Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom | Dr. Taylor Cyr and Sean Clements Majesty of Reason 2024-10-17 | Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom | Dr. Taylor Cyr and Sean Clements
How William Lane Craig misrepresents science Majesty of Reason 2024-10-01 | I'm joined by Dr. Daniel Linford and Phil Halper to explain what Craig gets wrong about science's bearing on the beginning of the universe. Specifically, we respond to a recent video by @ReasonableFaithOrg.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro2:22 Craig’s video9:22 Material causality18:14 Beginning to exist20:05 Big Bang and cosmological models33:18 No particular model is probable?36:26 Past finitude doesn’t imply beginning51:57 Quantum gravity55:51 Window shade analogy1:00:10 BGV Theorem1:17:13 Vilenkin’s paper1:26:00 Sean Carroll and Guth1:38:12 The fixed Kalam1:41:20 Abstract object counterexamples?1:51:45 Second law of thermodynamics1:55:10 The universe as a counterexample?1:57:56 Document! Don’t just assert!2:06:45 ConclusionNOTEAt 1:15:05, I wanted to summarize the problems with Craig’s use of the BGV theorem. I didn’t provide the most helpful summary in the video, so here’s a summary:(1) At best, the BGV theorem shows that a spacetime region which has been expanding on average throughout its history could not have been expanding forever. Such an expanding region must have begun its expansion at some finitely distant point in the past. This does *not* imply that all of spacetime *itself* has a beginning because all of spacetime may not have been expanding on average throughout its history. In such a case, the BGV Theorem would be inapplicable to the whole of spacetime itself. In fact, as pointed out in the video, both Guth and Vilenkin explicitly say that the BGV theorem only shows that the *inflation* of the universe has a beginning, it doesn’t show that the *universe as a whole* or *spacetime as a whole* has a beginning.(2) Recent literature purports to give grounds to doubt the BGV theorem. Whether or not this recent literature is correct, it reveals that this is not a settled issue. Instead, it is an active area of research and debate. Relevant papers here include Lesnefsky et al (2023) journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.044024, Geshnizjani et al (2023) link.springer.com/article/10.1007/JHEP10(2023)182, Nomura (2012) arxiv.org/abs/1205.5550, and Aguirre (2007) arxiv.org/abs/0712.0571.(3) The BGV theorem is only a theorem about classical spacetimes. But we probably don’t live in a classical spacetime. We have good reasons internal to the standard model and general relativity for thinking that these theories will be surpassed by a new theory able to incorporate both. So our current understanding of spacetime will be replaced by something else. So the BGV theorem does not apply to the spacetime we live in.(4) Even if we do live in a classical spacetime, the Malamant-Manchak theorems show that, in all likelihood, we couldn’t ever know enough about the global structure of spacetime to know that *all* of spacetime had a beginning.(5) Even if the BGV theorem shows that the past is finite — and, as explained above, it does not — we cannot infer that the universe (i.e., the totality of all physical reality) began to exist, for the reasons given in the section of the video entitled “Past finitude does not entail beginning to exist”.RESOURCES(1) The video to which we're responding (@ReasonableFaithOrg): youtu.be/-Aq9rET8_BE?si=9a3Q5cxkkxjdlIYg(2) Dan's dissertation, “Cosmic Skepticism and the Beginning of Physical Reality”: philarchive.org/archive/DAN_SA-15(3) Saatsi, “Non-causal explanations in physics”: philarchive.org/archive/SAANEI(4) “No, science doesn’t show the universe began to exist”: youtu.be/35tICdYtHsQ?si=oQ-LfJuWjSo6mWYb(5) Phil’s book, “Battle of the Big Bang”: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/B/bo244963115.html(6) @PhilHalper1's Kalam video: youtu.be/pGKe6YzHiME?si=XvhKyGYeEwecvAX4(7) Phil's video responding to Craig's responses: youtu.be/femxJFszbo8?si=TV2fEGjS91K7HB65(8) My Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(9) Linford, “A modal condition for the beginning of the universe”: philarchive.org/rec/LINAMC-2(10) Linford, “Neo-Lorentzian Relativity and the Beginning of the Universe”: philarchive.org/rec/LINNRA-3(11) Linford, "Big Bounce or Double Bang? A Reply to Craig and Sinclair": http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/17188/1/FORTHCOMING_Big_Bang_or_Double_Bounce_Erk_Sub.pdf(12) Linford, “The Kalam Cosmological Argument Meets the Mentaculus”: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/16833/1/Online_Final_BJPS_Kalam_Mentaculus_Submission.pdf(13) Halper, "The Kalam cosmological argument: Critiquing a recent defence": philarchive.org/rec/HALTKC(14) My Springer book with Dan: link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(15) My website: josephschmid.com
The new REBUTTED case for Gods existence Majesty of Reason 2024-09-15 | Trent Horn (@TheCounselofTrent) recently explained the new case for God's existence. In this video, I rebut his new case for God's existence.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:04 Trent’s preliminaries3:49 Argument from change27:14 Kalam29:27 Scientific case30:59 Hilbert’s Hotel1:08:09 Benardete paradoxes1:24:40 Modal contingency argument1:49:42 Fine-tuning argument2:00:29 Argument from miracles2:18:45 Moral argument2:33:18 Conclusion2:34:16 A story2:41:38 Bonus soccerLINKS(1) Want the script? Become a patron :)(2) Trent's video: youtube.com/watch?v=22qUGVZXlGg&pp=ygUKdHJlbnQgaG9ybg%3D%3D(3) Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(4) Argument from Change playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka2JpwLJaSaXdDZlBYkd9Cn(5) Response Videos playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkaNtpoOwEZm9fuJq423BUrW(6) Moral Arguments playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkaUcAQpHXN9ZNF2RxZLe7U_(7) Contingency Argument playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZkl5I5QDUXW5CauOfO_bs1(8) Classical Theism playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka0E9laGDA83gN2UbQoa4F2(9) Design Arguments playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkax5OrwZmkqE1fY446O4i6g(10) My Free Will playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka4SMFOH-KH-hdJoTz6fG5F(11) My Common Mistakes playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(12) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
If God exists, is everything permitted? | Dr. Justin Mooney & Dr. Luis Oliveira Majesty of Reason 2024-09-07 | Today I’m joined by Justin Mooney and Luis Oliveira to discuss a new aspects of the problem of evil.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:45 Summary of the paper28:40 Symmetry argument34:33 Necessary evil theodicies56:32 Necessary permission theodicies1:12:03 Divine right theodicies1:26:28 Final thoughts1:34:00 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Justin's website with all his papers: justinmooney.net(2) Luis' PhilPeople profile with all his papers: philpeople.org/profiles/luis-r-g-oliveira(3) Luis' article "God and gratuitous evil: between the rock and the hard place": philpapers.org/archive/OLIGAG.pdf(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Against single-issue pro-life voting Majesty of Reason 2024-08-24 | If the pro-life view is correct, should we prioritize abortion over every other issue in politics and voting? Dustin Crummett argues that the answer is no.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:50 Overview3:30 Body Count Reasoning8:04 Four notes13:18 Embryo Rescue Case19:17 Objection: death vs. unjust killing20:57 Objection: committing unjust killing23:25 Objection: cooperating with evil29:22 Objection: timing of abortion31:59 Objection: non-inferential beliefs38:20 Crummett himself52:02 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Crummett (2023), "Is abortion the only issue?", https://journals.publishing.umich.edu/ergo/article/id/2270/(2) McNabb and DeVito's response paper, "Basic Beliefs, the Embryo Rescue Case, and Single-Issue Voting", pdcnet.org/ncbq/content/ncbq_2021_0021_0002_0203_0208?file_type=pdf(3) Debate between @TheCounselofTrent and @dustin.crummett: youtu.be/RKfa4vAAaPI?si=uaDtEoQXZ-6-_jgR(4) Crummett's interview on @going_awoll: youtu.be/7m0fSYIWn8g?si=U04p-u-Hc4dzzB8c(5) My Applied Ethics playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkaYPueOwJRE0CPj6xyIWfxb(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Van Inwagen RESPONDS to William Lane Craig #Kalam #God #Infinity Majesty of Reason 2024-08-12 | The Kalam Cosmological Argument doesn't work.For more on why the Kalam fails, see my Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSRFor a specific video on this argument, see (especially Response #1 in) youtube.com/watch?v=wt-rEeUIcR4This clip is taken from @HarrisonDean: youtu.be/H0GG_HhaiAI?si=mNXLCP6ugnc5eUswMy website: josephschmid.com
Grim Reaper Paradoxes and Patchwork Principles | Ft. @Friction Majesty of Reason 2024-08-09 | The Grim Reaper Paradox does not support the Kalam cosmological argument. In this video, Troy and I explain why.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro & Outline1:44 Benardete Paradoxes6:43 Connection to the Kalam8:31 Finitist B-Arguments10:20 Grim Reaper Argument21:40 Our first objection22:41 A finite Benardete-like paradox24:24 Our first premise27:45 Our second premise34:49 Our second objection43:14 Diagnosis45:48 ConclusionLINKS(1) Troy's channel: youtube.com/@Friction(2) Troy's other links: https://link.space/@Friction(3) The paper discussed in the video is “Grim Reaper Paradoxes and Patchwork Principles: Severing the Case for Finitism”, Journal of Philosophy (Forthcoming): philarchive.org/rec/SCHGRP-4(4) My Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(5) Blog post, "Responses to the Grim Reaper Kalam", majestyofreason.wordpress.com/2024/05/28/responses-to-the-grim-reaper-kalam(6) Other papers of mine mentioned in the video:(6.1) “Branching Actualism and Cosmological Arguments”, Philosophical Studies (2023, with Alex Malpass): philpapers.org/rec/SCHBAA-22(6.2) “Benardete paradoxes, patchwork principles, and the infinite past”, Synthese (2024): philpapers.org/rec/SCHBPP-3(6.3) “The End is Near: Grim Reapers and Endless Futures”, Mind (Forthcoming): philpapers.org/rec/SCHTEI-19(6.4) "Benardete Paradoxes, Causal Finitism, and the Unsatisfiable Pair Diagnosis", Mind (Forthcoming, with Alex Malpass): philarchive.org/rec/SCHBPC(7) My Springer book with Dr. Dan Linford: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(8) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Arguments for and against Molinism | Dr. Daniel Rubio Majesty of Reason 2024-07-26 | Molinism is a popular view of divine providence, but it has serious problems. I'm joined by Daniel Rubio to explore these problems and more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:50 Key definitions19:30 Molina’s argument23:34 Theological utility35:00 Mooney’s argument37:37 Hasker’s ‘might’ argument44:42 Objective probability argument48:30 Grounding objection58:42 TSB argument1:03:55 Bruteness argument1:08:15 Explanatory priority argument1:14:28 Swenson’s dilemma1:24:00 Explaining freedom away1:31:50 God’s unlucky day1:33:37 Voodoo Argument1:41:07 Kryptonite argument1:45:45 Providential collapse argument1:54:54 Tier List1:56:59 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Dr. Rubio’s website: danielkfrubio.com(2) Climenhaga & Rubio, “Molinism: Explaining Our Freedom Away”: philpapers.org/archive/CLIMEO.pdf(3) Rubio, “Still Another Anti-Molinist Argument”: ojs.uclouvain.be/index.php/theologica/article/view/84353(4) Law, “If Molinism is true, what can you do?”: philpapers.org/archive/LAWIMI.pdf(5) Rasmussen, “On creating worlds without evil given divine counterfactual knowledge”: philpapers.org/rec/RASOCW(6) Rusavuk, “Molinism’s Kryptonite: Counterfactuals and circumstantial luck”: philpapers.org/archive/RUSMKC.pdf(7) Zimmerman, “Yet another anti-molinist argument”: https://fas-philosophy.rutgers.edu/zimmerman/Anti.Molinist.arg.proofs.pdf(8) Mooney’s argument for molinism (by @TheAnalyticChristian): youtube.com/watch?v=fzv37U2alAo(9) Swenson’s argument against molinism (by @TheAnalyticChristian): youtube.com/watch?v=HE0fxXY3hjE(10) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
A problem for effective altruism? | Dr. Travis Timmerman Majesty of Reason 2024-07-12 | Effective altruism faces a serious dilemma. How might the effective altruist solve it? I'm joined by Dr. Travis Timmerman to explore this question as well as the actualism/possibilism debate in ethics.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:18 Effective altruism9:22 Actualism and possibilism18:20 Not Demanding Enough Objection22:11 Bad Behavior Objection25:25 Non-Ratifiability Problem29:03 Worst Outcome Objection34:34 Asymmetry Objection38:58 Hybridism51:40 Dilemma for effective altruism1:08:21 A hybridist solution?1:15:15 Other practical implicationsRESOURCES(1) Dr. Timmerman's website: travistimmerman.com(2) "Effective Altruism's Underspecification Problem": philpapers.org/rec/TIMEAU(3) Dr. Timmerman's co-authored SEP entry on actualism and possibilism: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/actualism-possibilism-ethics/(4) "Sweatshops and Free Action: The Stakes of the Actualism/Possibilism Debate for Business Ethics": philpapers.org/rec/TIMSAF(5) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
The Modal Ontological Argument: An Analysis Majesty of Reason 2024-06-28 | Here's your comprehensive guide to the modal ontological argument for God's existence!Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro & Outline2:06 General structure of MOA12:55 Representative argument15:16 Simpler variant16:17 Criticisms26:43 Symmetry Breakers32:59 Presumption of possibility40:45 Conceivability45:07 Deontic56:12 Ontomystical1:06:33 Motivational centrality1:11:05 Godelian1:27:25 Maximal God1:33:07 Modal continuity1:44:23 Desire1:54:08 Open-mindedness1:59:30 Explicability2:06:39 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) My co-authored SEP entry with Oppy and Rasmussen: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-arguments/(2) The paper on PhilPapers: philpapers.org/rec/SCHSBF-2(3) Ontological Arguments playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Causal finitism is NOT the best solution to infinity paradoxes Majesty of Reason 2024-06-14 | How should we solve paradoxes of infinity like the Grim Reaper Paradox? One candidate solution is causal finitism. In this video, Alex Malpass and I argue that there’s a better solution: the unsatisfiable pair diagnosis (UPD).Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:45 Summary of the paper3:08 Grim Reaper paradox8:07 The Kalam9:52 Causal finitism12:55 The UPD23:16 Problems with causal finitist solution44:30 Mysterious force objection56:47 Patchwork objection1:13:20 Finite Benardete-like paradoxes1:15:35 Final notesLINKS(1) The original video from @PhilHalper1: youtu.be/vgLzMkxhEiQ?si=cIM4SZzykNmoOvod(2) The paper discussed in the video is “Benardete Paradoxes, Causal Finitism, and the Unsatisfiable Pair Diagnosis”, Mind (Forthcoming, with Alex Malpass): philarchive.org/rec/SCHBPC(3) My Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(4) Here are four other papers of mine mentioned in the video:(4.1) “Branching Actualism and Cosmological Arguments”, Philosophical Studies (2023, with Alex Malpass): philpapers.org/rec/SCHBAA-22(4.2) “Benardete paradoxes, patchwork principles, and the infinite past”, Synthese (2024): philpapers.org/rec/SCHBPP-3(4.3) “The End is Near: Grim Reapers and Endless Futures”, Mind (Forthcoming): philpapers.org/rec/SCHTEI-19(4.4) “Grim Reaper Paradoxes and Patchwork Principles: Severing the Case for Finitism”, Journal of Philosophy (Forthcoming, with Troy Dana): philarchive.org/rec/SCHGRP-4(5) My Springer book with Dr. Dan Linford: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(6) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Divine Foreknowledge vs. Human Freedom in Five Minutes Majesty of Reason 2024-06-01 | Is divine foreknowledge compatible with human freedom? Let's see if we can answer this in five minutes.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidLINKS(1) The video from which this is clipped: youtu.be/938qqjwCYC0(2) My Free Will playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka4SMFOH-KH-hdJoTz6fG5F(3) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Are we moral monsters? | Peter Singer on Charitable Giving Majesty of Reason 2024-05-19 | Peter Singer argues that you are morally obliged to donate to charity even at considerable personal cost. Is he right?Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidRESOURCES(1) Peter Singer's famous paper "Famine, Affluence, and Morality", originally published in 1972: personal.lse.ac.uk/robert49/teaching/mm/articles/Singer_1972Famine.pdf(2) Applied Ethics: An Impartial Introduction: amazon.com/Applied-Ethics-Introduction-Elizabeth-Jackson/dp/1647920116(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(4) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Pascals Wager | Dr. Al Hájek and Dr. Liz Jackson Majesty of Reason 2024-05-04 | Should you wager on God? Let's find out.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro and outline2:48 Key background15:52 The wager23:36 Many gods objection32:16 Mixed strategies objection39:00 Al’s dilemma51:21 Pascal’s mugging1:01:02 Is wagering even possible?1:10:34 Is wagering impious?1:14:25 St. Petersburg Paradox1:30:17 Closing remarksLINKS(1) The paper Liz and Al co-authored on Pascal's wager: philpapers.org/archive/HAJPEA.pdf(2) Liz's YouTube channel (@lizjackson111) and website: liz-jackson.com(3) Al's PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/alan-hajek(4) Some of Liz's papers on Pascal's wager: (i) philpapers.org/rec/JACFTP-2 (ii) philpapers.org/rec/JACAPD-9 (iii) philpapers.org/rec/JACSPW(5) Some of Al's papers on Pascal's wager: (i) philpapers.org/rec/HJEWWO (ii) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/(6) An earlier video I made with Liz on Pascal's Wager: youtube.com/watch?v=9qTC7OZB_1A(7) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(8) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Why atheists can blame Trent Horn for his bad arguments Majesty of Reason 2024-04-20 | Trent Horn (@TheCounselofTrent) recently argued that atheists cannot blame Christians for anything. In this video, I explain why he's wrong.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:00 Definitions1:48 Trent’s video4:24 Are atheists blaming Craig?6:05 ‘Should’ implies alternative possibilities?8:14 Power to change the future8:50 Linguistic incaution10:39 Sapolsky11:49 Trent’s core argument16:11 What’s the difference???20:12 Leeway freedom24:22 Atheism and reductive physicalism25:51 Humans vs. animals28:24 Libertarianism and laws of nature32:55 Does theism preclude moral responsibility?38:56 Luck objection42:43 Punishment and moral responsibility47:07 Old Testament God = North Korea48:53 Clarifying compatibilism51:54 Trent contra compatibilism54:19 Trent’s second argument57:21 Frankfurt cases1:04:20 Flickers of freedom1:11:02 Resources and conclusionCORRECTIONS(1) In the section entitled "Should’ implies alternative possibilities?", I contest the idea that 'S should φ' implies 'S could do something alternative to φ-ing'. I think my counterexamples to that idea are correct, but I don't think they actually address Trent's claim in the preceding clip. In particular, Trent's claim was instead that 'S should φ' implies 'S could φ'. Importantly, though, many of my examples can be modified to motivate denying this claim too. For instance, just imagine the boulder-trapping-arm case to be one in which you're compelled *not* to hack off your arm by your psychology (maybe you're very queasy). Still, it seems like you *should* hack off your arm!LINKS(1) My Response Videos playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkaNtpoOwEZm9fuJq423BUrW(2) My Free Will playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka4SMFOH-KH-hdJoTz6fG5F(3) My Common Mistakes playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(4) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4(5) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
How to excel at philosophy Majesty of Reason 2024-04-15 | What is philosophy? Why is it valuable? And how do we do it well? Here I talk about these topics and more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:56 The nature of philosophy11:43 The value of philosophy14:30 Is reason beautiful?19:07 Intellectual virtues25:34 How to communicate and engage philosophically33:45 Pervasive mistakes36:55 Mind changes40:11 Personal factors46:31 RecommendationsLINKS(1) Original video with @NaHoa: youtu.be/3TPIgKRvc7o?si=eNRYtjUqjDFZozwO(2) Doing Philosophy playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkbOGcxCZPjybRASmKynBfGN(3) The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4(4) How to Analyze Arguments like a Philosopher: youtube.com/watch?v=uD5_2p-vUjs&pp=ygUqaG93IHRvIGFuYWx5emUgYXJndW1lbnRzIGxpa2UgYSBwaGlsb3NvcGh5(5) Common Mistakes series: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
God is dead | April Fools Majesty of Reason 2024-04-01 | Today I prove atheism using ontological nihilism. Btw, God doesn't exist.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:27 The proof1:08 Ontological nihilism3:29 Ad4:24 Proof of ontological nihilism6:10 Non-fundamental nihilism9:16 Anti-foundationalism13:19 Appearances?15:45 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Westerhoff, Jan. 2024. "An Argument for Ontological Nihilism". Inquiry, available here: drive.google.com/file/d/1bAsqb8F599XsAR9CyUnNNIOVbGL2oFOH/view?usp=sharing(2) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Answering HUNDREDS of your questions! Majesty of Reason 2024-03-24 | The one million views AMA answers are HERE!Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidARBITRARY OUTLINE (SEE DESCRIPTION FOR QUESTIONS)0:00 Black shirt1:19:51 Dark blue shirt2:14:17 Grey-ish shirt3:44:49 Light blue shirtLINKSThe Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy: amazon.com/Majesty-Reason-Critical-Thinking-Philosophy/dp/B086FW6XV4My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2 (c) majestyofreason.wordpress.com/2022/12/05/details-and-errata-for-existential-inertia-and-classical-theistic-proofsFollow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Avoid these 15 mistakes about Free Will, Christianity, and Consciousness Majesty of Reason 2024-02-28 | In this final part of the common mistakes series, we cover mistakes about free will, Christianity, and consciousness.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE00:00 Intro1:03 Mistake 16320:10 Mistake 16421:36 Mistake 16522:29 Mistake 16623:40 Mistake 16725:17 Mistake 16840:56 Mistake 16944:19 Mistake 17046:13 Mistake 17147:21 Mistake 17247:49 Mistake 17349:02 Mistake 17452:56 Mistake 17554:09 Mistake 17659:22 Mistake 1771:09:02 Mistake 178 (Bonus)CORRECTION25:28 I should have explicitly and clearly specified that a large portion of the section on OT atrocities — Mistake 168 — was not just drawn from Josh Parikh’s talk but *directly* drawn from Parikh’s talk, ie, quoted therefrom. Apologies for not clarifying this at the outset. I've now updated the document containing Mistake 168 to reflect this clarification. You can see the updated document here: docs.google.com/document/d/15_GnNWL8lZJUU-640OoKwNP3BSocQJDfWD38OYJF9Y0/edit?usp=sharingYou can also find Parikh’s talk here: youtu.be/b3Ey8-ypa_A?si=38oYSElHN1JnjUsoRESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 7: docs.google.com/document/d/1yB118TjWVxTVk09LB95sd_IcvNAAHTZueWnHRYlsJXQ/edit?usp=sharing(2) Common Mistakes Series playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Apples dont exist Majesty of Reason 2024-02-17 | Here I cover the explanatory exclusion argument for mereological nihilism, which the view that composite objects don't exist.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Mereological nihilism4:16 Explanatory Exclusion Argument9:40 Moorean objection11:58 Other arguments and resourcesLINKS(1) My discussion with Dr. Olson: youtube.com/watch?v=qoO9VpgzPIg(2) My video on whether birds exist: youtube.com/watch?v=LgMY3-67uwk(3) @KaneB's video on ordinary objects: youtube.com/watch?v=07PZ1a-gZxw(4) Relevant SEP entries: (i) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ordinary-objects/ (ii) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/material-constitution/ (iii) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many/ (iv) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sorites-paradox/(5) Dr. Crummett's popular case for mereological nihilism: capturingchristianity.com/two-more-arguments-for-substance-dualism(6) Portions of this video are drawn from Schaffer's "From Nihilism to Monism", AJP (2007): http://www.jonathanschaffer.org/nihilism.pdf(7) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
LEVEL UP by avoiding these mistakes about God Majesty of Reason 2024-02-05 | Level up your philosophy of religion game by avoiding these common mistakes about models of God, divine simplicity, Thomism, and more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:12 Mistake 1422:42 Mistake 1434:06 Mistake 1449:08 Mistake 14510:12 Mistake 14612:08 Mistake 14715:30 Mistake 14817:09 Mistake 14925:39 Mistake 15025:59 Mistake 15132:54 Mistake 15239:02 Mistake 15340:28 Mistake 15441:27 Mistake 15541:58 Mistake 15642:43 Mistake 15743:05 Mistake 15844:07 Mistake 15945:35 Mistake 16051:21 Mistake 16152:36 Mistake 16259:09 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 6: docs.google.com/document/d/1V4FkN4yqSf0zrVZBs2QpMd6_157PohjzgeWSmWarCl4/edit?usp=sharing(2) Common Mistakes Series playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Grim Reapers and Endless Futures: A Problem for the Kalam Majesty of Reason 2024-01-23 | The Grim Reaper Paradox has been used to support the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Here I mount a grim challenge to this sort of reasoning: implying the impossibility of an endless future.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro2:55 The paper8:18 The unsatisfiable pair14:35 B-arguments17:34 A grim dilemma20:55 A future-oriented paradox31:44 First line: Patchwork principles41:33 Second line: Mysterious forces50:37 Summary51:58 ConclusionCORRECTIONSAt 8:02, I accidentally cut out the last two words of my sentence. I should have said "...equally motivate this new linking premise."RESOURCES(1) Free access link to the official article: academic.oup.com/mind/advance-article/doi/10.1093/mind/fzad065/7492631?utm_source=authortollfreelink&utm_campaign=mind&utm_medium=email&guestAccessKey=79959771-76b4-4604-a90a-419f5de3ab39(2) If the link in (1) doesn't work, you can read a pre-print here: philpapers.org/rec/SCHTEI-19(3) Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(4) My forthcoming Synthese paper, "Benardete paradoxes, patchwork principles, and the infinite past": philpapers.org/rec/SCHBPP-3(5) My 2023 Phil Studies paper with Alex Malpass, "Branching actualism and cosmological arguments": philpapers.org/rec/SCHBAA-22(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Does Free Will Exist? | Sapolsky vs. Huemer Debate Review Majesty of Reason 2024-01-08 | I’m joined by Dr. Taylor Cyr to review the recent debate between Dr. Robert Sapolsky and Dr. Michael Huemer on free will.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro & Outline2:15 Key terms13:12 Sapolsky’s opening47:43 Huemer’s opening1:50:20 ConclusionLINKS(1) Original debate on @PercyPrior1: youtu.be/FjAYvhv1-Lg?si=5Fs3NRhXhPHA45E9(2) Taylor's website: taylorwcyr.com(3) The Free Will Show (@thefreewillshow2132): thefreewillshow.com(4) Fischer's review of Sapolsky's book: https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/determined-a-science-of-life-without-free-will/(5) My Free Will playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka4SMFOH-KH-hdJoTz6fG5F(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
These mistakes are RUINING your philosophy of religion gains Majesty of Reason 2023-12-27 | Build your mental muscle by avoiding these mistakes about the problem of evil and divine hiddenness.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:49 Mistake 1268:57 Mistake 12719:05 Mistake 12821:51 Mistake 12924:28 Mistake 13025:08 Mistake 13126:39 Mistake 13230:03 Mistake 13334:33 Mistake 13436:28 Mistake 13538:45 Mistake 13639:34 Mistake 13744:14 Mistake 13848:05 Divine Hiddenness55:18 Mistake 1391:09:35 Mistake 1401:12:01 Mistake 1411:15:41 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 5: docs.google.com/document/d/1yxhbQRLtYzX-j-ZtWJi1Vyag49J4noPPkYvQGq6Odpg/edit?usp=sharing(2) Common Mistakes Series playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Common Mistakes about the Moral Argument, Fine-Tuning, and Ontological Arguments Majesty of Reason 2023-12-15 | In this fourth installment of my common mistakes series, I cover mistakes relating to the moral argument, fine-tuning argument, and ontological arguments.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:37 Mistake 1052:46 Mistake 1065:33 Mistake 10715:18 Mistake 10822:33 Mistake 10939:54 Mistake 11051:49 Mistake 11153:04 Mistake 11255:52 Mistake 11358:09 Mistake 11459:26 Mistake 1151:02:15 Mistake 1161:07:49 Mistake 1171:09:24 Mistake 1181:11:48 Mistake 1191:16:03 Mistake 1201:21:18 Mistake 1211:31:10 Mistake 1221:37:30 Mistake 1231:43:21 Mistake 1241:44:07 Mistake 1251:45:29 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 4: docs.google.com/document/d/1Voy-_z92sFBBrVGFo2Hb2qjV1khVcthVxLS6jAKZCsA/edit?usp=sharing(2) Document with resources criticizing WLC-style moral arguments: docs.google.com/document/d/1xjweiT6HE9kNVsWJeqVxpGekrWpnddnXiZryKSAZcJI/edit?usp=sharing(3) Common Mistakes Series playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
The best philosophy paper ever published Majesty of Reason 2023-12-02 | Let's read the greatest philosophy article every published.Reference:Goldschmidt, Tyron. 2016. "A Demonstration of the Causal Power of Absences". Dialectica 70(1): 85. Available at philarchive.org/archive/GOLADO-4Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidLINKS(1) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(2) Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvH(3) Join the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreason(4) My website: josephschmid.com(5) My PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
32 CAREER-ENDING mistakes about the Kalam and contingency arguments Majesty of Reason 2023-11-21 | In this third installment of my common mistakes series, I cover mistakes relating to the Kalam cosmological argument and contingency arguments.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:12 Mistake #7316:39 Mistake #7420:00 Mistake #7520:49 Mistake #7645:12 Mistake #7746:35 Mistake #7848:32 Mistake #7951:16 Mistake #8053:15 Mistake #8154:49 Mistake #821:00:51 Mistake #831:03:19 Mistake #841:04:56 Mistake #851:06:56 Mistake #861:07:09 Mistake #871:10:18 Mistake #881:17:23 Mistake #891:18:02 Mistake #901:18:56 Mistake #911:20:37 Mistake #921:22:25 Mistake #931:23:25 Mistake #941:25:17 Mistake #951:26:49 Mistake #961:34:14 Mistake #971:37:04 Mistake #981:38:21 Mistake #991:46:30 Mistake #1001:48:37 Mistake #1011:49:33 Mistake #1021:52:16 Mistake #1031:56:12 Mistake #1041:56:46 ConclusionCORRECTIONS54:37 I should have written and said “Nothing in science shows that *none* of (a)-(d) hold.”RESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 3: docs.google.com/document/d/1awjudXbCE0SlyWV_UuESTqctJPS2UmDdPZYW_WCUVBM/edit?usp=sharing(2) Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(3) Contingency argument playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZkl5I5QDUXW5CauOfO_bs1(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Do extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Majesty of Reason 2023-11-10 | Carl Sagan famously said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But is he right?Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidRESOURCES(1) Original video: youtu.be/ThHsjYx-oEs(2) Resource Document from that video: docs.google.com/document/d/1Sh_xOyu0gVh0GdEAD7s2XGUiAFUARmpqyH-JZ_ofLOo/edit?usp=sharing(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Fine-Tuning, Cosmic Purpose, and Psychophysical Harmony | Dr. Philip Goff Majesty of Reason 2023-10-31 | Is there purpose behind the universe? Philip Goff joins me to explain why he thinks the answer is yes. We cover fine-tuning, psychophysical harmony, and more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:22 About the book3:54 Fine-tuning15:01 Epistemically illuminated region24:23 Multiverse & Inverse gambler’s fallacy55:27 Electrons in love1:01:00 Too low intrinsic probability1:07:08 Psychophysical harmony1:20:23 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Dr. Goff's book "Why? The Purpose of the Universe": (a) amazon.co.uk/Why-Purpose-Universe-Philip-Goff/dp/0198883765 (b) global.oup.com/academic/product/why-the-purpose-of-the-universe-9780198883760(2) Dr. Goff's Halloween Special episode on his book: youtube.com/live/tf3hp3G4OA8(3) Dr. Goff's website: philipgoffphilosophy.com(4) The Draper paper from the video: philarchive.org/archive/DRAPAF(5) Dr. Goff's podcast / youtube channel @MindChat: youtube.com/@MindChat(6) Dr. Goff's twitter: twitter.com/Philip_Goff (7) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Avoid these HUGE MISTAKES about theism, atheism, and agnosticism Majesty of Reason 2023-10-20 | In this second part of a seven part series, we cover common mistakes relating to theism, atheism, agnosticism, and naturalism.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:20 Mistake #554:42 Mistake #5612:47 Mistake #5716:28 Mistake #5817:23 Mistake #5918:45 Mistake #6020:59 Mistake #6121:28 Mistake #6225:13 Mistake #6333:40 Mistake #6435:25 Mistake #6539:50 Mistake #6644:17 Mistake #6745:40 Mistake #6846:38 Mistake #6948:36 Mistake #7050:05 Mistake #7150:57 Mistake #7251:49 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 2: docs.google.com/document/d/1msopHLrp1QiwNBtM7AGDyLapNPBD36128A6oBFQmpJs/edit?usp=sharing(2) Common Mistakes playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkY8lCiJY7XZFkfBChK1VdMK(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Stop misusing logical fallacies Majesty of Reason 2023-10-10 | We need to talk about fallacy mongering...Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidRESOURCES(1) Original video: youtu.be/ThHsjYx-oEs(2) Resource Document from that video: docs.google.com/document/d/1Sh_xOyu0gVh0GdEAD7s2XGUiAFUARmpqyH-JZ_ofLOo/edit?usp=sharing(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Is everything necessary? | Dr. Josh Rasmussen & Dr. Amy Karofsky Majesty of Reason 2023-09-30 | I’m joined by Josh Rasmussen and Amy Karofsky to explore whether there’s any contingency in reality. It’s a MUST watch. (Or maybe not?)Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro & Outline2:16 Defining terms4:31 What’s at stake?9:57 Motivating necessitarianism39:10 Motivating contingentarianism1:03:37 Truth & A gadfly among gadflies!1:11:52 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Dr. Karofsky’s book “A Case for Necessitarianism”, amazon.com/Case-Necessitarianism-Routledge-Studies-Metaphysics/dp/1032026162(2) Dr. Karosky’s PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/amy-karofsky(3) My video with Dr. Karofsky on her book: youtu.be/Kf0BjBBGjxA(4) Dr. Rasmussen’s website: http://joshualrasmussen.com(5) Dr. Rasmussen’s YouTube channel (@WorldviewDesignChannel): youtube.com/@WorldviewDesignChannel(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Is philosophy useless? Majesty of Reason 2023-09-16 | The answer might surprise you.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidRESOURCES(1) Original video: youtu.be/ThHsjYx-oEs(2) Resource Document from that video: docs.google.com/document/d/1Sh_xOyu0gVh0GdEAD7s2XGUiAFUARmpqyH-JZ_ofLOo/edit?usp=sharing(3) The Priest lecture from @Philosophy_Overdose: youtube.com/watch?v=BsLYCgXufBI(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
These 54 mistakes are KILLING your philosophy game Majesty of Reason 2023-09-05 | In this first part of a seven part series, we cover common mistakes relating to epistemology, argumentation, philosophical methodology, the nature of philosophy, and behavior.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:00 Prelims3:05 Overview of series4:01 Mistake #116:51 Mistake #219:58 Mistake #322:34 Mistake #426:33 Mistake #527:51 Mistake #629:17 Mistake #729:59 Mistake #830:40 Mistake #931:23 Mistake #1032:00 Mistake #1141:40 Mistake #11 (extended)45:01 Mistake #12 (corrected #)46:34 Mistake #13 (corrected #)49:30 Mistake #14 (corrected #)53:54 Mistake #1555:24 Mistake #1656:14 Mistake #1757:37 Mistake #181:01:52 Mistake #191:03:29 Mistake #201:11:10 Mistake #211:11:57 Mistake #221:14:44 Mistake #231:15:28 Mistake #241:16:53 Mistake #251:17:48 Mistake #261:38:56 Mistake #271:39:15 Mistake #281:42:22 Mistake #291:46:11 Mistake #301:54:01 Mistake #311:55:41 Mistake #321:58:07 Mistake #331:59:18 Mistake #341:59:41 Mistake #352:02:21 Mistake #362:03:55 Mistake #372:06:44 Mistake #382:08:51 Mistake #392:09:37 Mistake #402:10:41 Mistake #412:15:15 Mistake #422:16:30 Mistake #432:19:04 Mistake #442:26:03 Mistake #452:28:00 Mistake #462:28:47 Mistake #472:30:58 Mistake #482:32:26 Mistake #492:33:55 Mistake #502:40:37 Mistake #512:43:14 Mistake #522:45:34 Mistake #532:47:30 Mistake #543:04:57 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Resource Document for Part 1: docs.google.com/document/d/1Sh_xOyu0gVh0GdEAD7s2XGUiAFUARmpqyH-JZ_ofLOo/edit?usp=sharing(2) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Skeptical Theism and the Problem of Evil | Dr. Perry Hendricks Majesty of Reason 2023-08-23 | Today I’m joined by Perry Hendricks to discuss skeptical theist responses to arguments from evil. We also cover seven objections to skeptical theism.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:30 Problem of evil2:10 Rowe’s ‘noseeum’ argument5:44 Common sense argument15:51 Draper’s Humean argument18:51 Skeptical theism20:01 Wykstra’s CORNEA23:45 Bergmann’s skeptical theism29:11 Deontological skeptical theism36:45 Addressing Rowe’s argument46:40 Addressing the common sense argument54:41 Addressing Draper’s argument56:18 Climenhaga’s objection1:01:20 Draper’s objection1:13:48 Damaging natural theology1:18:16 Moral paralysis1:21:36 Divine deception1:27:20 Radical skepticism1:31:25 Horrific world: a reductio?1:36:25 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Perry's website with all his papers: perryhendricks.com(2) Climenhaga's paper contra skeptical theism: philpapers.org/rec/CLIIWC(3) Perry's forthcoming book, "Skeptical Theism": amazon.com/Skeptical-Palgrave-Frontiers-Philosophy-Religion/dp/3031342704(4) Perry's paper, "Deontological skeptical theism proved": cambridge.org/core/journals/religious-studies/article/abs/deontological-sceptical-theism-proved/F2C7C8BF7AAE5AD81C75C3B36ACA44F6(5) Perry's paper, "We are not in the dark: refuting popular arguments against skeptical theism": scholarlypublishingcollective.org/uip/apq/article-abstract/58/2/125/283427/WE-ARE-NOT-IN-THE-DARKREFUTING-POPULAR-ARGUMENTS?redirectedFrom=fulltext(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Is moral realism the common sense view? | Dr. Lance Bush Majesty of Reason 2023-08-09 | Are ordinary people moral realists? Dr. Lance Bush doesn't think so. He joins me today to discuss his reasons why.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE00:00 Intro1:45 Experimental philosophy3:11 Stances, commitments, and intuitions13:09 Metaethics and folk metaethics18:02 Moral realism and anti-realism21:10 Disagreement paradigm30:45 WEIRD populations37:07 Confounds and validity39:50 Tolerance confound44:22 Normative confound49:15 Epistemic confound / scope ambiguity58:28 Open response data1:04:32 Polzler & Wright 20201:20:08 Folk metaethical indeterminacy1:27:45 Lance’s quantum mechanics study1:41:14 Moral realism is the common sense view?1:44:20 Lance’s closing comments1:50:17 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) Lance’s dissertation: search.proquest.com/openview/862c9bde93de6fbe84a38345b2c50a25/1.pdf?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y(2) Lance’s Youtube channel, @lanceindependent: youtube.com/channel/UCcBjfs5Stfr-v66B7F7vo0Q(3) Lance’s blog: lanceindependent.com(4) Lance’s professional website: lancesbush.com(5) My metaethics playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkbIsKrv640jcBmNCFbU-ZQy(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Whatever begins to exist has a cause? | Dr. Daniel Linford Majesty of Reason 2023-07-27 | Today I'm joined by Dr. Daniel Linford to discuss the Kalam's causal principle that whatever begins to exist has a cause. In particular, we discuss the first half of a video produced by @ReasonableFaithOrg.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:39 A false dichotomy2:06 Three arguments for the causal principle3:51 Argument from intuition (or magic?)14:20 Argument from chaos19:00 Science and everyday experience26:52 Dan’s reasons for rejecting the principle32:24 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) The video to which we're responding (from @ReasonableFaithOrg): youtu.be/6CulBuMCLg0(2) Dan’s notes for this video (and our previous video on the scientific case for the Kalam): drive.google.com/file/d/1JjfleKIyFsPPLjUZL_6jieeLW9aI14nP/view?usp=sharing(3) Dan’s dissertation, “Cosmic Skepticism and the Beginning of Physical Reality”: philarchive.org/archive/DAN_SA-15(4) Dan’s paper, “A modal condition for the beginning of the universe”: philarchive.org/rec/LINAMC-2(5) My analysis of the Kalam's causal principle: youtu.be/XslZE3luFq4(6) My Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(7) My Springer book co-authored with Dan: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
No, science doesn’t show the universe began to exist | Dr. Daniel Linford Majesty of Reason 2023-07-14 | Today I'm joined by Dr. Daniel Linford to respond to the scientific case for the universe's beginning as well as the claim that the universe's cause must be God. In particular, we discuss a video produced by @ReasonableFaithOrg.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro2:30 WLC’s video3:16 Past finitude doesn’t imply beginning19:45 Second Law of Thermodynamics28:00 Red shift and Big Bang cosmology36:53 Successive failure of models39:45 Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem46:05 Stage Two: Properties of the cause46:55 Spaceless?53:13 Timeless?56:02 Immaterial?59:38 Uncaused?1:02:57 Unimaginably powerful?1:06:42 God?1:12:35 ConclusionRESOURCES(1) The video to which we're responding (from @ReasonableFaithOrg): youtu.be/6CulBuMCLg0(2) Dan’s notes for this video (and our next video on the causal principle): drive.google.com/file/d/1JjfleKIyFsPPLjUZL_6jieeLW9aI14nP/view?usp=sharing(3) Dan’s dissertation, “Cosmic Skepticism and the Beginning of Physical Reality”: philarchive.org/archive/DAN_SA-15(4) Dan’s paper, “A modal condition for the beginning of the universe”: philarchive.org/rec/LINAMC-2(5) Dan’s paper, “Neo-Lorentzian Relativity and the Beginning of the Universe”: philarchive.org/rec/LINNRA-3(6) Dan's paper, "Big Bounce or Double Bang? A Reply to Craig and Sinclair on the Interpretation of Bounce Cosmologies": http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/17188/1/FORTHCOMING_Big_Bang_or_Double_Bounce_Erk_Sub.pdf(7) Dan’s paper, “The Kalam Cosmological Argument Meets the Mentaculus”: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/16833/1/Online_Final_BJPS_Kalam_Mentaculus_Submission.pdf(8) My Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(9) My Springer book co-authored with Dan: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(10) Phil Halper's (@PhilHalper1) recent article "The Kalam cosmological argument: Critiquing a recent defence", also on the scientific case for the Kalam: philarchive.org/rec/HALTKCTHE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Do Composite Objects Exist? | Dr. Eric Olson Majesty of Reason 2023-07-01 | Dr. Eric Olson joins me to discuss various puzzles of material constitution and composition. Do birds exist? Do tables? Do you?Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE00:00 A note1:01 Intro and overview2:01 Defining terms8:34 Statue and clay24:11 Sorites31:00 Problem of the Many37:30 Causal redundancy41:50 ConclusionLINKS(1) Dr. Olson's website: olsonphilosophy.blogspot.com(2) Dr. Olson's PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/eric-t-olson(3) Relevant SEP entries: (i) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ordinary-objects/ (ii) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/material-constitution/ (iii) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many/ (iv) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sorites-paradox/(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Theism is rational, but Trent Horn is wrong and that upsets me Majesty of Reason 2023-06-18 | Here I respond to Trent Horn for the 912th time, this time on the problem of evil and the evil God challenge.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro3:52 Gratuitous evil6:39 Evil requires God?10:48 Back to gratuitous evil15:04 The price of a lawful ecosystem?19:47 Intuition, methodology, and dialectic29:20 Clarifying gratuity35:44 Reversing the modus ponens45:05 Total evidence requirement46:39 Theodicy: Original Sin51:45 Theodicy: Free Will59:42 Theodicy: Virtue1:03:17 Intrinsic human dignity1:06:20 Compensation in heaven?1:08:37 Non-human animal suffering1:17:39 Evil God Challenge1:20:46 Privation theory of evil1:27:49 Soteriological confusion1:30:57 ConclusionMENTIONED RESOURCES(1) Trent’s video to which I’m responding (from @TheCounselofTrent): youtu.be/ZzM443aJbyM(2) Bengson, Cuneo, and Shafer-Landau’s paper: drive.google.com/file/d/1RDyu0j6vb-W_-bWMreQqw_XM8fLuvlKG/view?usp=sharing(3) Murray’s “Nature Red in Tooth and Claw”: amazon.com/Nature-Red-Tooth-Claw-Suffering/dp/0199237271(4) Draper’s paper on panpsychotheism: philpapers.org/rec/DRAP-3(5) Sebastian’s post explaining why he’s an atheist: naturalismnext.blogspot.com/2022/12/why-im-atheist_6.html(6) Emerson’s opening statement: emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2022/06/27/god-probably-doesnt-exist(7) Felipe Leon, "200 (or so) Arguments for Atheism": http://exapologist.blogspot.com/2022/06/120-or-so-arguments-for-atheism.html(8) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs-ebook/dp/B0BNMHRW63 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2(9) My papers on classical theism can be found on my PhilPeople profile ( philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid ) or my website ( josephschmid.com/research )(10) Pruss’ presentation on the privation theory: youtube.com/watch?v=rYs0ompB0kk(11) My video “Over 100 Arguments for God ANSWERED”: youtube.com/watch?v=iP0Mh42jvV4(12) Stephen’s (and my) response to Ben Shapiro (from @rationalityrules): youtube.com/watch?v=_W4I3G9ahCw&pp=ygUXc2hhcGlybyBhcmd1bWVudCBjaGFuZ2U%3DRELEVANT PLAYLISTS(1) Argument from Change: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka2JpwLJaSaXdDZlBYkd9Cn(2) Existential Inertia: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkbm7dtYaTCuJ33bePOTYBBB(3) Kalam: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(4) Contingency Argument: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZkl5I5QDUXW5CauOfO_bs1(5) Moral Argument: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkaUcAQpHXN9ZNF2RxZLe7U_(6) Response Videos: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkaNtpoOwEZm9fuJq423BUrW(7) Classical Theism: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka0E9laGDA83gN2UbQoa4F2CORRECTIONSSee the pinned comment for corrections!THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
How to Analyze Arguments Like a Philosopher Majesty of Reason 2023-06-14 | Here's your ultimate step-by-step guide for analyzing and assessing any argument that comes your way.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE00:00 Intro2:32 Bird’s eye view3:33 Step 18:17 Step 28:55 Step 2.113:00 Step 2.214:49 Step 2.316:17 Step 2.421:51 Step 327:00 Step 427:49 Step 4.128:33 Step 4.233:10 Step 4.338:10 Step 4 continued40:26 Step 544:46 Step 648:21 12 Tangible Tips55:25 How to ruin your worldview58:37 Book recommendations1:00:22 SummaryLINKS(1) Want access to the script? Become a patron :)(2) Summary of the step-by-step guide: docs.google.com/document/d/1Ox4vxAQmK83-Y4BC-IPw-9bFdJUstpXEkuZs_52kpqI/edit?usp=sharing(3) Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(4) The Kalam's Causal Principle: An Analysis: youtube.com/watch?v=XslZE3luFq4(5) A User's Guide to the Modal Ontological Argument: youtube.com/watch?v=iKgJvGHYqs8&list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t&index=2&pp=gAQBiAQB(6) Ontological Arguments from Anselm to Godel: youtube.com/watch?v=SVQz7AMUcyI&list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t&index=9&pp=gAQBiAQB(7) Dr. Graham Oppy on the Nature and Purpose of Arguments: youtube.com/watch?v=ybUW693C8UY&pp=ygUfZ3JhaGFtIG9wcHkgbmF0dXJlIG9mIGFyZ3VtZW50cw%3D%3D(8) Oppy, "What derivations cannot do": drive.google.com/file/d/1OmD1ecbqp_hNsKfO4SMXZsM101RGZ19p/view?usp=sharing(9) Dr. Josh Rasmussen's video "How to ruin your worldview", from @WorldviewDesignChannel: youtu.be/5Y4PQQOH5vo(10) Doing Philosophy playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkbOGcxCZPjybRASmKynBfGNBOOKS I RECOMMENDED(1) "Classical Logic and its Rabbit-Holes: A First Course" by Nelson Lande(2) "Language, Proof, and Logic" by Dave Barker-Plummer, Jon Barwise and John Etchemendy(3) "The Norton Introduction to Philosophy" edited by Rosen, Byrne, and others.(4) "Knowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy" by Michael Huemer(5) "Think: A Compelling Introduction to Philosophy" by Simon Blakburn(6) "The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy" by yours truly(7) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
From Kalam to God? Majesty of Reason 2023-06-02 | Must the cause of the universe be timeless, spaceless, immaterial, enormously powerful, and personal? No. Here's why.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidCLARIFICATIONThanks to commenter Tym Miara for inviting this helpful clarification:In the video, I argued that we cannot infer from the Kalam alone that the cause is spaceless. I began by using an example: “if, *for instance*, you’re only showing [in stage 1] that the past must be finite…” Using this example, I explained how we can’t then go on to infer that the cause of the beginning of (metric) time is spaceless.I intended the points I made subsequently — about the epistemic possibility of there being some sort of space in which the first cause resides, etc. — to generalize to *other* ways of defending stage 1 of the Kalam, including the appeals to Big Bang cosmology. I wasn’t intending to impute to Craig the inference from ‘x causes the beginning of time’ to ‘x is therefore spaceless’. My point was, firstly, that *if* we only show in stage 1 that metric time is past-finite, *then* we cannot infer that the first cause(s) thereof is spaceless; and, furthermore, that the point about the epistemic possibility of some space in which the first cause(s) resides is a problem for *other* extant ways of defending stage 1, not just a way of defending stage 1 which only shows that the past must be finite. I used the finite-metric-past defense of stage 1 as an example to introduce the point which I intended to generalize more broadly.So, then, the clarification is that I wasn't intending to say that Craig takes his spacelessness conclusion to be derived from the finitude of the past, though I can understand if what I said suggests that. I’m here canceling any such implicature, and explaining what I was intending to convey.My point, instead, is precisely that *none* of the points in Craig's stage 1 case show that the cause is spaceless — even the points pertaining to Big Bang cosmology. They only show, at best, that the cause doesn't exist in the spatial framework of our local spatiotemporal manifold, i.e., the self-contained one that began to expand about 13.8 billion years ago. As I noted in the video, there may be a different space that exists causally prior to the beginning of metric time (and hence causally prior to the beginning of the spatial manifold associated with that metric time) and in which the cause resides. This space may be the same sort of space as our local spatiotemporal manifold's space (e.g., three-dimensional); or it may be some more exotic state space that various philosophers have proposed for the 'location' of the universal wavefunction; or it may be a higher dimensional spatial framework; and so on. The epistemic possibilities are boundless, and Craig — in claiming the cause must be spaceless — illegitimately assumes that none of these are the case. The crucial point is that they straightforwardly undercut the claim that the cause of our local spatiotemporal manifold must be spaceless, i.e., without any space.And, of course, I think it's important to emphasize that Big Bang cosmology doesn't show that the universe, understood as all of physical reality, began to exist; for more on this, see Dr. Linford's dissertation here :)philarchive.org/archive/DAN_SA-15LINKS(1) The original video from @thoughtology7732: youtube.com/watch?v=JL3Y7QRPp5k(2) My Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193121 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
The Kalams Causal Principle: An Analysis Majesty of Reason 2023-05-20 | The Kalam’s causal principle says that whatever begins to exist has a cause. But should we accept this principle? That’s the topic of today’s (epic) video.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro & Outline2:53 Understanding the Causal Principle10:44 Arguments For the Causal Principle11:07 Intuition52:16 Induction and Abduction1:42:41 Argument from Chaos2:29:12 Modus Tollens Argument2:53:40 Arguments Against the Causal Principle2:54:02 Intuition: Reverse Card!2:57:23 Free Will3:15:55 Conceivability3:23:34 Quantum Mechanics3:32:35 Non-Causal Explanations3:37:53 Grünbaum’s argument3:41:47 Summary of Arguments Against3:47:39 ConclusionLINKS(1) Want access to the document? Become a patron :)(2) Kalam playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZzH2YffI32ViTZ73Tu8jSR(3) My co-authored article “Branching actualism and cosmological arguments”, forthcoming in Philosophical Studies: philpapers.org/rec/SCHBAA-22(4) Special thanks to Stephen Woodford from @rationalityrules not only for allowing me to re-use the relevant videos, but also for playing an integral role in making them stellar. Check out his channel (or my Kalam playlist) for the original videos and their reference documents! :)(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
You MUST watch this video | Dr. Amy Karofsky Majesty of Reason 2023-05-11 | Could anything have been otherwise? Amy Karofsky thinks not. In her view, absolutely everything is necessary. Today we discuss arguments for and against this view.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:20 Necessity and contingency2:51 Necessitarianism vs. Contingentarianism8:20 Necessitarianism vs. Fatalism & Determinism18:42 Historical backdrop24:15 Arguments for Contingentarianism24:57 Deliberation27:53 Imaginability31:51 Powers, actuality, and natural kinds40:48 Quantifying probability43:07 Quantum mechanics46:40 Intuition49:55 Majority belief52:50 Contingency-talk and counterfactuals57:00 Ought implies can1:02:49 Principle of Alternative Possibilities1:05:59 Arguments for Necessitarianism1:07:00 Ground of contingency1:17:07 Simplicity1:19:39 ConclusionLINKS(1) Dr. Karofsky’s book “A Case for Necessitarianism”, amazon.com/Case-Necessitarianism-Routledge-Studies-Metaphysics/dp/1032026162(2) Dr. Karosky’s PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/amy-karofsky(3) Btw, you NEED to check out the website New Work in Philosophy! They have all the latest information about new work on the cutting edge of philosophy. Link: newworkinphilosophy.substack.com(4) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Ontological Arguments from Anselm to Gödel Majesty of Reason 2023-05-02 | Ontological arguments seek to prove God's existence from the armchair. But are they any good? Let's tour some prominent ontological arguments and some prominent objections to help us find out.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE00:00 Intro1:13 Anselm's Ontological Argument4:19 Descartes’ Ontological Argument5:37 Parodies14:38 Modal Ontological Argument22:23 Gödelian Ontological Argument30:13 Dialectical problem43:44 Riposte45:43 Dilemma for the riposte50:01 Another dialectical problem56:30 Further criticisms58:43 Bonus soccerLINKS(1) Want the script? Become a patron :)(2) Oppy’s article “Ontological Arguments” from The Philosophers’ Magazine: archive.philosophersmag.com/ontological-arguments(3) Ontological Arguments playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t(4) Oppy (2000), “Response to Gettings”: philpapers.org/archive/OPPRTG-2.pdf(5) Oppy (2017), “The Ontological Arguments”: drive.google.com/file/d/1y2cbpSqcTUwnySsJv18SKlz7hLCDV6vl/view?usp=sharing(6) A User’s Guide to the Modal Ontological Argument: youtube.com/watch?v=iKgJvGHYqs8&list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t&index=2(7) Four Ontological Arguments in 12 Minutes: youtube.com/watch?v=a8yl8suh7aA&list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t&index=5(8) Graham Oppy responds to Josh Rasmussen’s Ontological Argument: youtube.com/watch?v=MIhwDlT2Eu8&list=PLxRhaLyXxXkZ7oLLpd6Joxl2VS1gOce6t&index=7(9) Bonus Soccer playlist! youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkb7WN8KlASj2P9ewLpXGeML(10) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Is the Future Open? | Dr. Patrick Todd Majesty of Reason 2023-04-21 | I'm joined by Dr. Patrick Todd to discuss whether all future contingents are false. You can also win his book for FREE!Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro2:56 Thesis and key terms9:55 The open future18:20 Problem of future contingents21:29 Grounding problem31:40 Symmetry objection41:50 Future-directed properties and abstracta47:44 Competing intuitions53:00 Moorean shift1:05:44 Credence-based objection clarified1:13:22 Companions in innocence: CCFs1:20:20 Logical problem, semantics, and neg-raising1:32:25 Conclusion and giveawayLINKS(1) Dr. Todd’s book, “The Open Future: Why Future Contingents are all False”, amazon.com/Open-Future-Why-Contingents-False/dp/0192897918(2) Dr. Todd’s website: http://www.patricktodd.co(3) Dr. Todd’s interview on open theism for @thefreewillshow2132: youtube.com/watch?v=3marFR9gr3g&pp=ygUYcGF0cmljayB0b2RkIG9wZW4gZnV0dXJl(4) Dr. Todd’s interview on the open future for @TheAnalyticChristian: youtube.com/watch?v=dXeHp-R7xhw&pp=ygUYcGF0cmljayB0b2RkIG9wZW4gZnV0dXJl(5) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Religious Naturalism | Dr. Graham Oppy & Dr. Eric Steinhart Majesty of Reason 2023-04-11 | What is religion? What is naturalism? Can naturalism and religion be combined? Is religious naturalism viable? I'm joined by Graham Oppy and Eric Steinhart to discuss these questions and more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro0:49 What is religion?12:53 What is naturalism?32:07 Religious naturalism56:21 Religious naturalist practices?LINKS(1) Oppy’s book, “Naturalism and Religion”, amazon.com/Naturalism-Religion-Investigating-Philosophy/dp/0815354665(2) Steinhart’s website: ericsteinhart.com(3) My video with Steinhart on atheistic platonism: youtu.be/dQrNFMExwso(4) Steinhart’s book, “Atheistic Platonism”, amazon.com/Atheistic-Platonism-Manifesto-Frontiers-Philosophy/dp/3031177517(5) Tiddy Smith (ed.), “Animism and Philosophy of Religion”, amazon.com/Animism-Philosophy-Religion-Palgrave-Frontiers/dp/3030941698(6) Tiddy Smith, “A common consent argument for the existence of nature spirits”, drive.google.com/file/d/1ITKus5fqUyqvpIibeQzjPdCivjuxr5Oi/view?usp=sharing(7) Kohn, “How Forests Think”, amazon.com/How-Forests-Think-Toward-Anthropology/dp/0520276116(8) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
Birds dont exist, therefore Christianity is false | April Fools Majesty of Reason 2023-04-01 | Birds don't exist. If birds don't exist, then Christianity is false. So, Christianity is false.™ QED.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro1:13 Merch2:47 Birds don’t exist8:18 The Picometer Argument11:13 No sharp transition?20:50 Disproving Christianity24:14 Believe or burn26:53 ConclusionLINKS(1) Thanks to Esteban from @guardedacumen for making the T-shirt images! His channel: youtube.com/@guardedacumen(2) The clip of Winger is extracted from @TheNonAlchemist's video here: youtube.com/watch?v=00IiRv6sJAc(2) More on arguments against the existence of birds: (i) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many/ , (ii) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/material-constitution/ , (iii) youtube.com/watch?v=07PZ1a-gZxw(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193121 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
The Axiology of Theism | Dr. Ryan Mullins Majesty of Reason 2023-03-19 | Should we want God to exist? Which model of God would result in the most valuable world? In this first ever MoR livestream, I’m joined by Dr. Ryan Mullins to talk about his recent contribution to this debate. And if you ask the best question during the live video, you’ll win a FREE BOOK! Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmid HOW TO WIN THE BOOK During the livestream, whoever asks the best question about the axiology of theism or the axiology of models of God will win a free book! You need to begin your question with either "Question:" or "Q:" to be considered, and the question needs to be on topic. Ryan and I will determine the best question at the end of the stream. Whoever wins should email me at majestyofreason@gmail.com. Good luck! LINKS (1) Ryan's paper we'll be discussing, "The Axiology of Panentheism": drive.google.com/file/d/10_LEZVm5YCwW4ZVB7lzRyy4jsccsMGNG/view?usp=sharing (2) The book we'll be giving away: routledge.com/Value-Beyond-Monotheism-The-Axiology-of-the-Divine/Lougheed/p/book/9780367540203 (3) Ryan's website: rtmullins.com (4) My classical theism playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXka0E9laGDA83gN2UbQoa4F2 (5) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2 THE USUAL... Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvH Join the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreason My website: josephschmid.com My PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
How to Research, Write, and Publish in Philosophy Majesty of Reason 2023-03-09 | Suan (@intellectualcatholicism) and I chat about philosophy research, writing philosophy papers, how to publish in philosophy, and so much more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro and published work4:42 Pre-writing and research12:17 Writing29:52 Submitting38:01 Post-submission49:34 Publishing books54:43 Q&A1:20:01 Bonus soccerLINKS(1) The original video: youtu.be/UGxN57CcDC0(2) If you liked this video, you'll love my Doing Philosophy playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLxRhaLyXxXkbOGcxCZPjybRASmKynBfGN(3) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193148 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
A Users Guide to Bayes Theorem Majesty of Reason 2023-02-24 | What is Bayes' Theorem? How is it used in philosophy, statistics, and beyond? How should it NOT be used? Welcome to the ultimate guide to these questions and more.Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): patreon.com/majestyofreasonIf you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): paypal.com/paypalme/josephcschmidOUTLINE0:00 Intro and outline3:10 What is Bayes’ Theorem?4:50 Belief and credence14:46 Interpretations of probability24:52 Epistemic probability28:32 Bayesian epistemology30:50 Core normative rules33:05 Propositional logic background42:32 Kolmogorov’s axioms54:25 Dutch Books57:25 Ratio Formula1:02:03 Conditionalization principle1:10:47 Subjective vs. Objective Bayesianism1:13:50 Bayes’ Theorem: Standard form(s)1:39:25 Bayes’ Theorem: Odds form1:53:06 Evidence2:09:25 Visualizing Bayes’ Theorem2:49:41 Common mistakes2:49:53 Base rate fallacy2:52:28 Evidence for H vs. Making H probable2:53:43 Total evidence requirement2:54:58 Fallacy of understated evidence2:59:36 Confirmation is comparative3:01:07 Evidential symmetry3:07:56 Strength asymmetry3:11:40 Falsifiability as a virtue3:12:27 Likelihood ratio rigging3:19:32 Conclusion and ResourcesNOTES(1) The argument I give around the ten-minute mark admittedly doesn't address the view that (i) credences don't exist, and yet (ii) we can still account for the relevant data about our doxastic lives by appeal to beliefs about probabilities. It also doesn't address the view that while credences exist and are distinct from beliefs, beliefs about probabilities suffice to account for the relevant data.While I have independent reservations for these views, it's worth noting them nonetheless. The belief/credence part of the video was mainly an exercise in warming listeners up to talk of credences so they would be more receptive to the rest of the video. It's a necessary preamble to the main event: Bayes' Theorem. I grant that a proper defense of belief-credence dualism — and a proper defense of the overly-basic motivations I sketched at the ten-minute mark — would need to contend with these alternative proposals!CORRECTIONS(1) At 52:55, I meant to say that the SECOND claim entails the FIRST while the FIRST does not entail the SECOND. Oops!(2) Thankfully, the audio improves at 28:32! Remind me to never record a solo presentation using Zoom…(3) Here's an important clarification about the roommate/magical marker example given around 2:07:00. In the video, I was not clear about the content of the hypotheses in question and how this affects their likelihoods and priors. Here is how I should have spelled out the example.Consider two hypotheses:H1: My friend wrote on my boardH2: My marker by itself wrote on my boardThe data is:D: "Don't forget to take out the trash!" is written on my boardNow, H1 renders D quite surprising, given that my friend knows all about my diligent habits of taking out the trash, etc. If H1 is true, he would most likely have written something on the board then erased it (since he knows I don't like him touching my board, etc.). And even if he didn't erase it, it would be very odd for him to write this given that he knows I'm super diligent about the trash.But H2 renders D far, far more surprising. Of all the possible things the marker could conceivably have written on the board by magically floating upwards etc., only an absurdly small fraction are even coherent, let alone English words strung together to compose an intelligible, grammatical, contextually relevant English sentence.Of course, H1 has higher prior than H2. But the point made in the video stands, since the likelihood of H1 (i.e., P(D|H1)) is very low, but it's still much greater than the likelihood of H2 (i.e., P(D|H2)), and hence data can still be evidence for a hypothesis even though the data is very surprising on that hypothesis.LINKS(1) Want the script? Become a patron :)(2) Videos from @3blue1brown: (i) youtube.com/watch?v=HZGCoVF3YvM , (ii) youtube.com/watch?v=U_85TaXbeIo , (iii) youtube.com/watch?v=lG4VkPoG3ko(3) Videos from Dr. Ben Page (@thinkingillustrated5281): (i) youtube.com/watch?v=RNQeOJoeiW0 , (ii) youtube.com/watch?v=4zlaFnYqGYo(4) Page's article on the Bayesian Bar: https://www.academia.edu/41820082/Introducing_Bayesianism_Through_The_Bayesian_Bar(5) Over 100 Arguments for God ANSWERED: youtu.be/iP0Mh42jvV4(6) My Springer book: (a) amazon.com/Existential-Inertia-Classical-Theistic-Proofs/dp/3031193121 (b) link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-19313-2THE USUAL...Follow the Majesty of Reason podcast! open.spotify.com/show/4Nda5uNcGselvKphtKSKvHJoin the Discord and chat all things philosophy! dsc.gg/majestyofreasonMy website: josephschmid.comMy PhilPeople profile: philpeople.org/profiles/joseph-schmid
