Dan Linford returns to the channel to offer his reply to my recent discussion with William Lane Craig, wherein he replied to critiques of his case for a cosmic beginning. We discuss probability theory, the BGV theorem, emergence of spacetime, and the relevance of quantum gravity to our scientific inferences about a beginning of the universe.

Video of this interview is available on YouTube.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Follow me on X because you’re awesome.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:01:24 Craig's modest claim

00:10:27 How to calculate the probability of a conclusion

00:15:21 The probabilistic fallacy in Craig's scientific case

00:21:56 Craig - "I'm ruling out classes of models"

00:26:33 Exceptions to the BGV theorem

00:29:22 Do theories of time make a difference?

00:42:28 Inference to the best explanation and low probability

00:51:25 Craig's inconsistency: temporally finite models of the universe

00:59:18 Why we need a quantum theory of gravity

01:12:04 The emergence of spacetime

David Enoch and Lance Bush face off over the question of whether objective moral truths exist. They debate the intuitiveness of moral realism, whether most people are moral realists, question-begging, radical skepticism, and much else besides.

Video of this interview is available on YouTube.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Follow me on X because you’re awesome.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:38 David's opening statement

00:13:21 Lance's opening statement

00:26:05 "I don't give a damn if most people aren't moral realists"

00:31:59 Who is begging the question on whom?

00:35:55 Is realism the intuitive position?

00:40:35 Is Lance a radical skeptic?

00:43:39 Realists misattribute metaethical claims to most people

00:57:48 "People in general are idiots"

01:02:06 Does ordinary moral discourse support realism?

01:10:42 What are the costs of realism and anti-realism?

01:18:15 On the strengths and weaknesses of analytic philosophy

01:22:33 What do you mean when you say something is “wrong,” Lance?

Joshua Rasmussen explains his cosmological argument for God's existence: the existence of contingent things requires an explanation, and God fits the bill. Roughly stated, for sure, but that's the idea.

Video of this interview is available on YouTube.

To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal or Buy Me a Coffee.

Follow me on X because you’re awesome.

EPISODE CHAPTERS

00:00:00 Introduction

00:00:57 Why the question matters

00:10:29 Is ultimate reality beyond logic?

00:14:55 Contingent vs. necessary things

00:20:44 Stage #1 - From contingent things to a necessary being

00:26:38 What is an "explanation"?

00:36:23 Why should there be an explanation of all contingent things?

00:47:37 Should we trust what intuition tells us?

00:55:56 Conflicting empirical generalizations - a la Joe Schmid

01:04:04 Stage #2 - From a necessary being to God

01:12:52 Even a limitless God requires explanation

01:23:37 Graham Oppy's necessary initial state of nature