When I heard your dismissal of ancient philosophy, it made me wonder what your conception of philosophy is in the first place. Maybe you've written about this and I haven't come across it? I'm not sure your example of Socrates doing weird calculations demonstrates much, especially considering how contemporary utilitarians can get pretty bizarro with hypothetical calculations of their own. I think the value of ancient philosophy depends to some extent on what you're looking for and how broadly you understand the task of 'philosophy' itself.
I am no philosopher and am not sure I followed the argument- if we exist, then it is more likely than not that many like us exist and if it is more likely than not that God exists so then would it not follow that it is more likely than not that many gods exist as well? Matt said he doesn't care for the ancient's logic but perhaps they were on to something with Mt Olympus... of course, I am only kidding.
Your thought experiment reminded me of- "For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them." Enjoyed listening, as always and hope you enjoy your journey in Faith, wherever it takes you <3
The idea is that your existence is more likely if there are more people. But that means that because theism makes it decently likely that a huge number of people would be created, theism gets a big boost.
Haven't listened yet, but here's a fun alternative idea I've been playing around with on "The Plausibility of God in a Scientific Age." In it I argue for the plausibility (not probability) of an abstract proposition, embedded in nature, that would be morally equivalent to the Hebraic idea of a God who is just and who judges every human being (indeed every sentient creature) by a single standard of justice: https://shorturl.at/pFR46
I've heard good things about this Adelstein guy.
I wrote in defence of DeSantis’s lab grown meat ban here: https://open.substack.com/pub/wollenblog/p/meatball-ron?r=2248ub&utm_medium=ios
When I heard your dismissal of ancient philosophy, it made me wonder what your conception of philosophy is in the first place. Maybe you've written about this and I haven't come across it? I'm not sure your example of Socrates doing weird calculations demonstrates much, especially considering how contemporary utilitarians can get pretty bizarro with hypothetical calculations of their own. I think the value of ancient philosophy depends to some extent on what you're looking for and how broadly you understand the task of 'philosophy' itself.
I am no philosopher and am not sure I followed the argument- if we exist, then it is more likely than not that many like us exist and if it is more likely than not that God exists so then would it not follow that it is more likely than not that many gods exist as well? Matt said he doesn't care for the ancient's logic but perhaps they were on to something with Mt Olympus... of course, I am only kidding.
Your thought experiment reminded me of- "For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them." Enjoyed listening, as always and hope you enjoy your journey in Faith, wherever it takes you <3
The idea is that your existence is more likely if there are more people. But that means that because theism makes it decently likely that a huge number of people would be created, theism gets a big boost.
Haven't listened yet, but here's a fun alternative idea I've been playing around with on "The Plausibility of God in a Scientific Age." In it I argue for the plausibility (not probability) of an abstract proposition, embedded in nature, that would be morally equivalent to the Hebraic idea of a God who is just and who judges every human being (indeed every sentient creature) by a single standard of justice: https://shorturl.at/pFR46