The Uncertainty Podcast

Dan Linford returns to the channel to offer his reply to my recent discussion with William Lane Craig, wherein he replied to critiques of his case for a cosmic beginning. We discuss probability theory, the BGV theorem, emergence of spacetime, and the relevance of quantum gravity to our scientific inferences about a beginning of the universe.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X because you’re awesome.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:01:24 Craig's modest claim00:10:27 How to calculate the probability of a conclusion00:15:21 The probabilistic fallacy in Craig's scientific case00:21:56 Craig - "I'm ruling out classes of models"00:26:33 Exceptions to the BGV theorem00:29:22 Do theories of time make a difference?00:42:28 Inference to the best explanation and low probability00:51:25 Craig's inconsistency: temporally finite models of the universe00:59:18 Why we need a quantum theory of gravity01:12:04 The emergence of spacetime Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

David Enoch and Lance Bush face off over the question of whether objective moral truths exist. They debate the intuitiveness of moral realism, whether most people are moral realists, question-begging, radical skepticism, and much else besides.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X because you’re awesome.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:38 David's opening statement00:13:21 Lance's opening statement00:26:05 "I don't give a damn if most people aren't moral realists"00:31:59 Who is begging the question on whom?00:35:55 Is realism the intuitive position?00:40:35 Is Lance a radical skeptic?00:43:39 Realists misattribute metaethical claims to most people00:57:48 "People in general are idiots"01:02:06 Does ordinary moral discourse support realism?01:10:42 What are the costs of realism and anti-realism?01:18:15 On the strengths and weaknesses of analytic philosophy01:22:33 What do you mean when you say something is “wrong,” Lance? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Joshua Rasmussen explains his cosmological argument for God's existence: the existence of contingent things requires an explanation, and God fits the bill. Roughly stated, for sure, but that's the idea.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X because you’re awesome.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:57 Why the question matters00:10:29 Is ultimate reality beyond logic?00:14:55 Contingent vs. necessary things00:20:44 Stage #1 - From contingent things to a necessary being00:26:38 What is an "explanation"?00:36:23 Why should there be an explanation of all contingent things?00:47:37 Should we trust what intuition tells us?00:55:56 Conflicting empirical generalizations - a la Joe Schmid01:04:04 Stage #2 - From a necessary being to God01:12:52 Even a limitless God requires explanation01:23:37 Graham Oppy's necessary initial state of nature Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

William Lane Craig, Christian philosopher and apologist, returns to the channel to defend his use of cosmology in support of the kalam cosmological argument. In particular, we focus on recent critiques of his work from Daniel Linford, Phil Halper, Niayesh Afshordi, and others.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X because you're awesome.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00 Introduction00:06 Craig's case for a cosmic beginning02:55 "We don't have a quantum theory of gravity"09:24 Has Craig misunderstood probabilities?15:44 Can you give a parody argument against a beginning?20:23 Finite past vs. beginning to exist24:08 The emergence of spacetime28:05 The Malament-Manchak theorem35:42 The BGV theorem and its limits42:08 The generalized second law of thermodynamics44:26 Sean Carroll's model of an eternal universe47:58 Why don't all cosmologists agree about a beginning?50:39 Does your scientific case require your philosophical case? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Robyn Faith Walsh, professor of New Testament at the University of Miami, discusses how people in antiquity would have understood the concept of "resurrection", whether Jesus or Paul was the true founder of Christianity and what Paul meant when he said that we will be raised with "spiritual bodies", and what facts the historian can establish concerning the events before and after Jesus' death.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:07 Can historians verify miracles?00:06:37 Did the ancients take their myths literally?00:08:31 What did Paul think about the resurrection?00:19:22 Did Paul preach a spiritual resurrection?00:25:56 Do historians take the case for the resurrection seriously?00:44:18 Fact #1: Was Jesus crucified?00:46:56 Fact #2: Was Jesus buried in a tomb?00:52:10 Fact #3: Was Jesus' tomb found empty?00:54:35 Fact #4: Did Jesus' followers report appearances of Jesus alive?01:00:00 Fact #5: The origin of the Christian faith01:06:07 Was Paul the real founder of Christianity?01:08:00 How to be objective when studying Jesus Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Alex Malpass and I sit down to hash out our differences surrounding the fine-tuning argument for theism. The debate is a veritable blood bath of ruthless repartee and, at times, intellectual genius - and we hope you enjoy.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:36 Miles's opening statement00:06:56 Alex's opening statement00:19:36 Does the stalking-horse objection prove too much?00:31:11 Can you prove aliens didn't raise Jesus from the dead?00:46:03 Is theism more likely than augmented naturalism?00:55:53 What if our universe is a computer simulation?00:57:11 Even an omnipotent God couldn't make belief rational.01:00:00 "I don't think you're an idiot, Alex!"01:03:05 Is theism a simple hypothesis?01:15:00 Miles's closing statement01:17:48 Alex's closing statement Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Michael Huemer returns to the channel to answer YOUR best objections to his case for free will. While I originally styled this as a "bonus" episode, it is not a bonus. It's the main weekly thing. Forgive me. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.Check out our original discussion about free will.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:21 Objection #1 - You've got the wrong definition of "free will".00:03:10 Objection #2 - Free will is incoherent.00:07:48 Objection #3 - Free will leads to an infinite regress.00:09:06 Objection #4 - Philosophers can't agree on what "free will" even means.00:13:38 Objection #5 - Mike's argument is question-begging. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

With the gracious hosting of Amos Wollen, myself and Noah McKay debated Alex Malpass and Nathan Bray on the question of God's existence - specifically, theism versus naturalism. Noah and I defended theism via appeal to a historical case for miracles and the fine-tuning of the universe for life. Alex and Nathan contended that theism was no better an explanation for these phenomena than naturalism, and that because naturalism is simpler than theism then, all thing being equal, we ought to prefer it to theism. This was an exciting, substantive exchange, and I hope you like it.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction01:50 Miles's opening statement07:15 Noah's opening statement13:29 Nathan's opening statement19:28 Alex's opening statement25:58 Cross-examining Miles46:39 Cross-examining Noah01:06:48 Cross-examining Nathan01:27:09 Cross-examining Alex01:47:12 Closing statements Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Michael Huemer returns to the channel to discuss arguments for and against skepticism, the thesis that we cannot know much of anything, including whether or not we are dreaming right now. Other topics discussed: direct realism about perception and the arguments from illusion and hallucination, phenomenal conservatism, and the costs and benefits of self-publishing.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:44 What got Michael into self-publishing?00:08:35 How do I know I'm not dreaming right now?00:21:46 The argument for external world skepticism00:26:57 A critique of phenomenal conservatism00:32:29 Is a "real external world" the best explanation of our evidence?00:46:00 Direct versus indirect perceptual realism00:51:08 The argument from illusion00:56:11 The argument from hallucination01:03:05 Can we know we're not in a simulation?01:12:01 The problem of other minds Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart explains the contours of his argument against materialism is his new book, All Things Are Full of Gods: The Mysteries of Mind and Life. We explore his idealist leanings, the claim that a mechanistic approach to nature could never explain consciousness, and the thesis that atman is brahman, that I am fundamentally identical to infinite consciousness.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:42 What do we mean by "mind"?00:09:24 Are you an idealist?00:15:21 Panpsychism00:28:18 Convince me that consciousness exists at all.00:46:09 Sean Carroll's case for naturalism, considered00:54:14 Is this just a type of "God of the gaps" reasoning?01:00:34 Do fine-tuning and cosmological arguments for God succeed?01:07:47 Is atman Brahman?01:12:50 Does this mean that I am God?01:19:34 What are you most uncertain of? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

David Wallace, professor of philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh, explains why he finds the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics convincing. We discuss probability, what it means for persons to "split", whether teleportation means death, and the role of philosophy in assessing science.Video of this interview is available on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:01:22 What is the difference between quantum and classical mechanics?00:08:12 The measurement problem00:14:16 The many-worlds interpretation00:19:46 Why can't I see other branches of reality?00:33:13 Is many-worlds crazy and absurd?00:37:57 The probability problem00:50:58 Do people split in two when the universe branches?01:00:11 Does many-worlds explain fine-tuning?01:04:56 Should many-worlds change the way we live?01:16:30 Of what are you most uncertain? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Philosopher, author, and intelligent-design advocate Stephen Meyer joins me to discuss the arguments of his recent book, Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries that Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe. While we only got around to two of those three discoveries, our conversation was robust, engaging, and will interest both advocates and critics of Stephen's work.Check out video of our discussion on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:11 Interview with Joe Rogan00:03:19 Stephen's basic case for God00:12:05 Data point #1 - Origin of the universe00:17:26 The limits of singularity theorems00:25:45 Quantum cosmology and theories of quantum gravity00:32:36 What if spacetime is emergent?00:36:45 Why is a beginning more likely under theism?00:41:22 Data point #2 - Cosmic fine-tuning00:46:40 Why is fine-tuning unlikely under naturalism?00:53:31 Why is fine-tuning likely under theism?00:57:55 Technical objection: No background information01:03:04 The multiverse hypothesis01:08:19 Do we need a "scientific" theory of the multiverse?01:13:20 Richard Dawkins' argument: God is complex01:17:24 But what about evil and suffering? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Prof. Daniel Wolne explains historical theories of religion with special focus on Sigmund Freud's speculation that religious belief arises from a projection of a father figure onto the universe. We then dive into contemporary theories arising from the cognitive science of religion: theory of mind, hyperactive agency detection devices, and social function theories.Check out video of our discussion on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:03:51 Explanation vs. theory of religion00:07:26 Methodological naturalism00:16:48 What is "religion"?00:27:44 Sigmund Freud - Is religion just projection of a father figure?00:39:42 What about non-theistic religions?00:42:09 Is religion the response to fear of death?00:45:22 Cognitive science of religion00:50:52 Hyperactive Agency Detection Device (HADD)01:06:06 What is religion's social function?01:11:56 Does cognitive science undermine religious belief? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Isn't "smorgasbord" a great word? Amos Wollen, my friend and fellow Oxford graduate student, joins me to debate his novel argument for the compatibility of God's love and an eternal Hell, a theodicy involving our consenting to suffering prior to our births, a case for the Baha'i faith, a fine-tuning argument from beauty, and the real reason that I take so many bathroom breaks.Check out the video of the debate on YouTube.Amos has a great Substack that you should absolutely read.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:50 A new argument for Hell39:43 A pre-existence theodicy01:04:52 A fine-tuning argument from beauty01:25:02 A case for the Baha'i faith Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Two philosophers come together to debate the question of whether objective, mind-independent moral facts exist. Mike says yes, Matt says no. They discuss whether we can ever have reason to go against our desires, whether beliefs about morality make any difference to our behavior, how we know things about the world, and the relevance of intuitions.Check out the video of the debate on YouTube.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:45 Dr. Matt Lutz opening statement00:11:49 Dr. Michael Huemer opening statement00:24:43 Do moral obligations involve impossible kinds of reasons?00:41:40 Can the error theorist make sense of doing something against one’s desires?00:56:08 If moral facts disappeared, would we live our lives differently?01:14:34 What’s wrong with intuition as a ground for moral knowledge?01:29:05 How do we know logical and mathematical truths?01:35:46 Dr. Matt Lutz closing statement01:36:54 Dr. Dr. Michael Huemer closing statement Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Emerson Green walks through three powerful objections to attempts to reduce consciousness to the brain: phenomenal transparency, philosophical zombies, and vagueness.Check out Emerson's YouTube channel.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:05 What are you a YouTuber?00:19:08 Objection #1 - Phenomenal transparency00:29:22 Why physicalism cannot tolerate transparency00:32:31 What if consciousness is translucent?00:38:36 Maybe there are no mental states at all00:49:52 Objection #2 - Philosophical zombies01:00:57 Different types of conceivability01:12:29 What about modal skepticism?01:17:32 Objection #3 - Vagueness01:24:40 When do we go from non-conscious to conscious? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Randal Rauser and I explore the arguments of his new book, The Wideness of the Sea: How to be Evangelical and Gay-Affirming, wherein he offers a four-part case for including a gay-affirming perspective within the fold of Christian orthodoxy: scripture, tradition, reason, and experience.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:12 The tale of Eugene Peterson00:04:45 What is evangelical Christianity?00:09:10 Affirming vs. non-affirming perspectives00:14:55 Why do evangelicals care so much about gay relationships?00:24:19 Argument #1: The Bible00:40:25 Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man..."00:45:10 Romans 1:26-27 - "God gave them over..."00:50:05 Argument #2: Reason00:51:11 William Lane Craig's case against homosexuality00:54:22 Against natural law?00:58:32 Argument #3: Tradition01:07:28 Argument #4: Experience Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Talia Mae Bettcher explains why she has come to a dismal view of the United States as a home for trans people, details the Trump administration's recent policy changes targeting trans individuals, and debates the merits of a biological understanding of sex and gender.Check out Talia's latest book, Beyond Personhood: An Essay in Trans Philosophy.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.Follow me on X-formerly-Twitter.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:05 Why do you feel unsafe in the U.S.?00:06:27 How did the U.S. get here?00:12:01 Has your religious upbringing informed your work today?00:17:13 Methodology and biological theories of gender00:24:17 What is trans philosophy?00:28:37 Can a traditionalist engage in trans philosophy?00:33:03 Answering Matt Walsh: what is a woman?00:46:44 Circular definitions of gender00:49:13 Trans people can be mistaken in their gender identity00:54:57 Trans woman and prison placement01:07:47 Is "it's complicated" a cop-out? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Stephen Law, professor of philosophy at Oxford, discusses his "evil god challenge" to theists: prove that God is not perfectly evil. That challenge, we will see, is surprisingly difficult to meet. Check out Stephen's paper outlining the evil-god challenge, as well as Mooney and Hendricks paper critiquing the challenge.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Do please follow me ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:06 The evil-god challenge00:11:03 The versions of the challenge00:17:02 Does the moral argument break the parallel?00:24:28 Skeptical theism will not undercut the challenge00:34:07 Does skeptical theism lead to skepticism about everything?00:46:30 The neutral-god challenge00:53:13 Theodicies won't undercut the challenge, either00:59:39 Would Jesus' resurrection break the parallel?01:07:57 Is an evil god logically incoherent?01:16:47 What are you most uncertain about? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Graham Oppy and Brian Cutter join me to debate philosophy's newest argument for God: the argument from psychophysical harmony. We talk about epistemic probability versus metaphysical possibility, the relevance of thought-experiments to determining possibility, whether mental states are identical to brain states, and what we ought to infer if we found John 3:16 in binary code in the digits of pi.Check out Cutter and Crummet's paper defending the psycho-physical harmony argument, my previous interviews with Graham and Brian.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Feel free to follow me ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:34 Cutter opening statement00:18:14 Oppy opening statement00:27:59 Moderated discussion01:48:33 Cutter closing statement01:50:07 Oppy closing statement Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Mhairi Tait, my friend and fellow DPhil student at Oxford, sits down with me to discuss whether Ted Bundy's mother was right to stand by her son, whether you could ever love the same person forever, whether you should "trade up" if you find someone with better qualities than your current beloved, and whether one still ought to be loved even if one were a worm.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Feel free to follow me ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:52 Is the best kind of love unconditional?00:14:10 Is it okay to not love everyone?00:20:00 Should we "trade up" if we find a better romantic partner?00:21:21 Is love ever unjustified?00:24:07 Is love for an abuser real love?00:30:14 The possibility of love at first sight00:40:30 What IS love, exactly?00:45:04 Do you, Miles, think love has created value in you00:55:11 Ted Bundy's mother loved him to the very end00:59:28 Ethical non-monogamy?01:01:15 Does love require free will?01:04:20 Is there a single concept the unifies all our uses of the word "love"?01:06:39 Does analytic philosophy do damage to love?01:11:50 Realist vs. anti-realist accounts of love01:14:17 Could you love the same person forever? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. David Enoch, author of "Taking Morality Seriously: A Defense of Robust Realism," joins me to discuss moral realism versus anti-realism, objections from the moral error theorist, and my personal sticking points in affirming the existence of irreducible moral facts: moral disagreement across cultures and evolutionary explanations for our moral beliefs.Buy David's book defending robust moral realism.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Feel free to follow me ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:07:23 Naturalism vs. non-naturalism00:19:23 Why should we reject moral error theory?00:32:32 The revisionary costs of error theory00:43:34 Intuition as our only ground for moral realism?00:47:45 The connection to ethical intuitionism00:51:19 Objection #1 - Moral disagreement01:03:18 Moral skepticism01:06:20 Objection #2 - Evolutionary debunking arguments01:16:16 Is God required to explain objective morality?01:20:45 Are most philosophers moral realists? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Dan Linford breaks down Einstein's theory of special relativity, its consequences for our understanding of time, and whether there are any ways to reconcile relativity with the view that past events are no longer real, and future events are not yet real. In particular, he examines William Lane Craig's attempt to rehabilitate a neo-Lorentzian theory of relativity.To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating via⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠PayPal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy Me a Coffee⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Feel free to follow me ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:10 What is special relativity?00:11:30 Of trains and absolute simultaneity00:15:31 Time dilation and length contraction00:25:08 Three "interpretations" of special relativity00:27:14 Theory #1 - Einsteinian relativity00:29:11 Theory #2 - Minkowskian relativity00:35:11 Theory #3 - neo-Lorentzian relativity00:47:09 What do physicists think of neo-Lorentzian relativity?00:59:50 Can we integrate special relativity with presentism?01:10:06 Neo-Lorentzianism applied to cosmology Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Sociologist and professor Dr. Christian Smith discusses his recent book, Why Religion Went Obsolete: The Demise of Traditional Faith in America. We discuss the reasons for the decline of faith in a traditionally Christian nation, the seeming recent revival of faith among the younger generation, and what these developments mean for the future of religion in America.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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:13 How do we define religion?00:05:44 In what sense has religion gone obsolete?00:09:13 Why has religion gone obsolete?00:18:52 Is religion trending downward worldwide?00:21:20 The internet's role in undermining religion00:25:43 The "cringy-ness" of online religious outreach00:28:11 The legacy of the New Atheists00:32:01 The role conservative politics has played00:37:33 Does this mean Americans are atheists?00:46:50 The advance of science did not cause religious decline00:50:26 The negative impact of creationism00:54:01 Homosexuality and abortion as the ride-or-die issues01:02:09 A revival of faith among American youth?01:10:20 Does religion have a future? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Astrophysicist Niayesh Afshordi and science communicator Phil Halper return to the channel to discuss their new book, Battle of the Big Bang: The New Tales of Our Cosmic Origins. We discuss inflationary theory, the BGV theorem, how space and time might not exist at the fundamental level of reality, and so much else besides. This was one of my favorite interviews so far.Follow Phil on YouTube.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 CHAPTERS00:00:13 Does the Big Bang theory feature a bang?00:07:53 What is an FLRW spacetime? What is the Lambda-CDM model?00:18:39 Is a singularity unscientific?00:25:05 Singularity theorem #1: Hawking-Penrose00:33:04 Singularity theorem #2: Borde-Guth-Vilenkin00:39:23 What is "classical" spacetime?00:52:40 Singularity theorem #3: Generalized second law of thermodynamics00:57:54 The quantum eternity theorem01:01:10 String-theoretic models of the universe01:05:56 A fundamental limit to what we can know?01:09:10 Is a cosmic beginning scientifically unsatisfying?01:15:17 Teaching science as a story01:19:35 Embrace uncertainty Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Dan Linford and I discuss the causal principle, that everything that begins to exist has a cause. We look at William Lane Craig's oft-repeated three reasons for affirming the premise: something cannot come from nothing, if something could come from nothing, then anything and everything should come from nothing, and an inductive generalization supports the causal principle.Check out Linford's paper discussing neo-Russellian analyses of causation.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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:01:58 Different types of "causes"00:05:49 Premise (1) of the KCA00:10:19 First argument for CP: An inductive generalization00:23:56 Metaphysics should be continuous with physics00:34:27 Is science our only source of knowledge?00:38:32 Second argument for CP: Something cannot come from nothing00:42:16 Is neo-Russellianism just too counter-intuitive? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 IntroductionEPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:32 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 sex39:05 Intentional revision of sex terms?44:35 Dr. Bogardus: What is a woman?45:04 Woman: Adult human female55:24 Can trans-women be women on this account?01:12:38 But still, should we revise the meaning of our terms? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:13 What is moral error theory?00:03:46 Non-cognitivism in ethics00:19:32 Motivation for non-cognitivism00:25:00 Ethical naturalism vs. non-naturalism00:54:30 Is there an objective morality?00:58:21 Epistemological objections to realism01:11:00 Miles' two responses to arguments for error theory Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:15 The fine-tuning argument00:12:30 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 existence01:10:38 There are more options besides theism and naturalism01:19:50 Skeptical theism01:28:29 Does evil disprove God?01:32:04 Philip Goff's limited God01:43:55 Life is better if you believe in God01:53:40 Should we take the red pill?01:58:59 Problems with moral realism02:12:50 What motivates you in running a YouTube channel? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:56 How do science and philosophy relate?00:11:33 The fine-tuning argument00:22:35 Is the universe fine-tuned for rocks?00:27:39 Does evil disprove God?00:31:04 Of multiverses and Boltzmann Brains00:35:45 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 universe00:58:24 The Borde-Guth-Vilenkin theorem01:01:49 Does everything that begin to exist have a cause01:08:02 Are theistic philosophers acting in good faith01:11:56 Are atheists acting in good faith?01:16:59 What is Tim's favorite color?01:17:29 Will physics ever explain consciousness? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:15 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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:33 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 Project00:36:54 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 world01:02:30 The role of ethical intuitions01:09:04 BONUS CONTENT - The inconsistencies of moral anti-realists Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:12 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? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:12:13 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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:12 What is dialetheism?00:06:09 Paradox #1 - The liar00:14:54 Paradox #2 - The law00:29:37 Paradox #3 - Theology00:38:15 Why Christianity can't possibly be true00:40:46 Does dialetheism support Buddhism?00:49:01 The relationship between Buddhism and modern science00:49:25 Support #1 - The impermanence of all things00:51:54 The cosmological argument for God00:56:26 The fine-tuning argument for God01:55:44 Support #2 - The nature of consciousness Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:07 Multiverses in cosmology00:06:36 The problem of no best world00:13:15 The wine analogy00:19:44 Two versions of the problem00:24:20 Theistic multiverse solution00:32:10 Objection - Duplication00:37:27 1st response - Limit the multiverse to kinds00:43:53 2nd response - More is not always better00:49:50 What's more valuable, God or the multiverse?00:58:39 The problem of evil01:18:30 What got Klaas into philosophy?01:20:11 Does philosophy make progress? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:06 What is gnosticism?00:10:43 The historical value of the gnostic gospels00:24:12 Are the canonical gospels less legendary than the gnostic ones?00:31:11 The gospels as literature rather than history00:35:58 The Gospel of Thomas00:48:35 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 Paul01:14:25 Are evangelical NT scholars taken seriously?01:25:56 Confirmation bias in NT scholarship Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:01:05 What is panpsychism?00:14:46 Panpsychism vs. idealism00:17:49 Why we should be panpsychists00:34:35 The combination problem00:40:12 From panpsychism to cosmopsychism00:48:40 The fine-tuning of the universe00:56:28 Cosmopsychism vs. theism01:10:45 What is the purpose of the universe?01:16:40 Debating William Lane Craig Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:03:25 What is dialetheism?00:15:12 Languages vs. meta-languages00:23:47 Examples of true contradictions00:25:02 #1 - The liar paradox00:31:23 #2 - Contradictions in the law00:40:11 #3 - Paradoxes of motion00:45:00 Not every contradiction is true00:52:40 Why should glut theorists care about consistency?01:07:13 My argument against dialetheism01:16:39 Contradictions within Christianity01:23:30 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 religions01:39:49 Things logicians wish everyone would know01:42:44 Godel's incompleteness theorems Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:45 Cosmological science today00:10:25 Anthropocentrism, defined00:15:16 Two kinds of anthropocentrism: biological and personal00:30:46 Consequentialism00:32:15 The cosmic perspective and non-anthropocentrism00:40:47 Objection: Some infinities are better than other infinities00:56:59 Why we should reject nonanthropocentrism01:01:48 Should we seek to preserve nature?01:18:25 Towards a stewardship model of environmentalism Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction02:04 Do you struggle with divine hiddenness?05:00 Schellenberg's argument14:22 Are there nonresistant nonbelievers?21:05 Would God prevent nonresistant nonbelief?27:43 Step #1 - God would always be open to relationship39:32 Step #2 - Openness entails no nonresistant nonbelief45:28 Relationship without belief.52:25 Alex O'Connor as a nonresistant nonbeliever59:52 Related Problem #1 - Demographics of nonbelief01:09:15 Related Problem #2 - Religious disagreement Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:00:22 The argument, summarized.00:06:10 Does evolution explain harmony?00:14:42 Probability of harmony on naturalism00:20:46 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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:01:15 Is the resurrection history or theology?00:05:29 Methodological naturalism00:24:46 Shouldn't we always prefer a natural explanation?00:37:05 Bias in conservative New Testament scholarship00:42:57 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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:04:25 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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

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 CHAPTERS00:00:00 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. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Keegan Kjeldson, YouTuber and musician, joins me to discuss how Nietzsche would have responded to philosopher Michael Huemer's argument for free will. Check out Keegan's awesome YouTube channel.To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Joe and I take a more personal turn in this video, discussing the importance of philosophy, what got us into the discipline, and whether studying Immanuel Kant your whole life is really worth it.Check out Joe's YouTube channel, Majesty of Reason.To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00:00 Introduction00:01:02 What's the value of philosophy?00:03:35 Are some areas of philosophy pointless?00:15:17 Joe Schmid: A Personal History00:25:27 Miles Donahue: A Personal History00:31:25 Why is Joe an agnostic?00:40:34 The FTA Objection 1 - Epistemically illuminated region00:49:34 The FTA Objection 2 - Theism's predictive problem01:03:57 The FTA Objection 3 - The Multiverse01:10:20 Question Lightning Round Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Darrell L. Bock, research professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, discusses the gnostic gospels and their relationship to early Christian belief and the historical Jesus.To support the channel, do please oh please⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Feel free to follow me on⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00 Introduction00:18 What makes the gnostic gospels so interesting?01:41 What is gnosticism?05:15 What did the gnostics think about Jesus?13:04 The Gospel of Thomas17:06 The Gospel of Judas18:31 The Gospel of Peter20:22 The Gospel of Phillip24:00 How did the New Testament books get selected?29:22 The Niece Creed and its history37:58 What role did Constantine play?47:04 Bart Ehrman's views on early Christianity Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Ned Block, professor of philosophy and psychology at NYU, joins me to discuss theories of consciousness, functionalism, the difference between access and phenomenal consciousness, the limitations of current Large Language Models, and how far away artificial general intelligence is from our current capacities.To support the channel, do please oh please⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠consider donating.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Feel free to follow me on⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.EPISODE CHAPTERS00:00 Introduction00:22 Hard vs. easy problems of consciousness07:39 Reductive vs. non-reductive physicalism12:19 The Chinese nation thought experiment19:14 Can ChatGPT fool you into thinking it's a human? The Turing test28:31 Rules vs. patterns-based reasoning34:16 Blockhead thought experiment37:53 Phenomenal vs. access consciousness44:09 What is artificial intelligence?46:27 The limits of LLMs49:48 Does thinking require a brain?50:34 Narrow vs. general AI51:57 Is AI about to surpass human intelligence? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe