Imperfect Paradise is an award-winning weekly narrative podcast showcasing California stories with universal significance, hosted by Antonia Cereijido. Each deeply reported story is driven by characters who illuminate aspects of American identity and underscore California's reputation as a home for dreamers and schemers, its heartbreaking inequality, its varied and diverse communities, its unique combination of dense cities and wild places. New episodes premiere Wednesdays, with broadcasts o ...
…
continue reading
Content provided by Atheist Community of Austin. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Atheist Community of Austin or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!
Go offline with the Player FM app!
God-Hating, Logical Necessity, and Dealing with Dogma | Talk Heathen 09.47
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 520867358 series 2137544
Content provided by Atheist Community of Austin. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Atheist Community of Austin or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
In today’s episode of Talk Heathen, hosts Jimmy Jr. and Scott Dickie open by discussing the hazards of reading the Bible, delve into complex philosophical arguments concerning contingency and prescriptive laws, and debate strategies for maintaining productive dialogue with theists who rely on defense mechanisms.
Donald, a regular caller, attempts to prove universal laws (like non-contradiction) are prescriptive, arguing their necessity means they must exist outside the universe. Hosts Scott and Jimmy Jr. press him on the modal scope issue, asserting that logically necessary laws (things that *will* happen) are distinct from prescriptive laws (things that *must* happen due to enforcement/intent). Donald fails to show a detectable difference between these two forms of necessity. Can philosophical arguments alone bridge the gap between description and prescription?
Lisa, a religious studies major, struggles to have productive dialogue because theists dismiss atheism as "God-hating" rather than disbelief. The hosts assert this is a deliberate tactic to demonize non-believers, protect dogma, and avoid critical questioning. Scott advises setting conversational boundaries early and asking the interlocutor to commit to a productive discussion, calling out deflections as face-saving psychological defense mechanisms. Should atheists try to engage people who are unwilling to be honest interlocutors?
Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.
…
continue reading
Donald, a regular caller, attempts to prove universal laws (like non-contradiction) are prescriptive, arguing their necessity means they must exist outside the universe. Hosts Scott and Jimmy Jr. press him on the modal scope issue, asserting that logically necessary laws (things that *will* happen) are distinct from prescriptive laws (things that *must* happen due to enforcement/intent). Donald fails to show a detectable difference between these two forms of necessity. Can philosophical arguments alone bridge the gap between description and prescription?
Lisa, a religious studies major, struggles to have productive dialogue because theists dismiss atheism as "God-hating" rather than disbelief. The hosts assert this is a deliberate tactic to demonize non-believers, protect dogma, and avoid critical questioning. Scott advises setting conversational boundaries early and asking the interlocutor to commit to a productive discussion, calling out deflections as face-saving psychological defense mechanisms. Should atheists try to engage people who are unwilling to be honest interlocutors?
Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.
433 episodes
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 520867358 series 2137544
Content provided by Atheist Community of Austin. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Atheist Community of Austin or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
In today’s episode of Talk Heathen, hosts Jimmy Jr. and Scott Dickie open by discussing the hazards of reading the Bible, delve into complex philosophical arguments concerning contingency and prescriptive laws, and debate strategies for maintaining productive dialogue with theists who rely on defense mechanisms.
Donald, a regular caller, attempts to prove universal laws (like non-contradiction) are prescriptive, arguing their necessity means they must exist outside the universe. Hosts Scott and Jimmy Jr. press him on the modal scope issue, asserting that logically necessary laws (things that *will* happen) are distinct from prescriptive laws (things that *must* happen due to enforcement/intent). Donald fails to show a detectable difference between these two forms of necessity. Can philosophical arguments alone bridge the gap between description and prescription?
Lisa, a religious studies major, struggles to have productive dialogue because theists dismiss atheism as "God-hating" rather than disbelief. The hosts assert this is a deliberate tactic to demonize non-believers, protect dogma, and avoid critical questioning. Scott advises setting conversational boundaries early and asking the interlocutor to commit to a productive discussion, calling out deflections as face-saving psychological defense mechanisms. Should atheists try to engage people who are unwilling to be honest interlocutors?
Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.
…
continue reading
Donald, a regular caller, attempts to prove universal laws (like non-contradiction) are prescriptive, arguing their necessity means they must exist outside the universe. Hosts Scott and Jimmy Jr. press him on the modal scope issue, asserting that logically necessary laws (things that *will* happen) are distinct from prescriptive laws (things that *must* happen due to enforcement/intent). Donald fails to show a detectable difference between these two forms of necessity. Can philosophical arguments alone bridge the gap between description and prescription?
Lisa, a religious studies major, struggles to have productive dialogue because theists dismiss atheism as "God-hating" rather than disbelief. The hosts assert this is a deliberate tactic to demonize non-believers, protect dogma, and avoid critical questioning. Scott advises setting conversational boundaries early and asking the interlocutor to commit to a productive discussion, calling out deflections as face-saving psychological defense mechanisms. Should atheists try to engage people who are unwilling to be honest interlocutors?
Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.
433 episodes
All episodes
×Welcome to Player FM!
Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.