No video :(

Thinking About Modality, Philosophy of Mind, Miracles, Etc. with Graham Oppy

Подписаться 23

Просмотров 1,6 тыс.

50% 1

I hope everybody who finds this finds something of value here. I tried to ask things I hadn't heard Graham talk about much before.
I know the audiovisual stuff probably isn't that great, did the best with what I had. (Yes, I know, the OBS stuff is plainly in view - I'm sorry)
And yes, I noticed I fiddled with my glasses a lot as I was reviewing this.
Thanks to Graham for agreeing to this interview.
And if you'll allow me some vanity, I'm not really in love with my hair here. Normally I like it left to flow all around, but it got in my eyes and was distracting, so I had it behind my ears here. Looks a lot worse that way, in my estimation.
Note: There are times I reference other philosophers' works and I run by them pretty quickly. I understand this does not give the full view of that philosopher. For instance, when I mention Nielsen, he himself makes some of the points Graham does in the essay I was referencing. He says it would be silly of Marxists to posit that the sole social function of religion is to act as an opiate, but that the Marxist diagnosis nevertheless has value. I ran by important nuances like this for the sake of conversational simplicity. If you're upset that I underexplain something someone says, I understand. I thought it was probably better to just get a point on the board than to get stuck explaining the intricate details, though.
Rough Works Cited:
Kai Nielsen - Is Religion the Opium of the People? Marxianism and Religion
David Papineau - Explanatory Gaps and Dualist Intuitions
Elliot Sober - A Modest Proposal
Graham Oppy - Hume and the Argument for Biological Design
Susana Monso and Kristin Andrews - Animal Moral Psychologies
Joe Schmid (Majesty of Reason Blog) - So You Think You Understand Existential Inertia?
Duncan Pritchard - Recent Work on Radical Skepticism
Stephen Law - The X-Claim Argument Against Religious Belief
Brian Cutter and Dustin Crummett - Psychophysical Harmony: A New Argument For Theism
Timestamps -
Modality - 2:00
Identity Theory - 20:18
Simplicity - 58:50
Miracles - 1:02:43
Hume on Biological Complexity, Can Kicking, Whatever - 1:12:35
External World Skepticism - 1:17:45
Empty World - 1:22:34
Existential Inertia - 1:27:11
Animal Ethics - 1:34:06
Religion as Societal Good - 1:38:45

Опубликовано:

5 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 12

@MsJavaWolf 7 месяцев назад

Nice interview, the part about top down/bottom up/emergence was particularly interesting.

@anthonyspencer766 3 месяца назад

Even more interesting is that a 2000-yr-old answer to this metaphysical question exists, which makes it a bit humorous to hear Oppy saying that he has just now begun to think about it and that it is not a situation getting much attention in the literature. The Aristotelian causal picture includes formal causes, as well as a substance metaphysics that distinguishes between form and matter. It deals with the bottom-up and top-down directions simultaneously. The trouble is nobody wants to let that pesky issue of final casuation back through the door. It was kicked out centuries ago. However, if Oppy wants to maintain the independence of these "levels", without a unidirectional causation from the micro to the macro, then to some extent, the higher-level facts (as forms), must pre-exist their actual instantiations in the physical universe. You aren't getting this without some type of final causation. A leg is a leg because it has a final cause. Darwinian theory cannot create new metaphysical levels of explanation ex nihilo.

@RealAtheology 7 месяцев назад

This was an excellent interview. Dr. Oppy is a genius and I always love hearing from him, however a lot of interviewers end up asking him the same questions to the point where if you've seen one Oppy interview, you've almost seen them all. In light of this, I really appreciated you asking Dr. Oppy about topics that are usually not touched on, such as his overall philosophy of mind, miracles, Hume, etc. It made the full 2 hours really insightful and as an Oppy-stan, I came away learning a lot of new things about him. Looking forward to more of your interviews in the future!

@LukeJensen-phil 7 месяцев назад

Hey, thanks. I'm not sure who left this comment, last time I was keeping up with RA, it was a team of people doing phil of religion. Whether you're speaking in an individual capacity, or on behalf of the whole team, means a lot.

@russellsteapot8779 8 месяцев назад

Oppy's always an excellent interview subject, and it was good that you picked some different questions, rather than the stuff he usually gets asked. I hope more people find this as it deserves more views. 👍

@jmike2039 4 месяца назад

47:00 Im so glad he said this because ive said the same thing in defense of identity theorists.

@LukeJensen-phil 4 месяца назад

I'd like to ask him today what he thinks, or if he's read the final version of the paper. The point seems to be there is an epistemic gap, so even if identity theory is true, we still wonder what the epistemic probability is. And I don't mean to say I think this is some sort of great argument or anything, I just wish either of us had the knowledge at the time of recording to be fair to the argument. Live and learn, I guess. Thanks for the comment, though, I'm sort of rambling.

@lolroflmaoization 4 месяца назад

It's a shame you didn't checkout the psychophysical harmony paper, you would've been able to tell him how they talked about the identity theory because they do actually address it.

@LukeJensen-phil 4 месяца назад

Strictly speaking, I think you're right about this. At the time of this interview, I had only very recently heard about the argument and had not yet had the time to get very familiar with it or the paper. If I remember right, Oppy also mentioned he was sort of starting to think about his views on mind more though because of stuff like this. I hope someone asks him more about it at some point or he writes a paper or something.

@JudeLind 3 месяца назад

In the paper, they have a footnote that specifically says type A physicalism is able to side-step the objection

@LukeJensen-phil 3 месяца назад

@JudeLind yeah, but I didn't ask specifically if Oppy is type A or not. He might agree there is an epistemic gap, even if there is (necessarily) no metaphysical one.