The Common Consent Argument

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

The argument that smith is making here is he's bringing back, an old argument for the existence of god called the common consent argument. It seems like wa, one of those old time philosophy of religion arguments. And so smith revives it, tries to revive it in this paper by basically saying, no, look, like this is laughable as as proof that god exists. But there might be something salvageable in this kind of argument.

Panpsychism didn't give us river spirits or mischievous sootballs, so this time we go straight to the source - a defense of animism, and in a top 10 analytic philosophy journal. Could a failed argument for the existence of God establish the existence of trees and mountains with “interiority” and “social characteristics”? Tamler wants to believe, but is the argument that'll push him over the edge?

Plus – speaking of top journals, a doozy of social psych article: Is forgiveness better than revenge at rehumanizing the self? Let's check the voodoo dolls to find out. Tamler is delighted by David’s reaction to this one.