How belief, evidence and justification work when the subject is God.
@MajestyofReason Reacts to Philomena Cunk Doing PhilosophyPhilosophy YouTuber Joe Schmidt (Majesty of Reason) uses Philomena Cunk's absurdist interview clips as springboards for real epistemology — the logic of definitions, why Cartesian certainty fails and phenomenal conservatism succeeds — while host Arjuna presses him on solipsism, degrees of reality, and what separates philosophical atheists from internet atheists.Joe Schmid, Philomena Cunk · Lecture · 1h 15m· May 2023
Matt Dillahunty vs @AdherentApologetics Debate Did a Perfect Mind Create the UniverseChristian Zach Sickler argues Bayesian-style that a perfect mind is the simplest hypothesis with the most explanatory power over moral agents, moral knowledge, and fine-tuning, while Matt Dillahunty counters that mere consistency with facts is trivial non-evidence, that a 'perfect mind' can neither be defined nor identified, and that theism explains nothing at all — with Arjuna hosting and staying out of the ring.Matt Dillahunty, Zach Sickler · Debate · 1h 32m· Oct 2022
Epistemology Discussion with Shivananda SharmaArjuna and Shivananda Sharma — a Hare Krishna actuary doing a philosophy PhD — argue that Enlightenment evidentialism and classical foundationalism are self-defeating, and that religious experience, embedded in a systematic mystical practice (Alston's doxastic practice, Plantinga's reformed epistemology, Vaishnava pramana theory), is as rational a source of knowledge as sense perception.Shivananda Sharma · Lecture · 2h 18m· Aug 2022
Do Intuitions Justify the basis of our Knowledge Epistemology Discussion with Gabriel LyonAlex Gallagher (Arjuna) defends a phenomenal-conservative epistemology on which seemings — up to self-evident, incorrigible experience — justify belief, while agnostic ex-Pentecostal Gabriel Lyon argues from contradiction thought experiments and mirage-style undercutting defeaters that seemings cannot always justify, and that spiritual experiences at best license a thin, underspecified spiritual reality.Gabriel Lyon · Lecture · 2h 19m· Jul 2022
A Vedanta Solution to Skepticism w Ashish DalelaAshish Dalela argues to Arjuna that Western skepticism self-destructs at its Cartesian root — a skeptic who drops Descartes' God has no way to establish that the external world exists — and that only a Vedantic account of graded volitional control and consciousness monism can rebuild reality from 'I exist'.Ashish Dalela · Lecture · 1h 39m· Mar 2022
Why Religious Experience Can't Prove One Religion to the Exclusion of OthersArjuna argues that the cross-traditional spread of religious experience and character transformation — the William James/John Hick problem Harold Netland concedes — refutes exclusivism and atheism alike, while fitting perfectly with inclusivist 'universal religious principles theism.'Harold Netland · Lecture · 7m· Mar 2022
Debate Does God Exist Matt Dillahunty vs Michael EgnorMichael Egnor argues that ten classical proofs make God's existence irrefutable and that atheists like Matt Dillahunty reject arguments they cannot even state, while Dillahunty argues from divine hiddenness and burden of proof that no God-claim has ever been demonstrated and that objective morality needs no divine mind.Matt Dillahunty, Michael Egnor, Nathan · Debate · 2h 22m· Sep 2021
Should we Wager on God Discussion with Liz JacksonPhilosopher Liz Jackson and host Arjuna rebuild Pascal's wager in Gaudiya Vaishnava terms — a dominance argument where wagering pays in this life and the cost of not wagering is finite rebirth rather than infinite hell — and argue the standard objections (many gods, belief-at-will, locked-from-inside hell) dissolve once the wager targets practice rather than belief.Liz Jackson · Lecture · 1h 28m· Sep 2021
Debate on The Evolutionary argument against Naturalism @JamesFodor vs @MaverickChristianWade 'Maverick Christian' defends his formalized upgrade of Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism — that on naturalism and evolution alone, reliable cognition is improbable and belief in both is therefore self-defeating — while atheist James Fodor argues the machinery proves too much, collapsing into a global skepticism that would defeat naked theism just as easily.James Fodor, Maverick Christian · Debate · 2h 5m· Sep 2021
@KaneB & Arjuna Discuss EpistemolgyArjuna and Adi Purusha Das test a 'realness'-of-cognitions epistemology drawn from Indian philosophy against Kane B, a philosophy-of-science PhD whose radically permissive pragmatism concedes theism is rational — while rejecting metaphysics, inference to the best explanation, causal realism, and moral facts.Adi Purusha Das, Kane B · Lecture · 2h 2m· Aug 2021
James Fodor & David Pallman Debate Epistemology Coherentism vs FoundationalismAtheist philosopher James Fodor argues that beliefs are justified by the explanatory coherence of one's whole cognitive state, against Christian apologist David Pallman's classical acquaintance foundationalism, with the debate converging on whether concept-laden perception can ever serve as a non-inferential foundation for knowledge.David Pallmann, James Fodor, Vraj · Debate · 2h 32m· Aug 2021
Aryan Invasion Theory DebunkedHarvard-trained Sanskritist Dr. Howard Resnick argues to interviewer Michael Granado that the Aryan invasion/migration theory rests on malleable evidence and colonial-era academic dogma, and that the Rig Veda itself — a super-sophisticated text memorized to the phoneme by people who 'forgot where they came from' — is the strongest argument for an indigenous Vedic homeland.Hṛdayānanda dāsa Goswāmī, Michael Granado · Lecture · 1h 5m· Jul 2021
A Comparative Religion Discussion on Hermeneutics Hare Krishna and ChristianAnglican theologian Keith Ward and Vaishnava scholar Krishna Kshetra Swami (Kenneth Valpey), hosted by Alex Gallagher, converge on the claim that sacred texts are intrinsically multivalent and every human reading partial — so 'I alone have the one correct interpretation' is the great hermeneutical heresy — while testing that thesis against Sanskrit's claim to be an absolute sacred language.Keith Ward, Kenneth Valpey · Lecture · 1h 11m· Jun 2021
The Ancient Indian Science for Understanding Scripture Krishna Kshetra SwamiOxford-trained ISKCON scholar-monk Krishna Kshetra Swami lays out Gaudiya Vaishnava epistemology and hermeneutics for Alex — Jiva Goswami's elimination of fallible ways of knowing down to shabda (received testimony), the sadhu-shastra-guru triangulation, and a qualities-principles-tools method that reads scripture as a living tradition rather than a legalistic rulebook.Krishna Kshetra Swami · Lecture · 2h 19m· Jun 2021
The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism Debate @MaverickChristian vs David PallmannMaverick Christian defends his reformulated, epistemic-probability version of Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism — that mental states are effectively epiphenomenal on naturalism, so evolution gives no reason to trust our cognitive faculties — against David Pallmann, whose local-vs-global phenomenology objection collapses under cross-examination until he concedes on air that this version survives his objections.David Pallmann, Josh Wolfe, Maverick Christian · Debate · 2h 6m· May 2021
James Fodor & Arjuna Epistemology and Foundational Intuitionism DebateArjuna (Alex Gallagher) defends a Vaishnava foundational intuitionism on which purified consciousness yields self-evident, even certain, perception of spiritual and moral truth, against James Fodor's explanatory coherentism, which holds that every belief, including religious experience, is justified only by its fit within a web of mutually supporting beliefs.James Fodor · Debate · 2h 26m· Mar 2021
Debate review @TJump vs Adi Purusha The Rationality of TheismArjuna and Adi Purusha review Adi Purusha's debate with atheist TJump, arguing that TJump's 'everything is imaginary until proven otherwise' epistemology is self-refuting - it cannot validate itself, sense reliability, the external world, or induction - and that once properly basic beliefs are admitted, religious experience and theism qualify as rational.Adi Purusha Das, Kane B · Debate · 45m· Dec 2020
@MajestyofReason & Arjuna Consciousness, Explanation, Causality, and Religious ExperienceArjuna (Alex Gallagher) argues to agnostic philosopher Joe Schmid (Majesty of Reason) that theism explains consciousness, cosmic order, and religious experience better than naturalism, while Schmid answers nearly every argument with a symmetry objection — whatever primitive the theist allows himself, the naturalist may take too — yet concedes key ground on religious experience, foundationalism, and solipsism.Joe Schmid · Lecture · 1h 13m· Nov 2020
Dr. Graham Oppy & Arjuna Gallagher Epistemology DiscussionGraham Oppy argues against Arjuna Gallagher and Akshay Gupta that no special faculty of intuition or self-evidence underwrites theism — belief rests on testimony and best-theory comparison — while conceding, against the popular atheists whose clips open the show, that theistic belief is rationally permissible.Akshay Gupta, Graham Oppy · Lecture · 2h 42m· Nov 2020
The Rationality of Theism Debate @Tjump vs Adi PurushaAdi Purusha Das argues Gaudiya Vaishnava theism is rational because chanting Krishna's names yields genuine, condition-dependent experience of God, while atheist Tom Jump insists no belief is rational without a method — novel testable predictions — that differentiates imagination from reality.Adi Purusha Das, Kane B · Debate · 1h 48m· Nov 2020
Epistemology Debate Review Matt Dillahunty & Dr. Howard ResnickArjuna, Adi Purusha Das, and Amala Gaura Das review the Dillahunty-Resnick debate and argue that Dillahunty's demand that spiritual claims be empirically demonstrable is scientism resting on ungrounded presuppositions, while conceding Resnick never clearly laid out the Vedic epistemology (pratyaksha, anumana, sabda) that would have answered him.Adi Purusha Das, Amala Gordas, Matt Dillahunty · Lecture · 1h 38m· Oct 2020
Matt Dillahunty & Dr. Howard Resnick Discuss EpistemologyBhakti scholar Howard Resnick (HD Goswami) argues to Matt Dillahunty that a communal, practice-based 'spiritual science' is a legitimate path to objective knowledge that outsiders are unqualified to judge, while Dillahunty counters that any reliable method would simply become science and that Resnick never provides a test that could distinguish a true religious claim from a false one.Hṛdayānanda dāsa Goswāmī, Matt Dillahunty · Lecture · 2h 15m· Sep 2020Matt Dillahunty & Dr. Howard Resnick discuss epistemology as it relates to theism & atheismBhakti scholar Howard Resnick (HD Goswami) argued that a 'spiritual science' can be genuinely objective while answerable only to qualified practitioners, and Matt Dillahunty pressed one question for two hours - how could an outsider tell whether Resnick's claims are true - concluding that an epistemology without demonstrable reliability is special pleading.Hṛdayānanda dāsa Goswāmī, Matt Dillahunty · Lecture · 2h 15m· Sep 2020
Epistemology and Free Will Discussion with Tom JumpOn Tom Jump's channel, Arjuna (Alex Gallagher) defends a self-evidence epistemology, a filter model of the brain, and desire-based free will against TJump's insistence that novel testable predictions are the only evidence and that neuroscience leaves nothing for a soul to do.Tom Jump · Lecture · 1h 45m· Sep 2020
William Lane Craig shows the absurdities of moral relativismA short clip of William Lane Craig (debating Sam Harris) affirming that moral values are objective — the Holocaust would remain evil even if the Nazis had won and brainwashed everyone — and crediting Harris's Moral Landscape for condemning atheistic moral relativists who won't call genital mutilation objectively wrong.William Lane Craig · Lecture · 2m· Apr 2020