Majesty of Reason Philosophy Podcast

Can there be true contradictions? If so, could they arise in theology and philosophy of religion? Jc Beall and Mike DeVito join me to talk about these questions and more. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) Mike DeVito's channel (w/ Dr. Tyler McNabb): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOlN... (2) Jc's book, "The Contradictory Christ": https://www.amazon.com/Contradictory-... (3) Beall's book, "Logic: The Basics": https://www.amazon.com/Logic-Basics-J... (4) Embracing the contradiction of Christ's incarnation (@The Analytic Christian): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIcP8... (5) Is Christ's nature contradictory? Beall vs Anderson (@Capturing Christianity): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQHOc... (6) Beall's SEP article on the Liar Paradox: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/li... (7) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com/

Want irrefutable proof of atheism? Watch this. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) Kabay, P.D. 2008. "A Defense of Trivialism". Dissertation, University of Melbourne. https://rest.neptune-prod.its.unimelb... (2) My contingency argument playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... (3) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com/

Is moral realism true? What should our metaethical methodology be? Does the evolutionary debunking argument work? Are there categorical reasons? I'm joined by Russ Shafer-Landau and Kane B to discuss these questions and more. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) Russ' website: https://philosophy.wisc.edu/staff/sha... (2) Kane's channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/KaneB (3) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com/

Does logic prove God? I don't think so. In this video, I explain why. Enjoy the bonus soccer, too ;) Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) God and Abstract Objects playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... (2) The Lord of Non-Contradiction: https://www.proginosko.com/docs/The_L... (3) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com

Could there be a barber who shaves exactly those who don’t shave themselves? Could there be a God who knows exactly those acts of knowledge that aren’t of themselves? The answer might surprise you. Everything is at stake. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) Rasmussen, “How to Expand God’s Sight”, wherein he argues for a dynamic view of God’s knowledge based on the Russellian paradox: https://c4ort.com/essays/how-to-expan... (2) How to Discuss the Nature of Reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qtrx... (3) My website: https://josephschmid.com NOTES (1) I'm kind of incompetent at Zoom, as you can tell from the beginning of the video. Lol (2) Thumbnail photo of Josh is credited to Cameron Bertuzzi from Capturing Christianity.

Platonism has been the subject of much criticism, as has theistic conceptualism. Do such criticisms work? That's the question we investigate in this video. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) Scott's book, "Platonism and the Objects of Science": https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/platoni... (2) Gunther's book, "The Unnecessary Science": https://www.amazon.com/Unnecessary-Sc... (3) God and Abstract Objects playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... (4) My video with Scott on his book: https://youtu.be/ZrDMkQQ6aGg (5) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com

@skydivephil recently made a documentary criticizing the Kalam cosmological argument. Trent Horn (@The Counsel of Trent) claims to have 'REBUTTED' the documentary. I claim he has done no such thing. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES Kalam documentary: https://youtu.be/pGKe6YzHiME Trent Horn's 'REBUTTAL': https://youtu.be/8V7BU3gvKdQ My Kalam playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irfj8... Malpass, A. and Morriston, W. 2020. “Endless and Infinite”, The Philosophical Quarterly. Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15XuA... Malpass, A. 2021. “All the time in the world”, Mind. Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z07W... Malpass, "Craig's Five Point Response: A Response": https://useofreason.wordpress.com/202... Malpass, "The Paradox of Dry Eternity": https://useofreason.wordpress.com/202... My review of the Horn-Watkins debate on @Capturing Christianity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b4Zi... My video with Malpass on Hilbert's Hotel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6RQa... My video with Malpass on the end

Interested in the Grim Reaper Paradox, Causal Finitism, the Kalam, and patchwork principles? I have just the video for you. I'm joined by Alex Malpass and Wes Morriston to review my Kalam discussion with Rob Koons. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES My discussion with Rob Koons on Intellectual Conservatism: https://youtu.be/9jV2AfeIC60 My Kalam playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... Note: Patrons have access to the document I'm using :) My website: https://josephschmid.com

Christian Coons claims to have proved that some acts have moral properties. I doubt he's done that. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) Coons' (2011) paper: https://link.springer.com/article/10.... (2) Brown's (2013) paper: https://link.springer.com/article/10.... (3) Moral Argument playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... (4) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com

Does Feser's Augustinian proof succeed? Is Theistic Conceptualism compatible with Divine Simplicity? And should we prefer Theistic Conceptualism to Platonism? I explore these questions and more in an epic discussion with @Parker's Pensées. Like the show? Help it grow! Consider becoming a patron (thanks!): https://www.patreon.com/majestyofreason If you wanna make a one-time donation or tip (thanks!): https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/josep... RESOURCES (1) The original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rflji... (2) God and Abstract Objects playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... (3) My website: https://www.josephschmid.com IMPORTANT NOTE: At one point in the discussion I say, roughly, that "Anderson says something like 'God's thoughts aren't about anything'". But I would like to make an important clarification about this. Here's what I was thinking. At minute 53 in his discussion with Malpass, Anderson says that “divine thoughts don’t have propositional content”. I take this to imply that divine thoughts aren’t about propositions. So, God’s thought that ‘Paris is the capital of France’ is not about Paris’ being the capital of France, ie, the meaning expressed by the aforequoted sentence. What, then, is it about? It can’t be about itself, since Anderson had—just prior to the time stamp above—denounced the self-reflexivity that engenders infinite regress. But if God’s thought that ‘Paris is the capital of France’ is not about Paris’ being the capital of France, and if it’s also not about itself, I took this to imply that God’s thought here isn’t about anything. (What’s any other plausible candidate for what it’s about? Cheeseburgers?) In essence, I understood Anderson’s claim to imply, by clear and innocuous inferences, the claim that God’s thoughts aren’t about anything. Now, in retrospect, I should have been more cautious in what I said. I should have said that Anderson said God’s thoughts have no propositional content, and that this pretty clearly (read: clear to my mind) entails that they aren’t about anything. And so I apologize for not being as clear as I should have and thereby suggesting something Anderson did not explicitly say.