. (Exception: if you tell your <em>kids<\/em> the truth about the man in red, you\u2019ll be called a bad parent.)\u00a0 Now it might be argued that because Santa Claus is an <em>impossible<\/em> being, one <em>can<\/em> prove that he doesn\u2019t exist.\u00a0 But to do so, you need to assume some general empirical facts about the world, facts about distances and maximum speeds and the poor aerodynamics of reindeer.\u00a0 The fact is that genuine proofs \u2013 conclusions validly drawn from self-evident premises \u2013 don\u2019t exist outside the realm of logic and mathematics.\u00a0 What we expect in the way of backing for knowledge claims in ordinary life is <em>justification<\/em> \u2013 reasons to believe.\u00a0 To the extent that these reasons involve sensory experience \u2013 that is, things we\u2019ve seen, heard, felt, touched, smelled or tasted \u2013 they provide something less than certainty.\u00a0 But that doesn\u2019t prevent us from claiming to know things like where we live, who the president of the United States is, what color we\u2019ve painted the dining room and so forth.<\/p>\n<p>Once we recognize that <em>proof<\/em> is an impossible standard, we can see that there\u2019s no in-principle difference between the justification of negative and positive existence claims.\u00a0 Both require evidence if we claim to know them, and both must be evaluated in the context other of our other rational beliefs.\u00a0 Consider the matter of whether King Arthur really existed.\u00a0 According to Jason Urbanus, writing in the January\/February issue of <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.archaeology.org\/issues\/322-1901\/sidebars\/7285-was-there-a-real-king-arthur\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Archaeology<\/a>, <\/em>this is a \u201ccontentious question [that] has divided both scholars and enthusiasts for centuries.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>But Urbanus himself thinks that the Arthur of legend is mythical.\u00a0 He explains that there is only one historical text \u2013 Geoffrey of Monmouth\u2019s <em>The History of the Kings of Britain<\/em> &#8212; that even mentions a British monarch named \u201cArthur.\u201d\u00a0 But that text says nothing about Camelot, a Round Table, or knights thereof, and the book itself was deemed unreliable by Geoffrey\u2019s own contemporaries.\u00a0 There is, moreover, no archaeological evidence that such a person as Arthur ever existed, even at his reputed birth place, Tintagel Castle.<\/p>\n<p>Now this brings up the notorious question whether \u201cabsence of evidence\u201d constitutes \u201cevidence of absence.\u201d\u00a0 The answer to the question is \u201csometimes.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0Here again, everything depends on the hypothesis under consideration and the assumptions that form the background of inquiry.\u00a0 The fact that I cannot see one is excellent evidence, in Massachusetts, that there is no elephant around.\u00a0 If the animal in question were a fox, or if I lived in Kenya, it would be a different story.\u00a0 I cannot be <em>sure<\/em> that there is no elephant, but I can be extremely well justified in believing there isn\u2019t.<\/p>\n<p>But let\u2019s turn to the second challenge.\u00a0 Why am I so determined to say that <em>God doesn\u2019t exist<\/em>; why don\u2019t I say instead that God <em>might not<\/em> exist, or that I <em>don\u2019t know whether<\/em> God exists?\u00a0 Why do I insist on being an atheist, rather than an agnostic?\u00a0 Well, it\u2019s because the question whether God exists has been settled to my satisfaction.\u00a0 (And why is <em>my<\/em> satisfaction all that\u2019s necessary?\u00a0 Because <em>I<\/em> am the one who is deciding what to believe.)\u00a0 I claim to <em>know<\/em> that God doesn\u2019t exist because I have excellent reasons and arguments against his existence, and because none of the arguments that are put forward in favor of his existence are any good.\u00a0 To say that I\u2019m an agnostic would be to say that I\u2019m undecided, and I\u2019m not.\u00a0 There are plenty of things that I <em>am<\/em> agnostic about: whether string theory is true, whether the <em>Game of Thrones<\/em> spin-offs will be any good, and whether you burn more fat if you exercise before breakfast.\u00a0 I have no idea about the first thing, a somewhat warranted opinion about the second, and a bit of evidence (courtesy of the <em>New York Times<\/em>) about the third.\u00a0 But the existence of God is different.\u00a0 I am completely confident about that.<\/p>\n<p>This brings us to the third challenge (already broached): who the hell do I think I am?\u00a0 Better minds than mine have concluded that God <em>does<\/em> exist \u2013 what makes me think my evidence and arguments are better than theirs?\u00a0 This challenge is a version of what is being called, in the epistemology literature, the problem of <em>peer disagreement<\/em>.\u00a0 It goes like this: suppose that you find yourself in a disagreement with another person (an \u201cepistemic peer\u201d)\u00a0 who is a) just as smart as you are and b) acquainted with all the same evidence and arguments that you are acquainted with.\u00a0 What should you do if you discover that the two of you disagree about something?\u00a0 Flying in the face of thousands of pages worth of philosophical disputation, I think the answer to this question is easy.\u00a0 The answer is: it depends.\u00a0 (The alert reader will have seen this coming.)\u00a0 That is, I contend that there is no <em>general<\/em> answer to this question.\u00a0 There are certainly cases where the discovery that I disagree with someone who has roughly the same smarts as me and the same evidence that I do ought to make me reconsider my position \u2013 those are cases where the best explanation for our disagreement is that one of us has made a mistake, but where there\u2019s no evidence that it\u2019s one of us rather than the other.\u00a0 But there are other cases where I ought to stand my ground: if, by my calculations, the tip at the restaurant ought to be $12.50, while my colleague (just as smart as me, just as knowledgeable about arithmetic) comes up with the amount of $768.40, I have excellent reason to think that they are the one who is wrong.\u00a0 It is always, or ought to be, <em>data<\/em> that someone disagrees with me, but it should also be an open question what <em>explains <\/em>the data.\u00a0 Maybe, despite our having <em>roughly<\/em> the same information, there are a few crucial facts that I have that you don\u2019t.\u00a0 And then there\u2019s the fact that \u201cintelligence\u201d is pretty context-dependent.\u00a0 People can be very intelligent and very well-informed, yet still have their blind spots.\u00a0 For that matter, people can be very intelligent in one domain and total idiots in another.<\/p>\n<p>But I don\u2019t have to think that anyone who disagrees with me in the matter of religion is a total idiot, or even a partial one.\u00a0 In general, I don\u2019t have ready explanations for the disagreements I have with my theist friends \u2013 in one or two cases, I have a hypothesis &#8212; but that doesn\u2019t mean I\u2019m wrong to think that I\u2019m right and they\u2019re wrong.\u00a0 And of course, they think <em>they\u2019re<\/em> right, and I\u2019m wrong.\u00a0 So it goes.<\/p>\n<p>In closing, let me just note that, while it\u2019s true that there are lots of people smarter than me who believe in God, it\u2019s also true, probably, that there are lots of people smarter than you who don\u2019t.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Picture Graffitied Atheism Advert by David Emery on Flickr. All Rights Reserved. Reproduced with permission of the author<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"I am an atheist.\u00a0 That is, I believe that God does not exist.\u00a0 I don\u2019t make a point of telling people this (except when I\u2019m writing a philosophical piece like [&hellip;]","protected":false},"author":1319,"featured_media":731,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"\"I am an atheist\", a post by Louise Antony on Open for Debate","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[19],"tags":[196,112,36,195],"custom_author":[194],"class_list":["post-729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-open-for-debate","tag-atheism","tag-disagreement","tag-epistemology","tag-religion","custom_author-antony-louise"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8KPlM-bL","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1594,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/deepfakes-and-the-history-of-faked-photography\/","url_meta":{"origin":729,"position":0},"title":"Deepfakes and the History of Faked Photography","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"January 9, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Looking back at the panicked discussion of deepfakes in 2018, actually existing deepfake technology has been something of a disappointment. The r\/deepfakeSFW subreddit is full of hobbyists face swapping cult films. The most common genre of deepfake is the face-swapped pornographic video. These videos clearly portray a message about the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Open for Debate&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/Image_appert_ernest_charles_photomontage_montrant_une_representation_de_la_prison_des_chantiers_a_versaill_1602819_cropped.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/Image_appert_ernest_charles_photomontage_montrant_une_representation_de_la_prison_des_chantiers_a_versaill_1602819_cropped.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/Image_appert_ernest_charles_photomontage_montrant_une_representation_de_la_prison_des_chantiers_a_versaill_1602819_cropped.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/Image_appert_ernest_charles_photomontage_montrant_une_representation_de_la_prison_des_chantiers_a_versaill_1602819_cropped.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/Image_appert_ernest_charles_photomontage_montrant_une_representation_de_la_prison_des_chantiers_a_versaill_1602819_cropped.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/Image_appert_ernest_charles_photomontage_montrant_une_representation_de_la_prison_des_chantiers_a_versaill_1602819_cropped.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":938,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/the-epistemic-predicament-of-the-conspiracy-theorist\/","url_meta":{"origin":729,"position":1},"title":"The epistemic predicament of the conspiracy theorist","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"June 15, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"A group of international public health scientists has recently published a statement in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet about the origins of the Sars-CoV-2 virus, the pathogen responsible for the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. In their statement, they report that on the basis of the publication and analysis\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Open for Debate&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/06\/4528869007_dbae1d6b03_o-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/06\/4528869007_dbae1d6b03_o-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/06\/4528869007_dbae1d6b03_o-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/06\/4528869007_dbae1d6b03_o-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/06\/4528869007_dbae1d6b03_o-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/06\/4528869007_dbae1d6b03_o-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":207,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/the-vices-of-truthlessness\/","url_meta":{"origin":729,"position":2},"title":"The Vices of Truthlessness","author":"Charlie Crerar","date":"August 28, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"From \u2018post-truth\u2019, to \u2018fake news\u2019, to \u2018alternative facts\u2019, truthlessness is everywhere at the moment. These phenomena present us with a huge array of questions. How do we separate fact from fiction? How can we tell which sources of information are credible? Is there even such a thing as objective truth?\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;In the News&quot;","block_context":{"text":"In the News","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/in-the-news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2017\/08\/truth-2069846_960_720.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2017\/08\/truth-2069846_960_720.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2017\/08\/truth-2069846_960_720.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2017\/08\/truth-2069846_960_720.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":856,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/which-crisis-of-trust\/","url_meta":{"origin":729,"position":3},"title":"Which crisis of trust?","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"February 24, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"The UK Labour Party\u2019s leadership contest is well underway after heavy defeat in the 2019 General Election. There is nothing close to consensus within the Party about why things went wrong, and still very little agreement on the most high-profile political issues. Members could be forgiven, then, for taking solace\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Open for Debate&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/02\/elvis-bekmanis-HORKkCWWBsM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/02\/elvis-bekmanis-HORKkCWWBsM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/02\/elvis-bekmanis-HORKkCWWBsM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/02\/elvis-bekmanis-HORKkCWWBsM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/02\/elvis-bekmanis-HORKkCWWBsM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/02\/elvis-bekmanis-HORKkCWWBsM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":2136,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/true-believers\/","url_meta":{"origin":729,"position":4},"title":"True Believers?","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"October 28, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Introduction One popular image of the \u2018brainwashed\u2019 person is someone who repeats what their leader says and who professes conviction in what they repeat.[1] But do brainwashed people really believe what they say? On the one hand, interpretative charity suggests that they are committed believers but, on the other hand,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Open for Debate&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/10\/hulki-okan-tabak-0_bs21hnvfg-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/10\/hulki-okan-tabak-0_bs21hnvfg-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/10\/hulki-okan-tabak-0_bs21hnvfg-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/10\/hulki-okan-tabak-0_bs21hnvfg-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/10\/hulki-okan-tabak-0_bs21hnvfg-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/10\/hulki-okan-tabak-0_bs21hnvfg-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":432,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/poisonous-words-arrogance-bullshit-and-accusations-of-lying-in-public-discourse\/","url_meta":{"origin":729,"position":5},"title":"Poisonous Words: Arrogance, Bullshit and Accusations of Lying in Public Discourse","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"April 23, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"As is common with international incidents today, the Skripal case, in which a Russian double agent and his daughter were poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury, England, has generated an abundance of fake news, conspiracy theories, deceptions, misleading, bullshit and lying. There have been many accusations of lying and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Open for Debate&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2018\/04\/all-explanations-arerubbish4754734_43ced6dc.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2018\/04\/all-explanations-arerubbish4754734_43ced6dc.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2018\/04\/all-explanations-arerubbish4754734_43ced6dc.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]}],"meta_box":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/09\/Graffitied-Atheism-Advert.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/729","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1319"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=729"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/729\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":733,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/729\/revisions\/733"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/731"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=729"},{"taxonomy":"custom_author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/custom_author?post=729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}