You Can Believe in Jesus Without 100% Evidence

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

Clifford: I don't think he's trying to say we can believe in Jesus. He very much is saying you can believe inJesus without without violating, you know, what the grounds for appropriate derivation of belief are. The straw man that I'm referring to is this belief in the dichotomous thing, like you can believe something if you're 100%, every piece of evidence that that is required to convince you that something is true.

David and Tamler argue about William James' classic essay "The Will to Believe." What's more important - avoiding falsehood or discovering truth? When (if ever) is it rational to believe anything without enough evidence? What about beliefs that we can't be agnostic about? Are there hypotheses that we have to believe in order for them to come true? Does James successfully demonstrate that faith can be rational?

Plus, a philosopher at Apple who's not allowed to talk to the media - what are they hiding? And why are academics constantly telling students that academia is a nightmare?

Support Very Bad Wizards

Links: