Majesty of Reason Philosophy Podcast

Does classical theism entail that gratitude to God is unfitting or inappropriate? I’m joined by Dr. Marcus Hunt to discuss this very question in connection to his recent article published in IJPR.   Argument Outline   (1) If someone cannot be benefited, then they cannot be a fitting target of prepositional gratitude.  (2) The God of classical theism cannot be benefited.  Therefore,  (3) The God of classical theism cannot be a fitting target of prepositional gratitude. For premise (1):   Step 1: A necessary condition for prepositional gratitude is a desire to benefit one’s benefactor.  Step 2: A desire to benefit a benefactor is fitting only if it is metaphysically possible for the benefactor to be benefited.   For premise (2):   Step 1: Classical theism (in particular, divine impassibility) entails that God is perfectly blessed.  Step 2: If God is perfectly blessed, then nothing could possibly benefit God -- God has all possible benefits necessarily and ‘already’ (as it were).   Curious to learn more about this argument?  Check out his IJPR paper:  (1) https://link.springer.com/content/pdf... OR (2) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tETh...    Marcus’s link: https://philpeople.org/profiles/marcu...   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason... My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/

What is existential inertia? What are some metaphysical accounts of existential inertia? And where should you go to learn further about it? Buckle up for discussion of these questions and more.   Want to read my IJPR paper, "Existential inertia and the Aristotelian proof"?  Check out these links:   (1) https://link.springer.com/article/10....   (2) https://rdcu.be/b6HXP     My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/

Today I'm joined by John DeRosa, host of the Classical Theism podcast, to discuss methods for productive and loving dialogue across ideological barriers.   Curious about what's to come on my channel in the next 6(ish) weeks? Here's a preview:   - Discussing a new argument against divine impassibility with the author of a recent IJPR article  - Discussing an argument from the PSR against classical theism with Chad McIntosh  - Aquinas's First Way (lecture video)  - Aquinas's Third Way (lecture video)  - A User's Guide to Existential Inertia (lecture video)  - And more...    John's link: http://www.classicaltheism.com/   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/

God, let’s talk about your feelings. Today I chat with Dr. Ryan Mullins about his new book “God and Emotion” with Cambridge University Press.   Among many other things, we discuss: What is divine impassibility, and what are the arguments for and against it? And what are emotions? Does God empathize with us? Can God suffer along with us?   Video Outline:   0. Introducing the book  1. Chapter One: Emotions  2. Chapter Two: The Impassible God  3. Chapter Three: The Passible God  4. Chapter Four: The Love of God  5. Chapter Five: The Wrath of God and Other Moral Judgments  6. Chapter Six: Divine Empathy and the Problem of Creepy Emotions  7. The Problem of Arbitrary Creation for Impassibility   Link to the book: https://www.cambridge.org/core/elemen...    Ryan’s paper “Can the Impassible God Suffer?”: https://philpapers.org/rec/MULWCT    Ryan's paper "The Problem of Arbitrary Creation for Impassibility": https://www.degruyter.com/view/journa...     Ryan's website & podcast: https://www.rtmullins.com/   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...

What are the norms governing sexual behavior? Is sex outside of marriage wrong? What about homosexuality? Hear two professional ethicists discuss these questions and others, arising from the Natural Law tradition in ethics.   Check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydrtF...    Dustin's link: http://dustincrummett.com/   Brian's link: http://bbesong.weebly.com/   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...

Is divine simplicity compatible with there being one God in three persons? Buckle up for a very illuminating exchange. Rob's relational qua-object paper: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fb2c. Ryan's three papers on Trinitarianism: (1) https://www.academia.edu/31860370/Has...   (2) https://ojs.uclouvain.be/index.php/th...   (3) https://www.academia.edu/1971708/Divi... Rob's website: http://robkoons.net/ Ryan's website: https://www.rtmullins.com/ My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/ My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...

Trent Horn recently claimed he had 'demonstrations' of God's existence that are relevantly analogous to 'ironclad' proofs. In this video, I argue that this is straightforwardly false.   Link to my debate with Randal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68Fxt...   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...    SPECIAL THANKS to Dr. Alex Malpass, to whom credit goes for the 'respecting consistency' point concerning modal patchwork principles.   If Trent sees this video, consider this an open invitation to a discussion between the two of us! (Whether on my channel or Trent's or what have you). :)   Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PF1J...

Why am I agnostic with respect to God's existence? Buckle up for one of my favorite videos made thus far. Here are some important resources I mentioned in the video, as well as some others:   Leon on Six Dozen (or so): https://exapologist.blogspot.com/2019...   Leon's Assessment of Arguments for Theism: http://exapologist.blogspot.com/p/ind...   Lowder on Arguments for Naturalism: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/secular...   Mullins on panentheism and models of God: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf...   God, Geography, and Justice: https://philpapers.org/rec/LINGGA    Two useful websites/blogs are Infidels.org and Philosophical Disquisitions blog   CORRECTION: Klaas Kraay is a *theist*, not a non-theist. Whoops! :)   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/

Is God’s comprehensive foreknowledge of the future incompatible with free will? Let’s see where reason takes us.   Here’s another argument that I didn’t cover in the video but which will be of interest to y’all:   (1) It is not under your control that God believed 1000 years ago that each of your actions would occur.  (2) Necessarily, if God believed 1000 years ago that each of your actions would occur, then each of your actions occur.  (3) If P necessarily entails Q, and P is not under your control, then Q is not under your control.  (4) So, the occurrence of each of your actions is not under your control.  (5) If (4), then you are not free.  (6) So, you are not free.   This argument is interesting. I would probably challenge premise (1). It is precisely because you are free in each of your actions that you are in control of past facts specifying what your free actions will be. In other words, while you don’t cause the past to be how it is, there’s a kind of counterfactual dependence of the past on your choices: had you chosen A instead of B, God would have foreknown that you chose A. Here’s another example. Presumably, it was true before you were born that you would read this sentence today. And — by the same kind of reasoning that would presumably motivate (1) — this truth is not under your control (since you didn’t even exist to causally influence the past). And, moreover, this truth necessarily entails that you do in fact read this sentence today. So, it would follow from all of this that you are not free in reading this sentence! And we didn’t even need to invoke God’s foreknowledge here. All we needed was a truth prior to your birth.   Surely, then, the argument has gone wrong somewhere. I suggest — as I did in the case of the foreknowledge argument — that it’s simply false that you have no control over truths prior to your birth. Rather, it is precisely because you are free and in control of your present actions that you thereby have control over truths prior to your birth. The explanation of your actions doesn’t flow from the past truth to your actions; rather, it’s the opposite. Your actions explain the past truth. Don’t put the cart before the horse.   Website: https://www.majestyofreason.wordpress...   Book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...

How do we facilitate the flow of insights across ideological barriers? How do we have productive, loving dialogue? Is there such a thing as rational disagreement, and (if so) how should we respond to it? What are some neglected intellectual virtues?   Today I'm joined by Dr. Josh Rasmussen to discuss these questions and more. Warning: this episode is amazing.   Outline   1. Productive and loving dialogue across ideological barriers  2. The nature of rational disagreement  3. Extra-rational barriers to belief  4. Intellectual virtues  5. The tension between maximizing true beliefs and minimizing false beliefs   Links  Josh's website: https://joshualrasmussen.com/ Josh's youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXVv...   My website: https://majestyofreason.wordpress.com/   My book: https://www.amazon.com/Majesty-Reason...