Why I dont care about logical fallacies Emerson Green 2022-04-24 | Take a look at nearly any book on critical thinking and you’ll come across a list of fallacies: ad hominem, god of the gaps, argument from ignorance, appeal to emotion, appeal to authority, post hoc ergo propter hoc, and so on. The problem is that many of these “fallacies” closely resemble good lines of reasoning. Overreliance on fallacy lists – common practice in the skeptic community – fosters shallow criticism, distracts from the substance of an issue, and doesn’t even accomplish the ostensible purpose of demarcating good and bad reasoning.I’m hard on skeptics in this episode, but that’s because I used to lean on this crutch myself. Over time, the usefulness of this approach struck me as less and less credible, and talk about fallacies tapered off. Fortunately, philosophers like Maarten Boudry and Michael Huemer, whose work you can find below, explained in clear terms what is so unhelpful about this mode of thinking. “Fallacy theory,” as Boudry calls it, is only one feature of a shallow, facile mode of philosophizing, one which isn’t very conducive to a genuine search for truth. I would suggest that one way of improving the quality of our discourse would be to lay off the fallacy accusations a bit. It would lead to a more fruitful search for knowledge and understanding.The Fallacy Fork: Why It’s Time to Get Rid of Fallacy Theory - Maarten Boudry maartenboudry.be/2017/06/the-fallacy-fork-why-its-time-to-get.htmlPlaying Fallacy “Gotcha!” - Maarten Boudry maartenboudry.be/2018/01/playing-fallacy-gotcha.htmlKnowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy - Michael Huemer amazon.com/Knowledge-Reality-Value-Mostly-Philosophy/dp/B091F5QTDSThe Fake, the Flimsy, and the Fallacious: Demarcating Arguments in Real Life - Maarten Boudry, Fabio Paglieri & Massimo Pigliucci philpapers.org/rec/BOUTFTTwitter @waldenpod Transcript emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2022/04/21/logical-fallacieshttps://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ Counter Apologetics /Consider supporting at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Consider supporting at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1/ Timestamps / 0:00 Introduction & the Fallacy Fork1:26 Post hoc ergo propter hoc3:09 Ad hominem 5:05 Ad populum 6:36 False Positives & Conclusion
Christians Upset By Conversion to Christianity Emerson Green 2024-10-10 | We discuss Philip Goff’s conversion, the online reaction to it, and what his “heretical Christianity” involves. Is he a real Christian? What does he think about the resurrection, the ascension, the miracles of Christ, the virgin birth, the trinity, inerrantism, the atonement, and God’s nature? Amos Wollen - Conversion Review: Christianity gains a new smart person wollenblog.substack.com/p/conversion-review-philip-goffRandal Rauser on Goff’s Conversion youtube.com/watch?v=DzVRUppDKjwNathan Ormond (DigitalGnosis) - Philosopher CONVERTS to Christianity youtube.com/live/k1NR3IDpdC8?si=73YidnD75EXq7i-hLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Panpsychism’s Biggest Problem Emerson Green 2024-09-06 | I give three reasons why panpsychism typically strikes us as counterintuitive, and why we shouldn't credit our innate bias against it. David Papineau: Physicalists who find panpsychism counterintuitive haven’t truly freed themselves from dualist thinking https://x.com/OnPanpsychism/status/1822034358439489978Jonathan Birch on overconfidence about sentience 80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/jonathan-birch-edge-sentience-uncertaintyMy Substack open.substack.com/pub/emersongreen/p/why-is-panpsychism-counterintuitive?r=3avwt7&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=trueThis episode was available early to supporters at patreon.com/waldenpodLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
The Zombie Argument Against Physicalism, Explained Emerson Green 2024-08-18 | Today, we explore the conceivability argument against materialism. Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenI primarily drew from three sources: Philip Goff’s Consciousness and Fundamental Reality (2017), Hedda Hassel Mørch’s Non-physicalist Theories of Consciousness (2023), and the SEP entry on Zombies written by Robert Kirk. Goff: amazon.com/Consciousness-Fundamental-Reality-Philosophy-Mind/dp/0197766390/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=Mørch: amazon.com/Non-physicalist-Theories-Consciousness-Elements-Philosophy/dp/1009317334Kirk: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/zombies/Here are two David Chalmers papers that were very useful: Chalmers on different types of physicalism: consc.net/papers/nature.htmlChalmers on different kinds of conceivability and possibility and the links between them: consc.net/papers/conceivability.htmlAlso referenced: Erik Hoel - Consciousness is a great mystery. Its definition isn’t. theintrinsicperspective.com/p/consciousness-is-a-great-mysteryPhilip Goff - A posteriori physicalists get our phenomenal concepts wrong philpapers.org/rec/PHIAPP-2Kane B on conceivability and possibility youtu.be/BYsT1Bk1_8Q?si=k5gzXXqSqSm4DLV300:00 Housekeeping 00:56 Where I stand currently & some common confusions04:03 Intro05:32 Clarifying Conceivability 14:06 What is physicalism? 19:16 Consider the Houseplant 25:09 What the zombie is missing32:38 Are zombies conceivable? 39:04 Metaphysical Possibility 42:42 A Posteriori Necessity 54:38 Phenomenal Transparency 1:03:56 Goff Interview
would you believe me (amazing prophecy) #trumpassassinationattempt #trump #apologetics #prophecy Emerson Green 2024-07-22 | ...
Moving Towards Agnosticism (with@AdherentApologetics) Emerson Green 2024-06-28 | Zac and I explore a few of the things that drew me to agnosticism. Religious ambiguity, conflicting evidence, disagreement among epistemic peers, the vast diversity of the theistic tradition (as well as varieties of non-theism), and my acceptance of the value-selection hypothesis have all played a part in pushing me somewhat reluctantly to agnosticism.Am I Agnostic? youtu.be/QCdTYZdFkNY?si=jwiJFpB7K7dPdGdeFor more on peer disagreement, see chapter 19 of Understanding Knowledge (Huemer) amazon.com/Understanding-Knowledge-Michael-Huemer/dp/B0BK12PN47Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Strong Emergence vs. The Core Theory (Response to Sean Carroll) Emerson Green 2024-06-05 | The core theory, weak vs. strong emergence, micro-reductionism, and Sean Carroll’s skeptical argument against everything. Is Dr. Carroll correct in holding that physics has ruled out the afterlife, an immaterial soul, fundamental consciousness, and parapsychology? Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenLINKS Sean Carroll speaking to the Freedom From Religion Foundation youtu.be/40eiycH077A?si=xgg4KC0JPYWnH0fUPhilip Goff: Is physics different in the brain? youtube.com/live/wlyKdirhOa4?si=RRYXSUbW8As7sRLwPapers: The Quantum Field Theory on Which the Everyday World Supervenes (2021) arxiv.org/abs/2101.07884Carroll: Consciousness and the Laws of Physics (2021) philarchive.org/archive/CARCAT-33Goff’s response to critics: philpapers.org/archive/GOFPCF.pdfRelevant blog posts from Carroll: preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/01/04/the-world-of-everyday-experience-in-one-equationpreposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/09/23/the-laws-underlying-the-physics-of-everyday-life-are-completely-understoodpreposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/09/29/seriously-the-laws-underlying-the-physics-of-everyday-life-really-are-completely-understoodpreposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/10/01/one-last-stabpreposterousuniverse.com/blog/2011/07/18/the-effective-field-theory-of-everyday-life-revisitedpreposterousuniverse.com/blog/2011/05/23/physics-and-the-immortality-of-the-soulpreposterousuniverse.com/blog/2008/02/18/telekinesis-and-quantum-field-theory/ timestamps / 00:00 The Core Theory Argument & Micro-reductionism10:07 Weak Emergence 13:18 Strong Emergence 16:16 The perils of modifying physics
Interview w/ @fubilosophy on Agnosticism, Free Will, & More Emerson Green 2024-04-07 | I’m interviewed by Fuad Abdullah Harahap about my deconversion, my shift towards agnosticism, the sad state of Christian apologetics, my issues with the skeptic community, free will, the afterlife, and some other cool stuff. The conversation on his channel: youtu.be/RqLidsTNB4E?si=Fg_ZEXatzwQiP6GPLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
What would convince you of Gods existence? Emerson Green 2024-03-04 | What would change your mind and cause you to convert to Christianity? I name three things: Christian aliens, miracles, and religious experience. That's not an exhaustive list, but those things would dramatically raise my credence in Christian theism.I spend the most time talking about religious experiences, mainly for two reasons. First, their epistemic significance is not always appreciated by nonbelievers. Second, I've noticed that some Christian apologists really hate it when nonbelievers say the experience of God would convince them of theism and thought that was worth examining./ Videos referenced in the episode /Jimmy Akin & Emerson Green - Debunking the Skeptics on UFOs youtu.be/aptdgtE5z-E?si=45CN8jubFSK9TqPqThe Argument from Miracles (Panel) youtu.be/i0DUQbvQvBk?si=YDM-4V4Ek9OsR0IOCountering the Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus youtu.be/zz6GapB6DMI?si=S-O58gKoW6wnqtPCWhat would make atheists accept a miracle claim? | C.M. Lorkowski & Real Atheology youtu.be/NFMI3c_Iex4?si=lbTM4EPrWFi0oXxi5 Mistakes Atheists Make About Epistemology youtu.be/4dalQu-vdMU?si=47A_FfzBiaRjJX-9&t=23904 Things I Learned About Epistemology youtu.be/Vo484enDccA?si=fAphMKP_fJJq-qF5Phenomenal Conservatism with Michael Huemer youtu.be/Heoei-RFpZA?si=NUz9qxmvONNP5eCQ/ timestamps / 00:00 A few thoughts on the question 02:35 Christian Aliens 04:30 Miracles 05:38 Religious Experience / All my stuff / Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Am I Agnostic? Emerson Green 2024-02-25 | The world is religiously ambiguous: It can be interpreted in various incompatible ways, and the interpreters are not necessarily violating any standards of rationality in doing so. As for me, I can’t say that I feel any position being forced on me by the evidence. My best efforts to judge the total balance of evidence weighing for and against theism leave me thinking that no one has a decisive case; and the main way to give the impression of having a decisive case is to ignore the total evidence, focusing solely or primarily on the facts that support your position. Put a spotlight on the things that favor your view, and minimize or cast aside the things that don’t fit. Over time, I've come to appreciate the force of some of the evidence against the hypothesis of indifference and in favor of a "value selection hypothesis", e.g. psychophysical harmony, fine-tuning, and the axiological trajectory of the universe. These, along with a few other considerations that favor theism more directly, have gradually moved me to more of a middle position on theism vs. atheism. (Today, I don’t dive into a full-fledged defense of those arguments.) There are plenty of sources of epistemic uncertainty that have increasingly led me to hold on to my beliefs more loosely. How am I supposed to alter my confidence in light of peer disagreement? How should I set my priors? How am I supposed to reckon with the inescapable contingency of my beliefs? Richard Rorty often spoke about a certain kind of philosopher with “radical and continuing doubts about the final vocabulary she currently uses, because she has been impressed by other vocabularies, vocabularies taken as final by people or books she has encountered” (1989). Rorty goes much further, in ways that I can’t get behind. But what can I say? I’m impressed by many of you. The problem is that you have mutually exclusive, incommensurable worldviews. At least for me, at this point, agnosticism seems like the most honest reaction to my epistemic situation. (Of course, God could settle this whenever he likes: https://x.com/waldenpod/status/1749836106973970860?s=20)Relevant video from Philip Swenson: youtu.be/MZR-PoFIRsw?si=jpuq9HaDYORRQHyNLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ timestamps / 00:00 Religious Ambiguity 6:37 The Value Selection Hypothesis 8:45 Theism and Evil 12:46 Psychophysical Harmony and Physical Complexity 14:29 Axiological Arc of the Universe17:05 Two Pretty Good Value Selection Hypotheses18:38 Is that you, God? 20:00 Common Consent Argument22:46 Agnostic?
Universalism Debate: Emerson Green vs. John Buck Emerson Green 2024-01-29 | I'm joined by John Buck to debate universal salvation, free will, eternal conscious torment, and other topics related to hell and the afterlife. I think Christian theism entails universalism, while John tends to think it does not. My playlist on hell youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgCsHWkb9NYtUnr7hNK_ar8MEJiosUcDm&si=D2n99kshEhRory6rKeith DeRose - Universalism and the Bible: https://campuspress.yale.edu/keithderose/1129-2/David Bentley Hart - That All Shall Be Saved amazon.com/That-All-Shall-Saved-Universal/dp/0300258488/ref=pd_lpo_sccl_3/134-6476606-7763711?pd_rd_w=RnK3U&content-id=amzn1.sym.1ad2066f-97d2-4731-9356-36b3edf1ae04&pf_rd_p=1ad2066f-97d2-4731-9356-36b3edf1ae04&pf_rd_r=9MEMFSD6TXQM4CNZCE7Y&pd_rd_wg=Sq7Sp&pd_rd_r=a8c0066b-22e3-4ed4-bba9-b7504ebaff61&pd_rd_i=0300258488&psc=1Rachel and Joshua Rasmussen - When Heaven Invades Hell amazon.com/When-Heaven-Invades-Joshua-Rasmussen/dp/1732383405/ref=sr_1_5?crid=16OSNXJR1XB3L&keywords=joshua+rasmussen&qid=1706464735&s=books&sprefix=joshua+rasmussen%2Cstripbooks%2C108&sr=1-5Andrew Hronich - Once Loved Always Loved: The Logic of Apokatastasis amazon.com/Once-Loved-Always-Logic-Apokatastasis/dp/1666756202Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/timestamps/00:00 Intro 04:05 Free Will18:21 Why do atheists care about universalism?24:51 Alternative Models of Hell 37:51 Scripture42:57 Why is John not a universalist? 1:13:04 Wild Metaphysical Speculation1:19:17 More on culpability and rejecting God 1:32:44 Restraining Sin1:41:57 Finite Theism
No, math does not prove God (Redeemed Zoomer Reply + Open Hangout) Emerson Green 2024-01-13 | Livestream about whether math proves God, followed by open hangout about tradcaths, incorruptibility, and other stuff. 00:00 "Math Proves God" 30:14 Open Hangout (Incorruptibility, Miracles, Tradcaths) https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
The Collapse of the Moral Argument for God Emerson Green 2024-01-11 | Today, we cast some doubt on the idea that morality is objective only if God exists. We also define some crucial terms, refute a few apologetic canards, and discuss how apologists have misrepresented the field of metaethics and failed the audiences that rely on them. We also discuss the Euthyphro dilemma, Hume’s Law, and explore a back-and-forth between William Lane Craig and Michael Huemer on the question, “Why obey God?” Finally, before summarizing the main problems for the moral argument, we cover two other moral arguments that are not abysmal failures. Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenCommon Mistakes about the Moral Argument | Majesty of Reason youtu.be/HagWjUtIzzY?si=prlYGNDzj3uaL6iyMajesty of Reason – Moral Arguments for God: An Analysis youtu.be/cFEjSzfEQrU?si=RhKSMu8ihQjFPj1-Michael Huemer – Groundless Morals (this chapter is within the volume of Erik Wielenberg vs. William Lane Craig on the moral argument) taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003055259-14/groundless-morals-michael-huemerMetaethics w/ Michael Huemer | Emerson Green youtu.be/32HHaQcqLPs?si=h_nlivpLA6Kp0cqYIs God Necessary for Morality? | William Lane Craig & Shelly Kagan youtu.be/Rm2wShHJ2iA?si=5qy7VnT2qVV4PwmjMoral Objectivity Without God | Russ Shafer-Landau youtu.be/50CQwa15R7A?si=kfK1sbx0kSG8BvUV/Timestamps/00:00 Introduction01:36 The Big Picture08:12 Metaethics (Defining Terms) 9:26 Descriptive vs. Evaluative (Defining Terms) 11:21 Objective Morality (Defining Terms) 14:54 Subjective Morality (Defining Terms) 20:05 The Metaethical Landscape (Defining Terms) 22:18 Apologist (Defining Terms) 23:33 Apologetics vs. Metaethics 27:49 “Humans are just animals” (Moral agents & patients) 33:40 The Moral Law Giver40:19 Euthyphro & Intrinsic Value52:29 Hume’s Law (Is-Ought Gap) 57:35 Why Obey God? 1:02:05 Groundless Morals1:09:44 Two Broad Classes of Moral Realism1:12:31 God Cannot Provide the Basis for Objective Morality (Craig vs. Huemer)1:37:41 Good Moral Arguments 1:47:01 What’s wrong with the moral argument?1:58:16 Why Craig still uses the argument
Death as an Atheist (AMA) Emerson Green 2023-12-05 | Are you afraid of death? How do you cope with death anxiety as an atheist? Full AMA: youtu.be/m-Cf8vEO5Qk?si=CjlIkbquDBS5Esw9Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen#afterlife #nde #atheism
Ayaan Hirsi Alis Conversion - An Atheist Reacts Emerson Green 2023-11-19 | Ayaan Hirsi Ali recently announced her conversion to Christianity. But has she only adopted a form of cultural Christianity? I examine her reasons for becoming a Christian and draw some parallels between Ayaan and another political convert: Andrew Tate. I think her reasons for adopting Christianity are quite clearly explicated, even though some Christians have been trying very hard to ignore them. She argues that Christianity can sustain the liberal values of the Enlightenment that she cherishes so deeply. Those values are under attack, she says, from Islam, Russia, China, and woke ideology. Every purely secular strategy tried in response has been insufficient. Christianity, on the other hand, could function as a far more effective weapon against her political enemies in this existential clash. But why does it matter that the west prevails over its cultural and geopolitical foes? Christianity can help with that, too – not just on a civilizational level, but individually as well. It's the antidote to nihilism, the heart of the Enlightenment, a panacea for wokeness and illiberalism. These considerations together lead her to adopt Christianity, even if she doesn't think it's actually true.Maybe in the future, she'll affirm something more than cultural Christianity. Until then, I'm honestly inclined to see Ayaan’s “conversion” as further vindication of the death of God: even the converts don’t really believe anymore. A good deal of true believers are apparently so desperate for a morale boost, they're willing to look past that. Ayaan's guiding light is liberalism, the Enlightenment, and western civilization. She is a positively zealous believer in what the west represents to her, and this is absolutely crucial to understanding her conversion to Christianity. She may not believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus, but she believes in western civilization. She believes this is the best way – perhaps the only way – to save it from withering.Ayaan Hirsi Ali - Why I am now a Christian unherd.com/2023/11/why-i-am-now-a-christianShadi Hamid - Embracing Islam to Own the Libs thefp.com/p/embracing-god-to-own-the-libsRandal Rauser on Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s conversion randalrauser.com/2023/11/ayaan-hirsi-ali-and-the-celebrity-conversion-with-the-weak-apologeticRod Dreher - A Christian of Convenience? europeanconservative.com/articles/dreher/ayaan-hirsi-ali-a-christian-of-convenienceTranscript emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2023/11/18/ayaan-hirsi-ali-and-the-rise-of-political-conversionsLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen00:00 Introduction 02:13 The Nature of Her Conversion 08:56 Arguing from Meaning 18:10 The Political Convert
AMA Responses (3.558K SUBSCRIBER SPECTACULAR) Emerson Green 2023-11-14 | 00:00 Intro00:46 Atheistic platonism? 01:22 Why are you gay? 01:30 Are you still a naturalist? 05:47 What kind of compatibilist are you? 09:41 If I settle your debt with PragerU, will you become a libertarian? 10:12 What’s your biggest gripe with physicalism? 12:42 On the abortion debate, when do you think personhood / full moral status begins? 17:22 Do twinks make better philosophers? 17:56 Are you agnostic about anything in philosophy? 19:37 Why are you such a sucker for spooky stuff? 30:49 Who makes those guitar transitions? 32:34 Favorite music? 34:30 Who are some of your favorite Eastern philosophers? 35:03 Which religion would you choose to be true? 40:54 Who are your favorite theist and atheist philosophers? 42:18 Arguing for dualism from mereological nihilism? 45:48 Euthanasia? 48:43 What are your thoughts on each general era of philosophy? 55:00 Thoughts on Jordan Peterson? 58:55 Have you looked into Islam? 1:03:57 Does your mother know you spend so much time talking to strangers on the internet? 1:04:04 What is your opinion on the resurrection? 1:08:23 The best argument against veganism? 1:21:18 What is the primary goal of adopting panpsychism? 1:23:20 Best defenses of objective morality? 1:24:34 How would aliens affect theism and atheism? 1:30:53 Are you a dualist or a physicalist? 1:31:31 Isn’t solipsism simpler than panpsychism? 1:33:37 Thoughts on idealism? 1:35:41 Which political system do you think is right? 1:39:34 Thoughts on metaethical naturalism? 1:41:52 Is incest wrong? 1:45:27 When will you have some Mormons back on your show? 1:46:34 Why atheist and not agnostic? Where can I find good philrel content? 1:49:54 Would necessitarianism defeat fine-tuning and psychophysical harmony? 1:57:38 Do you accept physical causal closure? 2:00:00 How do you explain psychophysical harmony? 2:02:34 Kant’s transcendental idealism and free will? 2:07:56 Are we obligated to refute false beliefs even if they’re meaningful? 2:13:01 Is there any profound nugget of wisdom that Christianity has first or exclusive ownership of? 2:15:17 Analytic/Continental divide? 2:18:05 "Emmerson" 2:19:03 Does the phenomenal powers view weaken psychophysical harmony? 2:22:04 Is time necessary for consciousness? 2:28:49 If you did reconvert, would you be a Christian or a generic theist? 2:32:20 Finite theism? 2:36:22 Top three philosophers who are wrong about everything? 2:37:57 Moral subjectivism with normally functioning humans as the (collective) observer(s) morality is stance-dependent upon?2:48:52 Are you afraid of death? How do you cope with death anxiety as an atheist? AMA (the questions are in the comment section here) youtu.be/fR5V2yc_wJELinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
AMA (leave your questions in the comments) Emerson Green 2023-11-06 | Correction: I am $420,069 in debtHere's the AMA: youtu.be/m-Cf8vEO5Qk?si=5zNwymThdns7o9OMLINKTREE https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
The Case Against Epiphenomenalism Emerson Green 2023-10-30 | Epiphenomenalism is the view that mental states have no effect on anything. The feeling of pain, counterintuitively, does not cause your aversion, mentally or physically. Beliefs don’t cause behavior. None of our actions occur in virtue of our thoughts, feelings, or sensations.Inspired by Matthew Adelstein’s post defending epiphenomenalism, I want to explain my opposition to the view. A few times, he referenced a podcast episode / blog post of mine from 2020, which I hadn’t read since it was first posted. I found a few things to disagree with in my own episode, so I thought I’d respond to Matthew and try to offer an updated critique of epiphenomenalism in the process. While epiphenomenalism is probably less wrong than physicalism, the causal efficacy of our mental states is as evident as anything, so the view should still be rejected in favor of panpsychism or interactionist dualism. As Paul Draper once put it, “wild ideas are needed” to explain consciousness, but I don’t think epiphenomenalism is the right wild idea.After responding to a few key points from Matthew, I offer a few reasons to reject epiphenomenalism:- Epiphenomenalism is self-defeating.- The evidence that supports the causal influence of mental states is the exact same kind of evidence for causal influence in other cases. This not only supports mental causation, but also raises the threat of undermining the epiphenomenalist’s claim that the physical has causal powers.- The phenomenal powers view as defended by Mørch (2017, 2020) is plausible and entails the falsity of epiphenomenalism. In short, there are plausible examples of causal necessity in the mind.- Among metaphysical theories of consciousness, epiphenomenalism is the most vulnerable to the problem of psychophysical harmony.LINKTREE https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ timestamps /00:00 Introduction 00:43 What is epiphenomenalism? 02:27 Conservation of energy, Libet experiments07:42 Self-Defeat16:44 Evidence of Causation & A Dilemma 23:20 The Phenomenal Powers View28:00 Psychophysical Harmony 32:24 Epiphenomenalism is Counterintuitive 40:02 Summary
Christian Universalism w/ Andrew Hronich Emerson Green 2023-10-10 | I'm joined by Andrew Hronich, author of Once Loved, Always Loved: The Logic of Apokatastasis amazon.com/Once-Loved-Always-Logic-Apokatastasis/dp/1666756202 We discuss universal reconciliation, eternal conscious torment, annihilationism, and much else! For arguments against ECT, check out my Hell playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgCsHWkb9NYtUnr7hNK_ar8MEJiosUcDm Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Saved for having the right beliefs? Emerson Green 2023-09-25 | Full interview with Randal Rauser: youtu.be/h3mwqd_Gvl8?si=Prv9qpp1stcrTNq7Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Why care about finite theism as an atheist? Emerson Green 2023-09-16 | First Debate (Dry Apologist vs. LDS Philosophy): youtu.be/K8f5gensQF0?si=EKCHIfe_Auxqp1sk Second Debate (John Buck vs. Alex Strasser): youtube.com/live/mlMBzYTGuW4?si=zb-5uMnOi4cbX_PWLinktree: https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
DEBATE: Is God Finite? Emerson Green 2023-09-03 | Alex Strasser and John Buck debate the merits of finite theism, the view that God is limited in power. Theistic finitism is less vulnerable to the problem of evil than perfect being theism, but are there other trade-offs that make the notion of a finite God less defensible overall? John is defending the view that strong versions of omnipotence avoid problems of vagueness, arbitrariness, ad hocness, lack of predictive power, and complexity that limited models of God suffer from. John also thinks that a new problem of evil arises that is particular only to limited views of God. Alex will give a cosmological argument and fine-tuning argument for finite theism, and further argue that omni-theism is not a fruitful research program due to serious issues with coherence and the analysis of omni-properties. Theistic finitism is rarely discussed in the philosophy of religion, and Alex wants to invite us to take finite theism more seriously and to investigate it carefully. Summary of theistic finitism: britannica.com/topic/theism/The-idea-of-a-finite-God Previous limited god debate: youtu.be/K8f5gensQF0?si=SjGkdvxlaWH01MVs Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ timestamps / 00:00 Introduction 03:41 John's Opening 22:00 Alex's Opening 39:16 Problem of Evil 1:02:51 God's Power 1:16:26 Miracles & the Bible 1:22:22 Simplicity as a Theoretical Virtue 1:29:53 Fine-tuning Redux 1:55:19 Biblical & Theological Constraints 2:03:30 Necessity 2:06:30 Worship & Hell 2:17:46 Parting Thoughts
Substance Dualism w/ Michael Huemer Emerson Green 2023-08-24 | Dr. Michael Huemer joins me to defend interactionist substance dualism, the view that the mind and body are composed of different substances and can exert causal influence over each other. Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenKnowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy amazon.com/Knowledge-Reality-Value-Mostly-Philosophy/dp/B091F5QTDS/ timestamps / 00:00 Intro 00:41 Why dualism instead of physicalism? 20:34 Emergence 30:47 Epiphenomenalism and Other Minds 37:53 Emergence II 39:45 Mental Substance and Spacetime 50:56 Personal Identity 1:09:44 Reincarnation 1:23:38 Audience Qs: Embodiment and Pairing1:30:16 God
Debunking UFO Skeptics w/ @JimmyAkin Emerson Green 2023-08-15 | Wouldn’t aliens manage to avoid crashing their ships, given how advanced they’d have to be? Aren’t the distances between life-supporting planets too vast to feasibly travel? If figures in the government actually knew something, wouldn’t a cover-up involve too many people to keep the secret for long? I’m joined by Jimmy Akin to answer ten common objections to UFO phenomena and alien visitations. In the wake of recent news stories about unidentified aerial phenomena, I heard the same skeptical talking points trotted out over and over again as if UFO believers had never considered them and had no response to them at all. So I’d like to play whatever small part I can in improving the quality of the discourse by advancing the conversation past the initial thoughts that are commonly offered into more interesting territory. This should make skeptics better skeptics, and help agnostics like myself better appreciate the skeptical position. Right now, the skeptics are not sending their best. The Objections emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2023/08/15/alien-apologetics-w-jimmy-akinJimmy Akin's Mysterious World sqpn.com/2023/09/alien-apologetics-with-emerson-greenThe conversation on Jimmy’s channel youtu.be/aptdgtE5z-E?si=5OIF0jVrpO2KOyh5My Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ timestamps / 00:00 Introduction 01:47 Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World 05:28 The Trump Objection 13:43 The 'Too Many People' Objection 22:47 The Crash Objection 33:50 The Distance Objection 47:39 The Geography Objection 54:48 The Skeptic Community 1:02:05 The Historical Objection 1:16:01 The Motivation Objection 1:38:19 The Low Priors Objection 1:54:43 The Illusion Objection 2:03:27 The Psychoanalysis Objection 2:15:00 Conclusion 2:18:00 Goodbyes
Encountering Mystery w/ Dr. Dale Allison Emerson Green 2023-08-09 | Today I’m speaking with Dr. Dale Allison, historian and author of many books, including The Resurrection of Jesus, The Historical Christ and the Theological Jesus, and our subject today, Encountering Mystery: Religious Experience in a Secular Age. The subtitle of the book notwithstanding, the unusual experiences we discuss are not explicitly religious. They’re usually interpreted through a religious lens (often without any reflection), but almost all of them needn’t be, which is something we return to quite a bit. Flatly disputing the phenomenon is not the only option available to atheists.We talk about paranormal and parapsychological phenomena (e.g., clairvoyance, levitation, visions of dead loved ones, etc.) as well as two major sources of skepticism towards things that fall into those categories. On the one hand, of course, there’s materialism, conservative naturalism, skepticism (as in, the skeptic community), etc. But Protestant Christianity, I was surprised to learn, has also been a skeptical force in history due to their drive to debunk Catholic miracle stories, or even just extraordinary events documented by the Catholic Church that explicitly or implicitly were used as evidence for Catholicism. One thing I forgot to mention during the interview: In addition to Dr. Allison’s book, there are a couple podcasts that regularly discuss cases like the ones that came up today in greater depth. “Otherworld” and “Jimmy Akin’s Mysterious World” come highly recommended from me. Encountering Mystery amazon.com/Encountering-Mystery-Religious-Experience-Secular/dp/0802881882 Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Yes, Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence Emerson Green 2023-07-21 | I defend the controversial idea that ordinary and extraordinary claims don’t require the same evidence. Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
4 Things I Learned About EPISTEMOLOGY Emerson Green 2023-07-19 | Understanding Knowledge - Michael Huemer amazon.com/Understanding-Knowledge-Michael-Huemer/dp/B0BK12PN47Linktree: https://linktr.ee/emersongreenDan Dennett vs. Greg Caruso on Free Will (clip at 16.30) youtu.be/AxhA7S3q49o Interview with Randal Rauser on ‘The Doubter’s Creed: How To Be A Christian When You Don’t Believe It’s True’ youtu.be/h3mwqd_Gvl8Majesty of Reason - Theism is rational, but Trent Horn is wrong and that upsets me (clip at 52.20) youtu.be/tctHQlYbl6EPhenomenal Conservatism w/ Michael Huemer youtu.be/Heoei-RFpZAMy Epistemology playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgCsHWkb9NYthZ9K4fDau7A6zDE7LzDgHSupport: https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ timestamps / 00:00 Intro 00:45 What is Knowledge? 14:40 Wittgensteinian View of Concepts 28:21 The Skeptic’s Error and the Moorean Shift 39:45 Internalism vs. Externalism 50:00 Empathy on the Epistemic Landscape 56:52 Parting Thoughts
5 Mistakes Atheists Make About Epistemology Emerson Green 2023-07-05 | Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenUnderstanding Knowledge - Michael Huemer amazon.com/Understanding-Knowledge-Michael-Huemer/dp/B0BK12PN4700:00 Introduction 00:30 No evidence for theism14:20 Theism is unfalsifiable 25:30 Testimony is not evidence39:50 Intuitions don't matter 47:43 Lacktheism51:29 Charity Support: https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Debate: Limited vs. Unlimited God Emerson Green 2023-06-23 | Catholic vs. Mormon on the Nature of GodLDS Philosophy and Dry Apologist join me for a debate on the nature of God. We compare the virtues of a limited model of God versus a model on which God is unlimited in power, as well as simple, impassible, etc. Are the classical models of God too impersonal and abstract, incapable of sustaining a commitment to a personal God who loves us? Or are the limited models of God not divine enough? What are the advantages and disadvantages of both views with respect to the problem of evil? My Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen LDSPhilosophy's channel: youtube.com/channel/UCD9dBPDSDvwkajmC0fPW3CQDry Apologist's channel: youtube.com/c/dryapologist/ timestamps / 00:00 Introduction 00:58 Limitations? 12:08 Caleb’s Opening 16:29 Joseph’s Opening 27:27 Aseity, Simplicity, Impassibility 48:02 Problem of Evil 58:52 Can a limited God cause revelations and religious experiences? 1:03:05 Problem of Evil redux 1:07:51 Arbitrary Limits 1:26:33 Why omni-properties? 1:29:31 Worship-worthiness
The Hypothesis of Indifference: Breaking the Binary Emerson Green 2023-06-19 | Thinking out loud about the hypothesis of indifference, a limited God, natural teleology, pan-agentialism, and how value-orientation in the universe is not binary but rather comes on a continuum. For reference, Paul Draper (1989) characterizes the hypothesis of indifference as follows: “neither the nature nor the condition of sentient beings on earth is the result of benevolent or malevolent actions performed by non-human persons.” Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Post-Debate Interview w/ Justin Schieber of Real Atheology Emerson Green 2023-05-11 | Justin Schieber joins me for a lighthearted breakdown of his debate with Eric Hernandez on the existence of God. We critique the arguments put forward by Eric, discuss the evidence presented by Justin, and talk about a few of our favorite moments from the debate. Huge shoutout to @CapturingChristianity for organizing the debate, and to the beautiful Lanier Theological Library for hosting the event. Does God Exist? Justin Schieber vs. Eric Hernandez (CC Exchange 2023) youtube.com/live/a1YA2yQPzZM?feature=share @RealAtheology's channel youtube.com/c/RealAtheology Patreon | Counter Apologetics patreon.com/counter Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen / Timestamps /00:00 Introduction01:52 Moral Argument 14:15 EAAN26:50 Souls36:56 Eric’s Rebuttal 53:55 Open Dialogue / Q&A1:00:19 Lanier Theological Library1:07:54 Religious Ambiguity (more Q&A)1:10:56 Chillin
Animal Suffering is Overwhelming Evidence Against God Emerson Green 2023-04-26 | Is the kind, degree, and distribution of animal suffering evidence against theism? We discuss why teleological evil, the scale of suffering in evolutionary history, and the moral randomness of animal pain is strong evidence against the existence of God. Transcript emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2023/04/26/animal-suffering-is-evidence-against-gods-existenceTip Jar account.venmo.com/u/emersongreenpodcastLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Widespread Theistic Belief is Evidence for Theism Emerson Green 2023-04-19 | I joined @DryApologist and @johnbuck4008 to speak about the common consent argument, which is typically dismissed as fallacious without much consideration. However, I think the fact that most people in recorded history have believed in something godlike is some evidence favoring the existence of the divine. We discuss why that's the case, as well as the only good response to the argument: the evolutionary debunking response. Defending the argument from widespread theistic belief: youtu.be/lF6Z7uKiHpQ (There are plenty of objections you may have thought of that didn't come up in this video. They're probably discussed in the longer video linked here ^ )How did religion evolve? youtu.be/ARPxNYNgiScFull conversation with Dry Apologist, John Buck, and Chris Rhodes: youtube.com/live/NgwBQ0EwXU8?feature=shareLinktree: https://linktr.ee/emersongreen. . . “[Ad populum] is the ‘fallacy’ of believing something because most people believe it. But what exactly is supposed to be wrong with that? . . . Maybe the idea is that most people believing p is irrelevant to whether p is true. I.e., if most people believe it, that doesn’t mean it is more likely to be correct. Problem: This is obviously wrong. If most people believe something, that obviously does make it more likely to be correct than if most people don’t believe it. If most of our beliefs weren’t true, the human species would die out pretty much immediately. Sometimes, people elaborate on this ‘fallacy’ by citing examples of beliefs that were once widely held but were false – e.g., that the sun orbits the Earth. So let me now just mention a few typical examples of beliefs that are widely held: Dogs exist. It’s generally lighter in the daytime than at night. The sky is blue, not red, green, or yellow. There are more than three human beings in existence. Human beings commonly have beliefs and desires. Putting your hand in a fire hurts. Six is more than two. The Earth has existed for more than five minutes. When you drop rocks near the surface of the Earth, they generally fall. . . . I’m sure you can extend that list for a long time. Now, which would you say there are more of: Widely-held beliefs that are true, or ones that are false?”Michael Huemer (Knowledge, Reality, and Value)
Gods Personality Change? Emerson Green 2023-02-24 | Is there a moral clash between the depiction of Yahweh and Jesus Christ? Recently on Twitter, I recounted an experience I had with Frank Turek when I was struggling to hold onto my faith: "I remember asking Frank Turek in person during a Q&A how he reconciled the portrayals of God in the OT & NT, since it seemed like there was a personality change. He said, 'There wasn’t one. Next question.' Anyway, I deconverted a week later."Joe Heschmeyer, writing for catholic.com, made a much more respectable and empathetic attempt to answer my question, which we’ll be taking a (critical) look at today. God’s Personality Change? - Catholic Answers catholic.com/magazine/blog/gods-personality-changeGood God? - David Bentley Hart theopolisinstitute.com/leithart_post/good-god-a-responseSlavery in the Bible - Counter Apologetics youtu.be/FXklhcQ41KQTranscript of this episode emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2023/02/18/gods-personality-changeFollow me on Twitter @/waldenpod twitter.com/waldenpodFor those who are curious, I asked Frank Turek the question in August 2014 in Manitou Springs, Colorado during a two-week apologetics camp called Summit. https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ Timestamps / 00:00 Frank Turek 02:01 The Parenthood Analogy 07:16 Relativism & Moral Agents08:31 Parting Thoughts
What best explains psychophysical harmony? Philip Goff vs. Dustin Crummett Emerson Green 2023-02-15 | Philip Goff (@MindChat) and @dustin.crummett debate psychophysical harmony, God, axiarchism, pan-agentialism, natural teleology, and explore some neglected terrain between theism and the hypothesis of indifference. What are our options in explaining the fine-tuning of consciousness? https://linktr.ee/emersongreenDr. Dustin Crummett on PhilPeople: philpeople.org/profiles/dustin-crummettDr. Philip Goff's website: philipgoffphilosophy.comMy playlist with a lot of psychophysical harmony stuff: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgCsHWkb9NYt1r3Q_4nx9DJHdlr40LYrG/ Counter Apologetics /Consider supporting at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Consider supporting at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1/ Timestamps / 00:00 Introduction 01:40 Indifference vs Value Selection03:47 Dustin's opening 09:48 Philip's opening 23:32 Open dialogue: Panagentialism, IIT, Teleology1:02:22 Problem of Evil1:12:53 Limited God 1:51:43 Philip's book title & subtitle
How to Be a Christian When You Don’t Believe It’s True w/ Randal Rauser Emerson Green 2023-02-09 | I’m joined by @Randal_Rauser to discuss his new book, The Doubter’s Creed: How to Be a Christian When You Don’t Believe It’s True. We discuss the uniquely creedal character of Christianity, the credibility of doxastic voluntarism (the view that we can choose our beliefs at will), prudential reasons to hope Christianity is true, the dispute between William James and W.K. Clifford over belief without sufficient evidence, universalism, eternal conscious torment, religious disagreement, and whether non-Christians can be saved. The Doubter’s Creed amazon.com/Doubters-Creed-Christian-When-Believe/dp/1738771830/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3UOHWM7HWVDFR&keywords=doubter%27s+creed&qid=1675895504&sprefix=doubter%27s+cree%2Caps%2C161&sr=8-1randalrauser.com https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ Timestamps /00:00 A religion of creeds 07:19 Doxastic voluntarism 18:17 Grace for beliefs, not just actions 31:12 Why hope Christianity is true? 43:40 Love your Rwandan neighbor as yourself 53:33 James vs. Clifford
Addressing Popular Forms of Theism vs. the Best Forms Emerson Green 2023-01-25 | Here's my defense of philosophical atheism (or whatever you want to call it) against new atheism (or whatever you want to call it) and my proposed truce. So, should atheists address popular and harmful versions of theism? Or should we address the most defensible versions of theism? To explore the question of God’s existence, we must engage with the best forms of theism, not the worst. As Michael Huemer put it, “Who cares if you can refute the craziest version of a view? … The way to learn is to address the most interesting defensible views, not to spend our time discussing trivially false ideas.” Even if those trivially false ideas are widespread, wield lots of influence in the world, and are positively dangerous, they’re still trivially false. At worst, it’s deeply dishonest to refute the worst version of an idea, stop there, and act as if the entire idea has been refuted. Depending on one's goals, however, addressing the strongest forms of theism might seem like a waste of time. If you're primarily concerned with atheist activism, helping others, and reducing the harm brought about by religion, why spend any time on things that have no significant influence in the world? The activists are generally more concerned with attacking the truth of influential beliefs that make the world worse. Philosophers are generally more concerned with addressing the best versions of each side, since that’s the best way of figuring out whether we should be theists, atheists, or agnostics. Though both are valuable and worthwhile projects, the main issue with the activist crowd is that they seem to think they’re the best at both, despite never engaging with the strongest versions of the view they reject. https://linktr.ee/emersongreenTranscript emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2023/01/25/addressing-popular-forms-of-theism-vs-the-best-forms/ Counter Apologetics /Consider supporting at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Consider supporting at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
The Argument from Miracles Emerson Green 2023-01-08 | Friendly debate between three miracle skeptics and a theist. https://linktr.ee/emersongreen / Counter Apologetics /Consider supporting at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Consider supporting at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1/ timestamps /00:00 Introduction to topic and guests 05:34 What is a miracle? 07:21 Hume 12:27 The role of miracles in religious belief 19:34 Analyzing miracles as a class vs. individual cases 27:27 What would convince you? 41:33 Why don't people try to heal amputees? 51:20 The non-random selection of data 1:06:07 Classical vs. evidentialist divide 1:10:04 The resurrection (of George) 1:15:19 Gerrymandered epistemology 1:27:49 The theological significance criterion 1:32:30 Theoretical virtues & reverse minimal facts 1:37:02 Closing thoughts
The Vagueness Argument Against Physicalism Emerson Green 2023-01-02 | When did consciousness first evolve? If physicalism is true, we’d expect it to have evolved gradually, just as other complex biological phenomena evolved gradually. But the transition from feeling nothing to feeling something couldn’t have been gradual. No matter how minimal a conscious experience is, if it’s “like something” to exist – anything at all – it’s not like nothing at all. On reflection it seems hard to imagine anything other than a sharp border between non-experiential reality and experiential reality. On the other hand, complex physical states are not sharp: they admit borderline cases. If we remove one atom at a time from a given brain state, it will eventually be vague or indeterminate whether or not the organism is still in that physical brain state. So if consciousness is just a kind of physical state, we’d expect consciousness to follow suit. Since it seems impossible that there could be a borderline case of consciousness – it’s either like something for a creature or like nothing – we have reason to think that physicalism is false. Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen1000 Word Philosophy - Vagueness 1000wordphilosophy.com/2019/03/11/vaguenessTranscript emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2022/12/16/the-vagueness-argument-against-physicalismMichael Tye - Vagueness and the Evolution of Consciousness academic.oup.com/book/39910David Papineau’s review of Vagueness and the Evolution of Consciousness in NDPR https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/vagueness-and-the-evolution-of-consciousness-through-the-looking-glass/Nino Kadic - Phenomenology of Fundamental Reality kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/theses/phenomenology-of-fundamental-reality(ea85e9fa-6b07-4018-9c54-a54407d16f35).htmlFollow on twitter @waldenpod @onpanpsychismSupport the podcasts at patreon.com/counter or patreon.com/waldenpod / timestamps / 00:00 The vagueness argument 03:59 Which creatures are conscious? 06:55 The sharpness of consciousness 09:20 The vagueness of biological phenomena 11:51 The sharpness of consciousness (cont.) 19:25 Weak emergence 20:52 The advantage of vagueness arguments
Meager Moral Fruits w/ @RealAtheology Emerson Green 2022-12-24 | Ben Watkins of Real Atheology joins me to discuss the meager moral fruits argument, a few objections to the argument, and why we're interested in it in the first place.Subscribe to Real Atheology on YouTube and on iTunes podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/real-atheology/id1200545713A few resources on the argument: emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2022/12/24/meager-moral-fruitsFollow us on Twitter @waldenpod @RealAtheology @SpeedWatkins Support the podcast at patreon.com/counterhttps://linktr.ee/emersongreen00:00 Housekeeping 1:41 To the Christians in my life 3:43 Introducing Ben from RA 6:06 Why I’m interested in the MMFA 9:49 The Meager Moral Fruits Argument 42:51 Open Hangout
Why I Support Abolition of the Death Penalty Emerson Green 2022-12-09 | In many ways, I'm the ideal audience for apologists of capital punishment. I believe in free will, I think human beings are responsible for their actions, I’m not opposed to retribution in all cases, I believe there are virtuous qualities to revenge, and I think some people deserve to die. However, none of that is enough to justify the death penalty system. First, arguing that some people deserve to die is not sufficient to show that any particular institution (e.g. the state) should have the power and legitimacy to carry out executions. Second, capital punishment is not reconcilable with the principle of remedy: when mistakes are inevitably made, the punishment for the wrongly convicted cannot be brought to an end and they cannot be given damages. Third, the application of the death penalty will inevitably be morally arbitrary in some cases – either due to the morally arbitrary nature of the laws themselves, the enforcement of the law, or the imperfect determination of guilt. Since this is unavoidable, we cannot have the death penalty without murdering innocents. And since saving innocent life is far more important than ending the lives of the guilty, this should dissuade us from maintaining a death-penalty system. Finally, the virtuous qualities of revenge are absent in the death penalty system. Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenSupport at patreon.com/waldenpod & patreon.com/counter Transcript emersongreenblog.wordpress.com/2022/12/07/why-i-support-abolition-of-the-death-penaltyMusic by ichika Nito and used with permission.Twitter @waldenpod/ Timestamps /00:00 Introduction 01:02 Defending the State 03:02 Moral Arbitrariness 06:00 The Principle of Remedy 08:15 What if we're certain? 10:46 Saving the Innocent vs. Killing the Guilty15:28 Revenge 29:32 Final Considerations
Psychophysical Harmony, Physicalism, & God w/ Brian Cutter Emerson Green 2022-11-27 | Dr. Brian Cutter joins me to discuss his paper, 'Psychophysical Harmony: A New Argument for Theism', coauthored with Dr. Dustin Crummett. After talking about epiphenomenalism and why William James’ argument against it works against all views in philosophy of mind (with the lone exception of Type-A materialism), we explain why psychophysical harmony seems so improbable. We also discuss what I consider to be one of the weirder features of physicalism – the metaphysical impossibility of inverts, zombies, disharmony, and so on – and why one's views about metaphysical modality won't help you escape the argument from psychophysical harmony. In addition to touching on a few objections, we also talk about the underdetermination of the data, and why psychophysical harmony may be equally good evidence for some hypotheses of those who exist in The Nagel Zone. The paper: philarchive.org/rec/CUTPHAWilliam James' argument against epiphenomenalism: youtu.be/GrG6SdJzozcMy interview with @dustin.crummett youtu.be/auahudU1C08https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ Counter Apologetics /Consider supporting at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Consider supporting at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1/ timestamps /00:00 Introduction & Preliminaries 03:59 The Problem with Epiphenomenalism 10:44 The Likelihood of Harmony 19:04 The Impossibility of Disharmony? 31:45 The Revenge Problem 49:53 The Path of Least Resistance 53:22 Underdetermination & the Nagel Zone58:02 Hiddenness 1:01:53 Do only those with a theistic agenda notice this problem?
The Participation Theodicy with @johnbuck4008 Emerson Green 2022-11-16 | The participation theodicy holds, reasonably enough, that it would be good to create an ideal world. Since it would be good for God to do so, it would also be good for us to do so (as well as any other beings). The goodness would only be multiplied through our participation and contribution to the creation of an ideal world. The defender of the participation theodicy doesn't deny that God could've created a much better world than ours -- or even created us in heaven -- and that this would be a good thing. Rather, they compare the goodness of creating a heavenly world ex nihilo to the goodness of creaturely participation in the creation of the same heavenly world. A unilateral divine act of ex nihilo creation would preclude the creative activities of other creatures. To quote my guest today, "The best sort of thing God could do would be to create the very best type of world for creatures to inhabit. But for creatures to be spontaneously generated in an ideal state of the world would be for them to miss out on helping God bring about that ideal world. So God, being generous, would have good reason to initially create creatures in a non-ideal state of the world, so that they could contribute towards bringing about its idealization, so that they too could do the very best type of thing that they could have done." https://linktr.ee/emersongreenFollow us on Twitter @waldenpod and @WriterJohnBuck/ Counter Apologetics /Consider supporting at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Consider supporting at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1/ Timestamps /0:00:00 Introduction 0:02:00 The Participation Theodicy 0:18:37 Divine Hiddenness 0:22:54 Teleological Evil 0:32:47 Is it worth it? 0:34:26 What would disconfirm your theory? 0:39:34 Is knowledge of participation necessary? 0:45:30 Evil we can't eliminate 0:54:37 Is our participation meaningful? How does free will factor in? 1:13:36 Draper's argument from pain & pleasure 1:37:04 Intrinsic vs. extrinsic goods (Why not hellworld?) 2:00:04 Rasmussen's analogy on theodicies 2:09:45 Skeptical theism continues to be wrong2:15:34 Some topics for future discussion
Debating the Problem of Teleological Evil with @DryApologist Emerson Green 2022-11-08 | Dry Apologist and I discuss the 'perfect will theodicy' and teleological evil. The Argument from Teleological Evil: youtu.be/S8W9E_YvmFwFull Conversation with Dry Apologist: youtu.be/WEBSV1HF9sEFelipe Leon's argument: http://exapologist.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-problem-of-teleological-evil.htmlQuentin Smith's argument: infidels.org/library/modern/quentin-smith-evil-lawsIs God the Best Explanation of Things? Rasmussen and Leon amazon.com/God-Best-Explanation-Things-Dialogue/dp/3030237516Support the show at patreon.com/counterhttps://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Defending the Common Consent Argument for God Emerson Green 2022-10-18 | Does the phenomenon of widespread theistic belief support theism? Or is the common consent argument nothing more than a fallacious argument from popularity? We discuss the argument from widespread theistic belief, the hyperactive agency detection device, religious ambiguity, universalism, divine hiddenness, the ad populum fallacy, whether religious disagreement is truly distinct from other kinds of disagreements, and why I think the prevalence and persistence of theism is evidence for God's existence. https://linktr.ee/emersongreenFull Videos: First clip - An Atheist Makes the Case for Theism w/ Adherent Apologetics youtube.com/watch?v=2kKpU1hBBJc&list=PLgCsHWkb9NYt1r3Q_4nx9DJHdlr40LYrG&index=2Second clip - Debunking Myself on God youtube.com/watch?v=qzV3E5NcDTA&list=PLgCsHWkb9NYt1r3Q_4nx9DJHdlr40LYrG&index=4Third clip - Devil's Advocate Debate w/ Christian Idealism youtube.com/watch?v=EtNgscve6P8&list=PLgCsHWkb9NYt1r3Q_4nx9DJHdlr40LYrG&index=3Related: Logical Fallacies youtu.be/2tcBav3rwZoA Catholic and an Atheist Debate God youtu.be/k5k48FeQqE4Hell: Eternal Conscious Torment youtu.be/iYXI9e8M6d400:00 Interview with Adherent Apologetics 12:50 The Argument from Widespread Theistic Belief 35:33 Roadmap for the rest of the episode 39:31 Religious Ambiguity, Hiddenness, & Universalism 1:07:59 Summary from the Devil's Advocate Debate
One Hell of a Problem w/ @RealAtheology & @CounterApologist Emerson Green 2022-10-03 | I’m joined by Counter Apologist and Ryan from Real Atheology to discuss eternal conscious torment. First, we take a look at the views of William Lane Craig, who famously denies the possibility of an actual infinite in the context of the kalam, yet seems to affirm the existence of an actual infinite in his defense of everlasting torment. Craig grants that finite sins merit finite punishment. But since rejecting a relationship with God is *not* a finite sin, eternal conscious torment is justified. (Craig seems to hold that our *guilt* is an actual infinite, not our punishment, which is a potential infinite.)We also touch on free will, postmortem salvation, the rejection of God, religious diversity, universalism, guilt, and David Bentley Hart's case that everlasting torment is morally indefensible. Clarification: When it comes to rejecting God, I used the words “ignorance or limitations/imperfections” several times (e.g., “No one would reject a relationship with a being of perfect love without some ignorance or imperfection”). “Ignorance” in this context would include lack of knowledge of God’s existence or his exact nature. “Imperfection” or “limitation” was usually intended to refer to our rational faculties. So if a person is rejecting a being of perfect love, I think that person must be lacking information or ability to assess that information, most likely. As David Bentley Hart argues, “no rejection of God on the part of the rational soul is possible apart from some quantum of ignorance and misapprehension and personal damage.” https://linktr.ee/emersongreenSubscribe to Real Atheology: youtube.com/realatheologySubscribe to Counter Apologist: youtube.com/CounterApologistFollow us on Twitter: twitter.com/RealAtheology twitter.com/CounterApologis twitter.com/waldenpodMy Hell playlist: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgCsHWkb9NYtUnr7hNK_ar8MEJiosUcDm
Metaethics w/ Michael Huemer Emerson Green 2022-09-17 | Dr. Michael Huemer joins me to discuss moral realism vs. antirealism, ethical intuitionism, God's relationship to morality, moral disagreement, companions in guilt, evolutionary debunking arguments, and much else in moral philosophy. Ethical Intuitionism amazon.com/Ethical-Intuitionism-M-Huemer/dp/0230573746/ref=sr_1_1?crid=8CEYB73OM4PJ&keywords=ethical+intuitionism+huemer&qid=1663122578&s=books&sprefix=ethical+intuitionism+huemer%2Cstripbooks%2C75&sr=1-1Knowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy amazon.com/Knowledge-Reality-Value-Mostly-Philosophy/dp/B091F5QTDS/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3GLGJRYBMDRL5&keywords=knowledge+reality+and+value&qid=1663122524&s=books&sprefix=knowledge+reality+and+value%2Cstripbooks%2C85&sr=1-1 William Lane Craig vs. Erik Wielenberg amazon.com/Debate-Morality-William-Lane-Craig-dp-0367135655/dp/0367135655/ref=mt_other?_encoding=UTF8&me=&qid=Consider supporting at patreon.com/counter or at patreon.com/waldenpodLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ Timestamps /00:00 Introduction01:03 Objective vs. Subjective06:40 Five Metaethical Views37:01 Fictionalism50:42 Phenomenal Conservatism, Scientism, Skepticism1:17:05 Moral Disagreement1:24:48 Theism and Moral Realism1:40:02 Companions in Innocence1:44:54 Evolutionary Debunking Arguments1:57:40 Huemer’s soul is not in Colorado nor is it in Michigan
Three Kinds of Naturalism Emerson Green 2022-09-15 | Sentientism Interview: youtu.be/e9iuwVIXDZcWhat is Naturalism? youtu.be/4G-WJCI85oQLinktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen"Conservative naturalists are straight physicalists—nothing exists but the physical, and the physical is characterized by all and only the properties of a completed physics (and perhaps chemistry, if chemistry cannot be reduced to physics). By contrast, moderate naturalists differ from conservative naturalists in that they expand their conception of the natural world so as to include abstract objects (e.g., propositions, properties, possible worlds, etc.). Finally, liberal naturalists differ from moderates and conservatives in that they not only admit into their ontology of the natural world the abstracta of the moderates, but they also allow for concreta that have more properties and powers than the conservatives and moderates allow. Examples of liberal naturalism include Spinozism and Russellian monism (also known as panprotopsychism)."Is God the Best Explanation of Things? Felipe Leon & Joshua Rasmussen (p. 91)
Responding to Trent Horns 5 Atheist Double Standards @TheCounselofTrent Emerson Green 2022-09-03 | https://linktr.ee/emersongreenInterview on the Sentientism podcast: youtu.be/e9iuwVIXDZcThe Meager Moral Fruits Argument: youtu.be/q5Kq-73HfWk@rationalityrules' video on his conflict with the ACA (relevant to 'Double Standard' 4): youtu.be/cX_vOpX6mt4/ Counter Apologetics /Support the podcast at patreon.com/counterApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/counter-apologetics/id1273573417Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0xp05xgyg04BWh0U1tCZ0z/ Walden Pod /Support the show at patreon.com/waldenpodApple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/walden-pod/id1474408172Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/5It3kjkrB9CTDen1Sx3aGl?si=fZ6MENZ4TdSLDPLAJ_6dAA&nd=1/ Timestamps /00:00 Coming Up01:00 Introduction01:48 Trent's Introduction (No disagreement!)03:13 Ancient Historical Documents (Double Standard 1)05:36 God is evil, nothing is evil (Double Standard 2a)19:43 Divine Command Theory25:18 Moral Realism vs. Atheism (Double Standard 2b)36:35 Bad Christians vs. Bad Atheists (Double Standard 3)42:17 Ridiculing Christian censorship while excommunicating atheist heretics (Double Standard 4)47:49 Atheists refuse to criticize Islam (Double Standard 5)55:39 Outro
Intelligent Theists, Ultimate Justice, Necessary Existence (Call In Show #2) Emerson Green 2022-08-29 | Is the intellectual tradition of theism evidence in favor of it? What about the atheistic tradition? ... Does atheism sap your moral motivation? Do Christians even believe in ultimate justice? ... Do contingency arguments succeed? What does it mean for something to be necessary? Leave a voicemail at (734) 707-1940(I'm only taking 3-4 calls per episode, so if you've already left one and haven't heard it yet, don't worry)@waldenpod https://linktr.ee/emersongreen/ Timestamps / 00:00 Coming Up00:40 1st Call01:45 Does the existence of intelligent theists give you pause? 10:31 2nd Call16:10 Does atheism deplete moral motivation? 25:56 3rd Call26:27 Do contingency arguments succeed? What is necessity?
