Counter Apologetics cover image

Counter Apologetics

Latest episodes

undefined
Sep 26, 2022 • 2h 3min

Metaethics & Moral Realism w/ Michael Huemer

Dr. Michael Huemer joins me to discuss moral realism vs. antirealism, ethical intuitionism, phenomenal conservatism, moral disagreement, and much else in moral philosophy. (This aired originally on YouTube and Walden Pod.) Ethical Intuitionism Knowledge, Reality, and Value: A Mostly Common Sense Guide to Philosophy William Lane Craig vs. Erik Wielenberg Linktree   / The Five Metaethical Positions / Noncognitivism/expressivism: Moral statements are neither true nor false. Evaluative predicates do not even purportedly refer to any sort of property, nor do evaluative statements assert propositions. Error theory/nihilism: Moral statements (that imply that something has an evaluative property) are all false. Subjectivism: Some moral statements are true, but not objectively. For a thing to be good is for some individual or group to (be disposed to) take some attitude towards it. Moral Naturalism: There are objective moral properties, but they are reducible. Evaluative truths are reducible to descriptive truths. Additionally, moral statements can be justified empirically. Moral Non-Naturalism/Intuitionism: There are objective moral properties, and they are irreducible. Evaluative truths are not reducible to descriptive truths. Additionally, at least some moral truths are known intuitively.   / Timestamps / 00:00 Introduction 01:05 Objective vs. Subjective 06:45 Five Metaethical Views 36:45 Fictionalism 50:40 Phenomenal Conservatism, Scientism, Skepticism 1:15:00 Moral Disagreement 1:25:00 Theism and Moral Realism 1:41:00 Companions in Innocence 1:46:30 Evolutionary Debunking Arguments 2:00:00 Huemer’s soul is not in Colorado nor is it in Michigan
undefined
Sep 7, 2022 • 57min

CA105 Responding to Trent Horn’s “5 Atheist Double Standards”

This is my response to Catholic apologist Trent Horn’s recent video entitled “5 Atheist Double Standards.” (The first minute is a cold open. It makes more sense if you’re watching the video version.) Watch on YouTube Interview on the Sentientism podcast The Meager Moral Fruits Argument My devil’s advocate debate Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen Timestamps: 00:00 Coming Up 01:00 Introduction 01:48 Trent’s Introduction (No disagreement!) 03:13 Ancient Historical Documents (Double Standard 1) 05:36 God is evil, nothing is evil (Double Standard 2a) 19:43 Divine Command Theory 25:18 Moral Realism vs. Atheism (Double Standard 2b)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
undefined
Aug 31, 2022 • 2h 18min

Debate Breakdown w/ Ben Burgis: Christopher Hitchens vs. David Berlinski

This is my appearance on Ben Burgis’s channel. Ben and I listen to and comment on a debate between Christopher Hitchens and David Berlinkski over the motion “Atheism poisons everything.” The video Linktree
undefined
Aug 28, 2022 • 1h 30min

CA104 How did religion evolve? w/ Naturalism Next

Naturalism Next joins me to discuss “the cognitive science argument against theism.” We talk about the psychology of religion, hyperactive agency detection, signaling theory, and more on the evolutionary origins of religious belief. Crucially, theories from modern cognitive science of religion are antecedently more likely on naturalism than on theism, and so provide good evidence against theism. We have plausible natural mechanisms that account for religious belief and practice – how they form and how they spread. The persistence and prevalence of religious belief can be understood through the framework of evolutionary theory and cognitive science of religion, providing us an answer to the question, “If God doesn’t exist, why does nearly everyone believe in God?” The first half of this episode is about the cognitive science of religion, and the latter half is on why the cognitive science of religion is evidence favoring naturalism over theism. Something for the psychology of religion nerds and philosophy of religion nerds alike. Naturalism Next (YouTube) Naturalism Next (Blog) Subscribe on YouTube Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission. Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen
undefined
Aug 21, 2022 • 18min

Bonus: The Fall – w/ Christian Idealism & Invoking Theism

I’m joined by Christian Idealism and Invoking Theism to discuss how they see the Fall as non-young earth creationists. This was an impromptu recording in my hotel room at the Capturing Christianity conference in Houston. (You also might recognize the introductions from the previous episode.)  Subscribe on YouTube Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission. Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen
undefined
Aug 16, 2022 • 41min

CA103 Defeat, Evil, & Hell – w/ Christian Idealism & Invoking Theism

I’m joined by Christian Idealism and Invoking Theism to discuss the problem of evil, the defeat condition, eternal conscious torment, alternative models of the afterlife, and whether we can have sex in hell. We’re also joined on mic by John Buck for a few minutes. This was an impromptu recording in my hotel room at the Capturing Christianity conference in Houston. Subscribe on YouTube Support the podcast at patreon.com/waldenpod or /counter Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission. Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen
undefined
Jul 22, 2022 • 25min

CA102 The Most Plausible Form of Christianity

I outline a version of Christianity that doesn’t suffer from some of the problems that I find the most troubling. Universalism, in conjunction with a handful of other views, seems capable of smoothing over some of my biggest reasons for rejecting theism. This is a clip from a longer interview on Adherent Apologetics. We didn’t plan on covering this subject, but I was asked near the end of the interview about what I considered to be the most viable form of Christianity. Universalism has been on my mind a lot in the past month or so, and this seemed like a good way of kicking off the exploration on this podcast. If we’re to steelman Christianity and attack it at its best, this is to my mind the version that deserves our attention. Watch the full interview here David Bentley Hart – That All Shall Be Saved Keith Derose – Universalism and the Bible Elenore Stump – Closer to Truth Joe Schmid w/ Trent Horn – Is explicit knowledge of God necessary for a relationship with him? Subscribe on YouTube Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen
undefined
Jul 15, 2022 • 1h 51min

CA101 Five Arguments Against God w/ Jonathan MS Pearce

I’m joined by the author of “30 Arguments Against The Existence of ‘God’: Heaven, Hell, Satan, and Divine Design” to discuss five arguments raised in his new book. Watch the interview on YouTube here Jonathan’s column on OnlySky Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here linktr.ee/emersongreen
undefined
Jul 1, 2022 • 1h 45min

CA100 A Catholic and an Atheist Debate God

Emerson Green defends the motion “God probably does not exist” against John Buck. Moderated by the Non-Alchemist. YouTube: A Catholic and an Atheism Debate God and Religion Transcript of Emerson’s opening statement Follow John on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/WriterJohnBuck & Emerson here: https://twitter.com/waldenpod Support the podcast at patreon.com/counter linktr.ee/emersongreen Roadmap: Introduction (2 min) John’s Opening Statement (20 min) First Cross-Examination (5 min) Emerson’s Opening Statement (20 min) Second Cross-Exam (5 min) John’s Rebuttal (12 min) Emerson’s Rebuttal (12 min) John’s Closing Statement (5 min) Emerson’s Closing Statement (5 min) Audience Q&A
undefined
Jun 20, 2022 • 11min

CA99 Teleological Evil

There are many famous examples of unintelligent design in nature, but what about malevolent design? Some natural systems are aimed at producing suffering: they cause suffering by acting in accordance with their natural purpose, function, or design plan. Why would we infer a benevolent, omnipotent designer from malevolent design? The fact that predation – a striking example of teleological evil – is a prominent feature of the biological order is very surprising on theism. Predation isn’t a feature of the biological order because animals are acting against their design plan – exactly the opposite. The fact that animals must savagely kill and devour each other in order to survive is strong evidence against the hypothesis that nature was designed, directly or indirectly, by an unsurpassably great being of perfect love and goodness. The Problem of Teleological Evil – Felipe Leon [exapologist] An Atheological Argument from Evil Natural Laws – Quentin Smith [infidels] Justin Schieber of Real Atheology interviews Quentin Smith (2017) [YouTube] Subscribe on YouTube Consider supporting the show on Patreon here or Walden Pod here Listen to our sister show, Walden Pod here Music by ichika Nito & Whalers. Used with permission. Transcript Follow me on Twitter @waldenpod linktr.ee/emersongreen

Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts

Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
App store bannerPlay store banner