After-Show Q&A with Graham Oppy & Ed Feser

[@justinmarty127]

Edward Feser is such a pleasure to listen to. Thank you for posting this

[@mistermkultra3114]

Thomas Aquinas on Heaven : I'm so proud of that guy named Ed Feser

[@plzenjoygameosu2349]

Ed Feser is awesome!

[@LynchMobster47]

The modal collapse talk was getting good! I honestly think though that modal collapse is going to be a problem for anyone who wants to simultaneously posit the existence of any necessary cause of a contingent effect, regardless of what Divine Attributes one assigns to that cause. I think this is a good reason to reject a contrastive PSR (where not only do you need an explanation for what exists, but you also need an explanation for why something exists as opposed to something else). Of course denial of a contrastive PSR does not entail denial of a PSR in general. In fact, I would tend to think that one of the reasons that these counterfactuals do not require explanation is precisely because they have no existence, and thus there is nothing to explain.

[@AShaif]

Another agnostic way of looking at it is that the absence of knowledge of a preference in creating world A rather than world B or no world at all does not mean the absence of those worlds (B) or the absence of the creator himself. (the absence of knowledge of evidence (of something) is NOT the knowledge of evidence of its absence). But by denying the doctrine of (God's act = God), which Ed has done, he denied what was a pillar of the Doctrine of Divine Simplicity, which to some Christians is the standard model, however not a pillar in say Islamic or Sikhistic theologies.

[@billj6109]

There's way too many debate clips interrupting the ad

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

Golden lol

[@AlexADalton]

In before Joe Schmid posts his first video response to this.

[@MajestyofReason]

Ahahaha. I'll just direct people to my blog posts, "So you think you understand Existential Inertia?" and "Comments on Feser on Oppy on Thomistic Cosmological Arguments"

[@whatsinaname691]

@@MajestyofReason “on on on”

[@eternalbyzantium262]

@@MajestyofReason Joe is the coolest.

[@InquisPrinciple]

Already responded to Schmid’s thesis myself

[@DeistJonathan]

@@InquisPrincipleWhere?

[@andrej1659]

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” Romans 3:23-24

[@varginabrown852]

*LIFE EXCLUSIVELY COMES FROM LIFE AND NOT INANIMATE MATTER ALL BY ITSELF NATURALLY* 💯 My couch is made of inanimate matter too but it didn't make itself

[@asank4995]

21:50 for atheists who can't get over the fact that "who made God?" is a silly question. 😌

[@mind_onion]

If that's what you took away from it you didn't understand what Oppy said at all. What Oppy said is it's a legitimate criticism to certain arguments and not others. You heard the "not a legitimate criticism to all arguments" (lit. "the idea that it is a general response ... is absurd") part and decided that meant "silly question". So that tells me what went on is you heard "[stuff you don't really understand]... response to argument is absurd... [more stuff you don't really understand]" Which looks a lot like the understanding of what was said that someone might have if they were using confirmation bias. This isn't even an objection I typically bring up to theists... I'm just wanting to push against the clear confirmation bias driven watering down and misunderstandings that seems virulent in these communities.

[@asank4995]

@@mind_onion please. You don't have to be so pedantic about this. I know that there are atheists who realise that this question isn't a good objection. That doesn't mean that there aren't atheists who ask it unironically, which is precisely why Feser spends a lot of pages addressing it in his book. If you think you're one of those smart enough to not fall for this low level objection, then you have no reason to be annoyed by my comment. But apparently, you did so... 😏

[@mind_onion]

@@asank4995 So, you clearly didnt understand me or oppy then. Cool. How about I put it this way: "it isn't a good objection to what, specifically?"

[@asank4995]

@@mind_onion Lol okay. I'll indulge you. Give me a version of the cosmological argument made by any well-known theists in the history of philosophy where asking "who made God?" is not silly.

[@mind_onion]

@@asank4995 All that matters to atheists is the arguments we run into from theists, "historical philosopher" or not. It's not our fault they all are terrible in different ways. I admit freely, I dont really ask around and try to find out who came up with every obviously bad argument I come across. Here's a question for you, why does WLC go with "everything that begins to exist" instead of applying occam's razor and just going with "everything has a cause"? Or why not "everything material created by a mind uses previously existing material?" Is it simply because he doesn't like the conclusions from those lines? Is he just being arbitrary?

[@carsonwall2400]

Graham is such a beast

[@gfujigo]

Even as a devout Christian I fully agree. I like listening to Graham Oppy. His thinking is so clear and sharp and, most importantly, thought provoking.

[@logans.butler285]

Yeah, too bad Edward Feser completely annihilated him in this debate, right?

[@Pirroli]

@@logans.butler285 I must've missed that, because that didn't seem to be the case at all!

[@diggingshovelle9669]

In the case of a society where there was no way to contain a psychopath bent on murder,the only option available being the death penalty?

[@mistermkultra3114]

I only have one question: What brand of hair gel does Cameron use?

[@danglingondivineladders3994]

only the very best

[@matheusmoura4848]

None, his hair being that way is a brute fact.

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

Maximally great hair. Cameron’s hair has that style by a necessity of its own nature.

[@conceptualemilio]

I don't know if this is meant to critique brute facts but it is funny 😂, I think brute facts are a surrending of reason​@@matheusmoura4848

[@20july1944]

Thank you, Cameron. I must say I'm dissatisfied with how people don't really hold Oppy to an initial explanation for our universe.

[@0The0Web0]

When the view is that it comes down to an initial state which is necessary, then that's the stopping point. It couldn't be otherwise; no further explanations. Same as for the view that it comes down to god that is necessary. Makes so sense asking for an 'initial explanation' for god then either.

[@conceptualemilio]

​@@0The0Web0 like relating to that initial states nature like self sustaining and many other things

[@aquapointbeshoy2736]

Wait, how did this happen? Just now getting a notification for a 2 year old vid

[@joelfeddersen6136]

Could you possibly get an episode in response to the book 'The Immortality Key' by Brian Muraresku? Or the podcast he did with Jordan Peterson because it shook up my faith

[@juanmanuelgonzalez9341]

Hi brother, I felt that punch as well, but after thinking it through, I don't think this is more than just another atheistic theory about the human experience. If you feel bad, could it be that this makes you feel more than disbelieve in God, disbelieve in afterlife? You can watch videos of another atheist (but believes in afterlife) called Bernardo Kalstrup and you can see how he sees the same data pointing in a different direction. Moreover, there are many events that this theory cannot really explain. You cannot explain NDE with verificable data with this theory neither. I'm pasting you just one pagan version of a mind-blowing event out of many: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Zeitoun

[@charlescarter2072]

How did it shake up your faith?

[@anglozombie2485]

Oppy got a laugh but I did wish Ed wasn't so all over the place on brute fact question

[@vgrof2315]

The state cannot be trusted with the death penalty!!!

[@conceptualemilio]

If you think about it like anything can become corrupt

[@thanevakarian9762]

If a hot cup of coffee is predestinated before time by God to never become cold There’s no potentiality for it to be cold. Determinists or fatalists are so weird lol

[@MeganDelacroix]

Dr Feser's answer on the death penalty failed to address the benefit to the criminal enunciated in the _Gorgias,_ and borne out by countless behavioral studies since. Convicts on death row are *_over 19 times_* more likely to express remorse and repentance than those on LWOP. Given this fact, Catholics, and all others interested in saving souls, have an absolute moral duty to not only defend but actively champion the death penalty, and press for its far swifter application. "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." (Romans 13:3-4)

[@JohnCenaFan6298]

Tf

[@urikamoment]

You can use negative theology to explain away inconsistencies in your theory? How convenient. The human concept “compelled” cannot possibly apply to god, but “freedom” and “simplicity” can?

[@20july1944]

Are you an atheist?

[@coralbricks]

Could you elaborate?

[@amadoursua1599]

To be convinced that God exists, we must first have the need for God.

[@conceptualemilio]

Simple, God is the necessary precondition for everything so in order to deny that, you deny reality and pragmatically are less off health wise, relationship wise and so much more stuff.