Dr. Tomas Bogardus discusses contemporary philosophical analysis of sex and gender, defending a traditional understanding of these terms.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction

00:32 What are the main views about gender?

17:03 What's the difference between sex and gender?

27:52 Why think sex terms are social constructions?

35:29 Societal consequences for biological realism regarding sex

39:05 Intentional revision of sex terms?

44:35 Dr. Bogardus: What is a woman?

45:04 Woman: Adult human female

55:24 Can trans-women be women on this account?

01:12:38 But still, should we revise the meaning of our terms?

Dr. Matt Lutz defends moral error theory, the two-part thesis that (i) our moral claims are capable of being true or false, but (ii) because there is no objective morality, all of them are false.

Check out all of Dr. Lutz's publications.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:13 What is moral error theory?

00:03:46 Non-cognitivism in ethics

00:19:32 Motivation for non-cognitivism

00:25:00 Ethical naturalism vs. non-naturalism

00:54:30 Is there an objective morality?

00:58:21 Epistemological objections to realism

01:11:00 Miles' two responses to arguments for error theory

Joe Folley and I discuss our philosophical differences regarding fine-tuning, the problem of evil, skeptical theism, pragmatic justification for God, apatheism, and much else besides.

Check out Joe's excellent YouTube channel.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:15 The fine-tuning argument

00:12:30 Can the constants really vary?

00:18:41 What is "possibility"?

00:34:54 Is probability just frequency?

00:48:16 Is there common ground between theist and atheist?

00:58:04 We should not be apathetic about God's existence

01:10:38 There are more options besides theism and naturalism

01:19:50 Skeptical theism

01:28:29 Does evil disprove God?

01:32:04 Philip Goff's limited God

01:43:55 Life is better if you believe in God

01:53:40 Should we take the red pill?

01:58:59 Problems with moral realism

02:12:50 What motivates you in running a YouTube channel?

Dr. Tim Maudlin returns to the channel to discuss the fine-tuning of the universe, the beginning of the universe, and whether these facts might be reasonably suggest that a creator God exists.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:56 How do science and philosophy relate?

00:11:33 The fine-tuning argument

00:22:35 Is the universe fine-tuned for rocks?

00:27:39 Does evil disprove God?

00:31:04 Of multiverses and Boltzmann Brains

00:35:45 How does the multiverse explain fine-tuning?

00:47:39 Do we know we're not Boltzmann Brains?

00:50:59 God and the beginning of the universe

00:58:24 The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin theorem

01:01:49 Does everything that begin to exist have a cause

01:08:02 Are theistic philosophers acting in good faith

01:11:56 Are atheists acting in good faith?

01:16:59 What is Tim's favorite color?

01:17:29 Will physics ever explain consciousness?

Dr. Randal Rauser, himself a Christian apologist, joins me to critically examine some of the mistakes and excesses of Christian apologetics as it is commonly practiced - on YouTube and within broader academic discourse as well.

Check out Randal's YouTube channel.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:15 What is apologetics?

00:05:52 What is a 'tentative' apologist?

00:14:25 Mistake #1 - Not giving weight to moral experience.

00:36:09 How do we determine what the Bible teaches?

00:38:02 Mistake #2 - Thinking every question must be answered.

00:45:49 Mistake #3 - Simplifying enormously complicated issues.

00:50:50 If saving souls isn't the right motive for apologetics, what is?

00:57:03 Mistake #4 - Mixing apologetics with politics.

01:01:36 Debating vs. discussing controversial issues.

Dr. Michael Huemer and I discuss the evils of factory farming, the strengths and possible drawbacks of a vegan and vegetarian diet, whether animals have rights, if humans are the pinnacle of intrinsic value, and whether already having severe dietary restrictions justifies eating meat (it doesn't).

Check out Dr. Huemer's book, "Dialogues on Ethical Vegetarianism".

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:33 What goes on in factory farms?

00:10:45 Do we have to argue that animals have rights?

00:17:26 Do animals have rights?

00:25:02 Can we hunt animals?

00:27:24 Are all animals sentient?

00:29:01 The Shrimp Welfare Project

00:36:54 Why does it seem normal to eat meat?

00:41:08 Nutritional deficiencies in a vegan diet?

00:47:25 Plant farming kills animals too!

00:55:06 Are we heading for a vegetarian-only world

01:02:30 The role of ethical intuitions

01:09:04 BONUS CONTENT - The inconsistencies of moral anti-realists

Dr. RT Mullins discusses his view that God is literally identical to time. We also discuss and critique William Lane Craig's proposal that God is, in a sense, both temporal and timeless.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:12 What's the point of philosophical theology?

00:11:00 Mullins' definition of time.

00:21:14 An absolutist theory of time.

00:23:39 Is this pantheism?

00:30:49 The idea that God is time.

00:39:35 William Lane Craig's view - God creates time.

00:52:50 Is God's timelessness logically prior to His temporality?

01:04:48 Does time have a beginning?

01:14:07 Do scientists know anything about time?

Dr. Daniel Rubio graciously agreed to come on the channel to discuss and critique a paper I wrote examining four lesser-discussed hypotheses that lie somewhere between theism and atheism: the simulation hypothesis, cosmopsychism, axiarchism, and new laws of nature.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:12:13 Option #1 - We're in a simulation.

00:32:26 Option #2 - The universe designed itself.

01:05:31 Option #3 - Goodness requires that the universe exist.

01:29:01 Option #4 - Laws of nature guide the universe towards life.

Dr. Graham Priest explains his views on dialetheism, the view that some contradictions are true, while also discussing the relationship between Buddhism and modern science, the cosmological and fine-tuning arguments, and how Christians can avoid refutation by embracing paradox.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:12 What is dialetheism?

00:06:09 Paradox #1 - The liar

00:14:54 Paradox #2 - The law

00:29:37 Paradox #3 - Theology

00:38:15 Why Christianity can't possibly be true

00:40:46 Does dialetheism support Buddhism?

00:49:01 The relationship between Buddhism and modern science

00:49:25 Support #1 - The impermanence of all things

00:51:54 The cosmological argument for God

00:56:26 The fine-tuning argument for God

01:55:44 Support #2 - The nature of consciousness

Dr. Klaas Kraay explains that the multiverse, rather than serving as an alternative to God, actually supports belief in God by undermining two atheistic arguments: the problem of evil and the problem of no best world.

Check out Klaas' paper explaining the theistic multiverse, "Theism, Possible Worlds, and the Multiverse."

Also see my paper looking at the relationship between theistic multiverses and modern science, "Does science undermine the theistic multiverse?"

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:07 Multiverses in cosmology

00:06:36 The problem of no best world

00:13:15 The wine analogy

00:19:44 Two versions of the problem

00:24:20 Theistic multiverse solution

00:32:10 Objection - Duplication

00:37:27 1st response - Limit the multiverse to kinds

00:43:53 2nd response - More is not always better

00:49:50 What's more valuable, God or the multiverse?

00:58:39 The problem of evil

01:18:30 What got Klaas into philosophy?

01:20:11 Does philosophy make progress?

Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh, professor of New Testament at the University of Miami, explains the gnostic gospels, their significance, and their relationship to the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and whether Jesus' earlies disciples would recognize the theology of the earliest Christian creeds.

Check out Dr. Walsh's book, "The Origins of Early Christian Literature."

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:06 What is gnosticism?

00:10:43 The historical value of the gnostic gospels

00:24:12 Are the canonical gospels less legendary than the gnostic ones?

00:31:11 The gospels as literature rather than history

00:35:58 The Gospel of Thomas

00:48:35 Do the gnostic gospels go back to the first century?

00:53:28 Does the Apostles' Creed reflect earliest Christianity?

01:01:55 Would the apostles recognize modern Christianity?

01:07:14 The gospels writers borrowed from Paul

01:14:25 Are evangelical NT scholars taken seriously?

01:25:56 Confirmation bias in NT scholarship

Philip Goff joins me to discuss panpsychism, cosmopsychism, and how these theories of consciousness have the potential to explain one of the most striking discoveries of modern science: the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.Check out Philip's book, Why?: The Purpose of the Universe.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or Buy Me a Coffee.

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:01:05 What is panpsychism?

00:14:46 Panpsychism vs. idealism

00:17:49 Why we should be panpsychists

00:34:35 The combination problem

00:40:12 From panpsychism to cosmopsychism

00:48:40 The fine-tuning of the universe

00:56:28 Cosmopsychism vs. theism

01:10:45 What is the purpose of the universe?

01:16:40 Debating William Lane Craig

Dr. Jc Beall, professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, explains "glut theory," the view that some contradictory statements can both be true - or, equivalently, that true theories can be inconsistent.

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:03:25 What is dialetheism?

00:15:12 Languages vs. meta-languages

00:23:47 Examples of true contradictions

00:25:02 #1 - The liar paradox

00:31:23 #2 - Contradictions in the law

00:40:11 #3 - Paradoxes of motion

00:45:00 Not every contradiction is true

00:52:40 Why should glut theorists care about consistency?

01:07:13 My argument against dialetheism

01:16:39 Contradictions within Christianity

01:23:30 Can both atheism and Christianity be true?

01:26:34 Is glut theory itself both true and false?

01:32:07 Glut theory and Eastern religions

01:39:49 Things logicians wish everyone would know

01:42:44 Godel's incompleteness theorems

Neil Manson explains the hidden tension between environmental ethics and findings in cosmology over the last thirty years: if life exists throughout the universe, then we lose one main argument for caring what happens to life here on Earth.

Check out Neil Manson's paper, "Anthropocentrism, Exo-Planets, and the Cosmic Perspective".

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:45 Cosmological science today

00:10:25 Anthropocentrism, defined

00:15:16 Two kinds of anthropocentrism: biological and personal

00:30:46 Consequentialism

00:32:15 The cosmic perspective and non-anthropocentrism

00:40:47 Objection: Some infinities are better than other infinities

00:56:59 Why we should reject nonanthropocentrism

01:01:48 Should we seek to preserve nature?

01:18:25 Towards a stewardship model of environmentalism

Matthew returns to the podcast to discuss effective altruism and its philosophical underpinnings.

Check out Matthew's YouTube channel.

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Dr. Max Baker-Hytch of Oxford University discusses Schellenberg's argument for atheism stemming from nonresistant nonbelief, nonbelief in God that results through no fault of one's own.

Check out Max's paper, "On Sin-based Responses to Divine hiddenness".

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

02:04 Do you struggle with divine hiddenness?

05:00 Schellenberg's argument

14:22 Are there nonresistant nonbelievers?

21:05 Would God prevent nonresistant nonbelief?

27:43 Step #1 - God would always be open to relationship

39:32 Step #2 - Openness entails no nonresistant nonbelief

45:28 Relationship without belief.

52:25 Alex O'Connor as a nonresistant nonbeliever

59:52 Related Problem #1 - Demographics of nonbelief

01:09:15 Related Problem #2 - Religious disagreement

Dr. Brian Cutter outlines the argument from psychophysical harmony for theism and responds to Graham Oppy's recent critique. Check out Crummett and Cutter's article defending the argument from psychophysical harmony:

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:22 The argument, summarized.

00:06:10 Does evolution explain harmony?

00:14:42 Probability of harmony on naturalism

00:20:46 Objection #1 - Infinite range of possible laws.

00:24:52 Objection #2 - Principle of indifference.

00:35:08 Probability of harmony on theism.

00:45:08 Replying to Graham Oppy's objections.

00:50:39 What if the mind and brain are identical?

01:14:36 Other explanations for harmony.

01:24:35 The role of historical context.

Dr. Mike Licona, professor of New Testament Studies at Houston Christian University, joins me to discuss the philosophy of history, whether a historian can determine if an event like the resurrection of Jesus happened, and then, if they can, whether the evidence is in fact sufficient to conclude that two-thousand years ago, Jesus rose from the dead.Check our Dr. Licona's book, "The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach."

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠⁠⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:01:15 Is the resurrection history or theology?

00:05:29 Methodological naturalism

00:24:46 Shouldn't we always prefer a natural explanation?

00:37:05 Bias in conservative New Testament scholarship

00:42:57 The historical case for the resurrection.

00:47:05 Was Jesus' tomb found empty?

00:49:53 What did the early disciples believe?

00:56:32 Did Paul teach a "spiritual" resurrection?

01:04:55 Alternative #1 - Someone stole the body.

01:08:48 Alternative #2 - The disciples hallucinated.

01:19:23 Alternatives #3 - Aliens raised Jesus from the dead.

Michael Huemer returns to the podcast to discuss his philosophical argument for reincarnation. If time is infinite, then the probability that you have lived multiple times - indeed, an infinite number of times - is 100%. I am not so sure about this argument. Check out Huemer's published version of the reincarnation argument, as well as his Substack.

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating⁠.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:04:25 The argument.

00:06:53 Poincare recurrence theorem.

00:17:42 Arguments for an infinite past.

00:28:10 Objection: infinite space and cosmic clones.

00:46:07 What does it feel like to reincarnate?

00:54:31 Should we look forward to our future lives?

01:08:19 Philosophical problems with Heaven.

Troy Dana joins me to debate the fine-tuning argument for God, as well as his anti-design fine-tuning argument.

Check out Troy's YouTube channel, along with Troy's written version of his anti-design argument.

To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠consider donating.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction.

00:00:57 Overview of the FTA.

00:04:49 Troy's anti-design FTA.

00:13:40 Likelihood of fine-tuning given bare design.

00:25:09 Discovering the digits of pi in the cosmic microwave background.

00:33:11 Double counting the evidence?

00:40:37 Bayesianism breaks down in cosmic contexts?

00:44:43 Return of awesome theistic evidence.

01:00:36 We'll pursue this in writing.

01:01:24 Troy's second anti-design argument.

01:11:10 Prior probability of theism.