#85 What Is a Woman? - Talia Mae Bettcher And Tomas Bogardus

#85 What Is a Woman? - Talia Mae Bettcher And Tomas Bogardus

Talia Mae Bettcher and Tomas Bogardus join me to debate the question, "What is a woman?". Is gender biologically grounded, socially constructed, or something else entirely? If you're looking for a cordial and substantive exchange from two thinkers who fundamentally disagree on these issues, look no further. Video of this interview is available on YouTube [https://youtu.be/gD6GSfWoaRE]. To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal [https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/mileskdonahue] or Buy Me a Coffee [http://(https://buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue]. Follow me on X because you’re awesome [https://www.twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD]. EPISODE CHAPTERS 00:00:00 Introduction 00:01:17 Bogardus opening statement 00:02:03 Dictionaries and ordinary usage 00:03:41 The ambiguity view 00:07:09 The resistant concept of woman 00:08:12 Circularity and self-identification 00:11:23 The relevance objection to ambiguity 00:13:47 Non-human men and women 00:16:17 Bettcher opening statement 00:18:29 Woman as a philosophical question 00:19:44 Folk concepts and biological definitions 00:22:13 Folk concepts vs. theoretical concepts 00:24:45 Adult, human, and female 00:28:14 Open discussion begins 00:28:57 Bettcher on the ambiguity thesis 00:30:28 Family resemblance and trans womanhood 00:35:16 Political concepts and same-sex marriage 00:52:25 Are folk concepts biological? 00:57:47 Souls, bodies, and female identity 01:04:31 Twin Earth, Superman, and non-human men 01:13:13 Stone lions, Batman, and conceptual analysis 01:26:44 The husbandry argument 01:29:44 Sex, function, and biology 01:34:35 Why the question matters 01:39:44 Closing statements Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe [https://mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

#84 Continental Philosophy: Genius or Gibberish? - Keegan Kjeldson

Keegan Kjeldson of the Untimely Reflections YouTube channel returns to the podcast to discuss the merits of continental philosophy. While he is largely in favor and I am not, we both agree that Hegel is abysmally obscure. Video of this interview is available on YouTube [https://youtu.be/QxIxXzOgLcI]. To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal [https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/mileskdonahue] or Buy Me a Coffee [http://(https://buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue]. Follow me on X because you’re awesome [https://www.twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD]. EPISODE CHAPTERS 00:00:00 Introduction 00:00:18 Hegel vs Plantinga: obscurity and clarity 00:03:07 Keegan’s defense of continental philosophy 00:08:38 Why continental philosophy feels impenetrable 00:11:15 Spinoza and intuitive knowledge 00:14:25 Nietzsche, style, and philosophical insight 00:18:07 Logical positivism and ethics 00:22:21 What is metaethics? 00:27:17 Utilitarianism and moral intuitions 00:30:17 Do arguments bottom out in intuition? 00:36:39 What is philosophy for? 00:44:41 Moral realism and objective moral truth 00:48:59 Judith Butler and the charge of gibberish 00:54:10 Clear continental thinkers 00:55:57 Heidegger and justified obscurity 01:02:00 Is clarity always a virtue? 01:06:49 Can poetry give us rational grounds? 01:12:52 Moral knowledge vs moral persuasion 01:15:29 Motivated reasoning in ethics 01:25:21 Ethics, emotion, and objectivity 01:28:14 The Nazi example and moral realism 01:32:26 Abortion, personhood, and moral disagreement 01:38:44 Objective truth in morality and science 01:41:17 Has humanity made moral progress? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe [https://mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

#83 Answering (Almost) Every Objection to the Fine-Tuning Argument

The great, the one, the only Joseph C. Schmid returns to the podcast to offer a comprehensive reply to (almost) every objection to the fine-tuning argument for theism. Ever worried about puddles? Inverse gamblers? Stalking horses? Boltzmann Brains? Alex Malpass? Well, fear no more: we define, describe, and dispel (or defend!) all these concerns and more. Not gonna lie guys, this is one of my favorite discussions so far. Hats off to Joe for being 10/10 great. Video of this interview is available on YouTube [https://youtu.be/wrwWLz6Duww]. To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal [https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/mileskdonahue] or Buy Me a Coffee [http://(https://buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue]. Follow me on X because you’re awesome [https://www.twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD]. EPISODE CHAPTERS 00:00:00 Introduction 00:00:45 #1 The puddle analogy refutes the FTA 00:05:49 #2 Other forms of life are possible! 00:08:58 #3 The multiverse explains fine-tuning 00:53:08 #4 Electrons in love 01:16:06 #5 We couldn't have observed a non-fine-tuned universe 01:21:09 #6 Maybe the constants are metaphysical necessary! 01:33:38 #7 Our universe is hostile to life 01:42:00 #8 Alex Malpass and the stalking horse objection 01:47:54 #9 We cannot get a grip on divine psychology Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe [https://mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

#82 Does William Lane Craig Get Cosmology Wrong? - Dan Linford

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 [https://youtu.be/X0Shu9NyXWw]. To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal [https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/mileskdonahue] or Buy Me a Coffee [http://(https://buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue]. Follow me on X because you’re awesome [https://www.twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD]. 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 Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe [https://mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

#81 Are There Objective Moral Truths? - David Enoch vs. Lance Bush

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 [https://youtu.be/UWZuHxO4WcA]. To support the channel, do please oh please consider donating, either via PayPal [https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/mileskdonahue] or Buy Me a Coffee [http://(https://buymeacoffee.com/mileskdonahue]. Follow me on X because you’re awesome [https://www.twitter.com/PhilosopherMKD]. 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? Get full access to Miles K. Donahue at mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe [https://mileskdonahue.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]