Dr. Nicholas Oschman joins us for a free-flowing and almost totally unscripted conversation about certainty, deception, whether religious people really believe what they say, orthodoxy, cynicism, charismatic experience, Islamic philosophy, and more. The conversation is raw, honest, and iconoclastic, but also gentle, humble, and hilarious. Whoever you are, we guarantee there's something to challenge you here.
The whiskey featured in this episode is Jameson Caskmates Stout Edition.
If you're local to Milwaukee, check out our friends at Story Hill BKC.
Content note: this episode contains some mild profanity.
=====
Want to support us?
The best way is to subscribe to our Patreon. Annual memberships are available for a 10% discount.
If you'd rather make a one-time donation, you can contribute through our PayPal.
Other important info:
Cheers!
Dr. Nicholas Oschman joins us for a free-flowing and almost totally unscripted conversation about certainty, deception, whether religious people really believe what they say, orthodoxy, cynicism, charismatic experience, Islamic philosophy, and more. The conversation is raw, honest, and iconoclastic, but also gentle, humble, and hilarious. Whoever you are, we guarantee there's something to challenge you here.
The whiskey featured in this episode is Jameson Caskmates Stout Edition.
If you're local to Milwaukee, check out our friends at Story Hill BKC.
Content note: this episode contains some mild profanity.
=====
Want to support us?
The best way is to subscribe to our Patreon. Annual memberships are available for a 10% discount.
If you'd rather make a one-time donation, you can contribute through our PayPal.
Other important info:
Cheers!
00:02
this episode is made possible by our
00:04
supporters on patreon
00:05
where you can get access to additional
00:07
content a pastor and a philosopher swag
00:09
and more you can become a supporter for
00:11
as little as three dollars a month
00:13
but if you're in the milwaukee region
00:14
you'll want to join as a top shelf
00:15
supporter
00:16
so you're sure to receive your invite to
00:18
our in-person live
00:19
tasting events picture that for a moment
00:22
a pastor a philosopher you
00:24
and a whole bunch of other similarly
00:25
enjoyable people walk into a bar
00:27
that's a very long title for an event
00:29
but you definitely won't want to miss it
00:31
our first tasting event is rapidly
00:32
approaching so time is short
00:35
all top shelf patreon supporters as of
00:36
saturday may 8th will receive an invite
00:39
that's two days from this episode
00:40
release so pop over now to
00:43
a patreon.com and a philosopher to lock
00:45
in your spot
00:46
we'll see you there
00:51
well friends welcome to a pastor and a
00:52
philosopher walking to a bar
00:54
we're so excited to share some time with
00:57
you community
00:58
and and be together we've got a fun
01:00
guest to share with you
01:02
today and we've got also a fun beverage
01:05
to share with you today today we are
01:07
drinking
01:08
jameson irish whiskey cask mates the
01:11
stout edition
01:12
how do you know anything about this so
01:14
before you judge us for drinking
01:16
jameson this is an interesting jameson
01:18
uh no i had never heard of this before
01:20
today i had no idea jameson did anything
01:22
like this
01:23
yep and for all you whiskey snobs out
01:25
there who are judging us
01:26
like good for you that's fine you can do
01:28
that but i hope to have
01:30
more like you know lowbrow and jameson's
01:34
not lowbrow but it's just not
01:36
awesome you know people do shots with
01:37
jameson but i hope to have more not
01:40
awesome whiskeys just to see what we
01:42
think about them and see i've never said
01:43
that since
01:45
i think it'd be fun more not awesome
01:47
things so break this down like piece by
01:49
piece like an irish whiskey what's the
01:53
well it's definition in ireland
01:56
well no yeah i mean it's made in ireland
01:58
it does have its own
02:00
flavor to it now you whiskey snobs write
02:03
us in
02:03
email us and tell us all about why irish
02:05
whiskey is unique but
02:07
i'm sure it has to do with the grains
02:09
that are used in the grain
02:11
the the mash bill is what they call it i
02:13
believe where how much
02:14
how much how much wheat how much barley
02:16
how much corn
02:17
bourbon's heavy corn i don't think irish
02:20
whiskey is
02:20
and it probably has to do something with
02:22
what they're aged in now this is a fun
02:24
unique irish whiskey because it's been
02:27
aged
02:27
in stout barrels they're finished i
02:30
would say in stout barrels and that
02:31
is at a distillery in cork ireland
02:35
called franciscan well i believe right
02:37
huh
02:38
yeah i think that's right i couldn't
02:39
find any information about how long it's
02:41
spent in the stout barrels but
02:42
finished is probably a good way to think
02:44
about it so can i take a drink yet
02:46
go for it yeah i mean i'm interested to
02:48
see how different it is than regular
02:49
jamison which
02:50
yeah i mean or irish risky in general
02:52
that's probably of the the class of
02:54
world whiskies that's the one i'm
02:55
probably the least familiar with see now
02:57
this smells more like a bourbon than a
02:59
irish or some more similar to a bourbon
03:01
than irish whiskey to me because
03:02
perhaps because of the stout finish even
03:05
for a bourbon this would be sweet though
03:06
this is really sweet
03:08
i should have googled irish whiskey
03:10
before i did this so i could sound smart
03:11
and tell you what makes it different
03:12
from all the other ones
03:14
i seem to remember hearing something
03:15
about there being like a double
03:16
distillation method that is unique to
03:18
ireland
03:19
okay but i could be totally wrong about
03:20
it so this bottle says triple distilled
03:22
maybe it's that they distill more than
03:24
other places yeah triple distilled
03:26
i had the pleasure of being in dublin
03:28
ireland this last october
03:30
and everything is jamison around there
03:32
but i this is by far i would say
03:34
actually the most pleasant irish whiskey
03:36
i've ever had um meaning all the other
03:39
ones were actively unpleasant
03:41
no no no i'm i mean i like this is what
03:43
i'm saying
03:44
irish whiskey i'll drink like when i was
03:46
in ireland i drank irish whiskey because
03:48
that's all they've got that's well
03:49
that's
03:50
not all they got but i did find myself
03:52
drinking some makers when i was in
03:53
belfast but
03:55
when in when in ireland drink some irish
03:57
whiskey so i did that
03:58
sure this is better than the irish
04:00
whiskey i had there including jameson or
04:02
pow powers or tell them or do sure yeah
04:05
interesting
04:05
i've got some pretty good ones uh for
04:07
maybe future podcasts
04:08
i'll introduce you to i do um so this
04:11
one
04:11
the the stout is like a punch in the
04:14
face it's way more present than i
04:15
expected it's delicious
04:16
actually i like that i don't have guess
04:19
this was an irish whiskey at all
04:21
yeah me neither i i don't like stouts
04:25
and the overly sweet
04:26
stouts but it works with whiskey
04:30
that's nice yeah it just gives it kind
04:32
of a chocolate finish
04:34
it's about all but it's very very
04:36
present yeah and i would say irish
04:38
whiskey in general
04:39
isn't as complex in my in my estimation
04:42
as a bourbon or a scotch for sure yeah
04:46
yeah i mean there are you know there are
04:47
some exceptions to that but you have to
04:49
pay for them yeah i just realized that
04:51
my for sure
04:53
showed highlighted my wisconsin you know
04:56
imaginative yeah oh yeah so
05:00
jameson irish whiskey cast mates this
05:02
stout edition
05:03
i would say pastor and philosopher walk
05:05
into a bar recommended
05:06
yeah yeah thumbs up
05:12
our guest today is dr nicholas
05:15
oshman i'm going to just call him nick
05:17
if that's all right
05:18
nick and i go way back he's a good
05:20
friend of mine we started the phd
05:22
program at marquette university together
05:24
at the same time
05:25
so nick is a great friend but he's also
05:26
a great scholar he is a specialist in
05:28
medieval islamic
05:30
philosophy specializing in a guy named
05:32
alfa robbie
05:34
maybe he'll come up later i don't know
05:36
but the book he's working on
05:38
is a little bit broader than that so
05:40
it's it's rooted in medieval islamic
05:41
philosophy but also has
05:43
uh sort of some connections some really
05:45
interesting and relevant connections i
05:47
think
05:48
to politics and even to religion
05:51
and to some of the stuff that we care
05:52
about on this podcast so we've invited
05:54
him here to talk to us about
05:56
certainty and what you might call
05:59
intellectual humility
06:01
and i know you've got a lot of thoughts
06:02
on that because we've talked about it a
06:03
lot
06:04
so we're really glad to have you here
06:05
nick thanks for thanks for joining us
06:07
thanks for having me i'm excited to be
06:09
talking with you guys
06:10
in now what should i call you dr nick
06:13
nick dr
06:14
ashman nick is preferable thank you
06:17
i like dr nick a lot though it's yeah
06:19
it's two simpsons
06:21
it kind of has a sensual vibe though i
06:23
don't know it is kind of like an after
06:25
hours
06:26
kind of doctor you know what i mean if
06:27
if anyone has met me you know that i do
06:29
not have a sensual vibe so it does not
06:31
fit at all
06:33
all right nick you got it by the way uh
06:36
i just want to warn you i'm pretty sure
06:38
kyle invited me on the podcast
06:40
just that way he can start being meaner
06:42
on the podcast
06:43
and it will look less mean in comparison
06:46
so yeah
06:48
forgive me i like it no i could just by
06:51
kyle's
06:52
like description of you nick i just had
06:54
this feeling like i
06:56
i think i could easily take an angle
06:58
that will just make it very contrarian
07:00
and in in kyle was like yeah that
07:03
probably wouldn't be too hard
07:04
we could do that yeah i'm joking i don't
07:06
want to do that
07:08
i'm not sure if i've met someone that's
07:09
taken an angle around me that isn't
07:11
contrarian so i think
07:12
you're going to slide into it it's fine
07:15
i'll find my spot
07:16
good so
07:19
i feel like certainty is probably going
07:21
to be a recurring theme on this podcast
07:23
given i think all of our backgrounds and
07:26
a kind of religious fundamentalism
07:27
certainty is something that we've all
07:29
struggled with and tried to come to
07:30
grips with can i be certain about this
07:33
this being god and faith and all of that
07:35
stuff
07:36
um so if you wouldn't mind telling us a
07:37
bit about your background
07:39
and how you became interested in that
07:40
topic you can make that as religious or
07:43
as secular
07:44
as you want yeah so um i kind of came at
07:48
this
07:48
from or at least my research i came at
07:50
from from two different
07:52
strains i i had i grew up in a
07:54
fundamentalist background as you
07:55
mentioned i
07:56
uh grew up southern baptist i've been
07:58
part of a variety of fundamentalist
08:00
churches over the years
08:02
and even as a child i remember being 10
08:04
11 12.
08:05
i had this kind of religious impetus
08:07
toward
08:08
understanding why god would choose
08:11
prophets it seemed very odd to me
08:13
that god would choose people for special
08:15
revelation it seemed unjust
08:17
i what what echoed was always that story
08:20
that we have about saul
08:21
where where uh you have israel and
08:23
they're demanding that they have a king
08:25
and and god says why and then samuel
08:27
before him
08:28
and in fact i know jason upton will be
08:29
on the podcast uh
08:31
in the future at least you're planning
08:32
on it when i was a teenager i heard
08:34
jason upton
08:35
preach about this uh about samuel and
08:38
the 400 years of waiting
08:39
uh to hear god's voice before that and
08:42
that seemed right to me right right it
08:43
seems odd that all of a sudden god is
08:44
speaking to one person
08:46
if god wants to have a relationship with
08:48
people then he should have relationship
08:49
with all people it should be universally
08:52
accessible and this is a thought process
08:55
that i later found out was uh
08:57
reminiscent to an islamic philosopher
08:59
named abu bakr al-razi
09:01
who basically said there are no prophets
09:04
this is entirely ridiculous
09:05
if you believe in prophecy then you
09:07
believe that god is not just
09:09
he actually calls the the prophets uh uh
09:11
tious billy goats because they have the
09:13
long beards
09:14
and so they put on an affectation of
09:16
being impressive but but in fact
09:18
uh really they have no more access to
09:21
certainty than anyone else does because
09:22
the way that you get certainty is
09:24
through philosophy through reason
09:26
so so i had this kind of inclination
09:28
yeah
09:29
so i had this kind of inclination when i
09:31
was younger that there had to be a kind
09:32
of
09:33
egalitarian notion to why god speaks to
09:36
certain people
09:37
and i wasn't able to find it
09:39
particularly in the southern baptist
09:41
church
09:42
and the reason why is because they're
09:43
not just fundamentalists they're kind of
09:45
closed off in terms of the way
09:47
revelation unfolds i
09:48
i have a kind of a not the historical
09:51
idiosyncrasies but i have a kind of
09:52
mountainous bent
09:53
uh the the idea that that uh
09:56
everything's unfolding religiously
09:58
uh it doesn't ever end the bible's not
10:00
the capstone or something like this
10:02
and so that was one thing that was
10:04
happening for me religiously
10:06
for a long time but then there was this
10:08
other just purely intellectual thing
10:10
that i was going through and it became a
10:12
huge crisis for me during high school
10:14
which was i had no harmonics to read the
10:17
bible i
10:18
grew up in a fundamentalist church and i
10:21
was taught that
10:22
absolute inerrancy the the literal the
10:24
the understood literal
10:26
uh meaning of the text was the important
10:28
meaning and
10:30
i just got obsessed with the problem of
10:32
evolution and i
10:34
god bless him my ap biology teacher mr
10:37
wagner who is an atheist
10:38
and was so kind to me because i know i
10:40
was so obnoxious
10:42
but i was i was being intellectually
10:44
honest it wasn't i wasn't
10:45
i wasn't into any of these uh
10:47
apologetics movements or anything like
10:49
this i i know kyle has a history of kind
10:51
of
10:52
being part of a school that's teaching
10:53
you certain strategies that's not what i
10:55
was doing i was just
10:56
desperately going through the process
11:00
of trying to understand evolution
11:01
honestly and understand why i was wrong
11:03
and mr wagner was so nice he would tell
11:05
me oh yeah actually
11:06
scientists haven't figured out that part
11:07
yet uh that's a really good question
11:10
and and i would go and i was i was
11:12
encouraged and i thought i was making
11:13
progress bit by bit by bit
11:14
and then i had a friend that asked me a
11:16
question about how something in the
11:18
world worked
11:18
and i gave him a perfectly cogent and
11:20
coherent evolutionary answer
11:22
and at that moment i realized ah oh i do
11:25
believe this
11:26
i believe this and so that was the uh
11:30
the moment when i realized to be
11:32
intellectually honest i was going to
11:34
have to
11:36
change my hermeneutics and uh i
11:39
want to define hermeneutics for us yeah
11:41
yeah so
11:42
in a narrow sense hermeneutics is the
11:44
way we read the bible
11:46
in a broader sense it's the way you read
11:47
anything it could be the way you read
11:48
experience it could be the
11:50
way you read historical texts it becomes
11:52
very important for someone who does the
11:53
history of philosophy
11:54
and what your hermeneutics are but in
11:56
this case i i was worried about how i
11:58
can read the bible how can the bible be
12:00
true and
12:02
the first two chapters of genesis not be
12:04
the way i always understood them to be
12:07
and so i went to i went to vanderbilt
12:10
which is where i did my undergrad
12:12
and i was a religious studies and
12:14
philosophy major i was a philosophy
12:15
major
12:15
just for the kicks and i was sure that
12:19
that by doing these history and critical
12:21
theory of religion courses i was going
12:22
to find an answer
12:23
i was going to find some kind of
12:24
harmonics that was going to allow me to
12:27
read the bible
12:28
and not to denigrate anyone that is in
12:31
history and critical theory of religion
12:33
but i just found more confusion there
12:35
and and i found a lot of people that
12:36
were dissatisfied with their own
12:38
hermeneutics
12:39
and i wasn't getting the answers i was
12:40
expected and then i walked into
12:42
a medieval philosophy class and it was
12:45
being taught by len goodman
12:46
and i was introduced to my monadise and
12:50
in this entirely different field where i
12:51
never expected it to show up
12:53
i found something that kind of answered
12:54
all my all my questions
12:56
okay so nick uh i've got a number of
12:59
questions already first one
13:00
what's my monitors okay so so my monity
13:04
is uh
13:05
rabbi moses ben mayman rambam in
13:09
in the jewish uh in the jewish orthodox
13:11
community he he's a great codifier
13:13
of jewish law he's this wonderful 13th
13:17
century
13:18
uh jewish philosopher who actually is
13:20
living in the muslim world
13:21
and so he's receiving all the richness
13:23
of muslim philosophy
13:25
and using it for his own ends and he's
13:28
someone that's very very concerned i
13:29
have a very different understanding of
13:30
him now than i did then
13:32
but he's someone that's very very
13:33
concerned with the question of how
13:35
reason
13:36
and religion can fit together which is
13:37
really where the heart of my research
13:39
lies
13:40
well that's super fun kyle skipped to
13:43
business right away but i would like to
13:44
know what you're drinking because
13:47
obviously a pastor and a philosopher
13:49
walk into a bar
13:50
i was told that you have something
13:51
special oh yeah so
13:53
so what i'm actually drinking is uh um
13:57
blackberry spindrift because i'm a dad
14:00
and i don't have time to do these things
14:02
um but for the sake of the podcast what
14:04
i'm drinking
14:05
is uh my gifting whiskey which is a a
14:08
bell mead single barrel
14:09
uh this is actually aged in uh olarosa
14:11
sherry casks
14:12
and so it's a it's a single barrel it's
14:14
number it's cast number
14:16
uh three two five eight it's uh 110
14:19
proof so it's strong stuff
14:20
and uh it's delicious wow so is that a
14:23
scotch or a bourbon
14:24
it's a bourbon okay and he's
14:28
semi-promised me a bottle i'm gonna hold
14:31
him to it yeah
14:33
every season it's a limited edition so i
14:35
said the next time that i saw him i was
14:36
going to get it for him
14:38
as a dissertation defense
14:39
congratulations but uh
14:41
who knows when that's going to be now um
14:43
and so so who knows
14:45
how many bottles they'll have left at
14:46
that point in time yeah
14:48
they'll need is good stuff it's it's
14:50
local i i'm in nashville so
14:52
so i i came back to to live with my wife
14:54
in nashville vanderbilt's obviously here
14:56
so this is where we met as undergraduate
14:57
students and so
14:58
i'm representing local i know you guys
15:00
like to represent the milwaukee area but
15:02
uh my wife was always here and so i
15:04
never quite felt like milwaukee was home
15:06
nashville's home for me love it so i'd
15:09
like to know if we could get you
15:10
nick to promise to give a gift of belle
15:13
meade to kyle and then can we get kyle
15:14
to promise
15:15
does it bring some to sample on this
15:18
podcast
15:19
yes i'm happy with that whatever makes
15:21
it more likely that i get it
15:22
so so i'm unwilling to make that promise
15:24
because i'm not certain that i can
15:26
fulfill it
15:27
here we go certainty such a [ __ ]
15:32
so nick you you jumped into you grew up
15:35
southern baptist do you
15:37
sounded like you had the had the mind of
15:39
a scholar from a young age on
15:41
and by that i mean you were just curious
15:43
it sounds like would you say yeah
15:45
yeah so um
15:48
when i say this i i want to be clear i i
15:50
think this is a
15:52
systemic problem it's not something any
15:53
individual did but but i wouldn't say it
15:55
was the mind of a scholar
15:56
i i felt like i had the mind of a weapon
15:59
in the sense that
16:00
the the people around me saw that i was
16:03
clever
16:04
and they thought that they could put
16:05
that to good use and and
16:07
and again i i am not suggesting at all
16:09
any malicious intent by any of
16:11
any of the people that i'm talking about
16:12
because in their heads this was
16:14
something that was
16:16
apparently true that this was obviously
16:18
for the good of the faith these kinds of
16:20
things
16:21
and and so i was encouraged to to
16:24
challenge myself intellectually
16:25
because i was going to be a defender of
16:27
the faith or something along these lines
16:28
i was always encouraged in that kind of
16:30
way
16:32
but there was this kind of pressure
16:34
toward
16:35
being able to defend the truth and
16:38
luckily
16:39
i was also around a lot of people that
16:41
were at least 100 sincere
16:44
right there there's nothing malicious or
16:45
underhanded about it and so
16:47
so when they encouraged me to pursue the
16:49
truth they were doing it fearlessly
16:51
and and so i internalized it in a way
16:53
that i wasn't worried about
16:55
finding a truth that was uncomfortable
16:57
because the truth
16:59
is comfortable the truth is what we're
17:01
seeking and so so so because of that i
17:03
did feel a little bit of a permission
17:05
structure to
17:06
to think weird thoughts and and
17:08
eventually i ended up
17:09
leaving the southern baptist church and
17:11
and going to some more charismatic
17:12
churches where they thought
17:13
very weird thoughts i thought very weird
17:15
thoughts at the time but
17:17
uh in in the midst of all of that it
17:19
created a kind of permission structure
17:21
for me to
17:22
follow arguments where they lead which
17:23
is the philosophical mindset
17:26
got it you went from charismatic to
17:28
where then i hope i'm a christian
17:30
every single day i hope i'm a christian
17:31
i i in in the in the in the common
17:34
vernacular of the word i'm a christian i
17:36
pray
17:36
i i engage with people in the church um
17:39
i care about the church
17:41
quite deeply i'm annoyed with the church
17:43
quite deeply at times
17:44
uh the way that i'm annoyed with friends
17:46
and family because this is what it is to
17:48
love something
17:49
but the idea of defining it or or
17:51
pigeonholing or anything like this
17:53
i find all of this very destructive
17:54
because i find orthodoxy destructive and
17:56
so
17:56
i'm not going to uh i'm not going to put
17:58
a label yeah but also i'm not going to
18:00
put a like oh i'm non-denominational
18:02
which is like this other label right no
18:04
no i don't know it but i also don't want
18:06
to not label it
18:08
yeah i i'm a person and i i care about
18:11
the truth
18:11
and um i i firmly believe
18:14
that one of the central promises of the
18:16
gospel is is the idea of asking seeking
18:19
and finding
18:19
and so so i'm not really worried about
18:22
any of that because
18:23
i know what i'm asking for i know what
18:25
i'm seeking and i know what eventually
18:26
i'll find
18:27
or it won't and that's
18:30
that's the way life is it's fascinating
18:32
so can you tell us why
18:34
uh you think orthodoxy is destructive
18:36
dangerous
18:38
yeah so this gets back to maimonides so
18:41
maimonides is a recipient of alfa robbie
18:43
the guy that i that i focus on
18:45
and the entire premise of what religion
18:48
is for alfa robbie and then
18:50
later for maimonides is that religion is
18:52
a poetic expression
18:54
of philosophical truths religion has no
18:56
special access to truth whatsoever
18:58
it's it's just making images that people
19:00
that can't understand philosophy
19:02
are able to engage with and so when that
19:05
happens the role of the prophet changes
19:07
and it stops being about
19:09
i'm expressing truth in a kind of
19:12
axiomatic way
19:13
and it becomes about i am functioning in
19:17
a certain kind of role in society in a
19:18
political role
19:20
to allow people to live good lives
19:22
because if you make certain kind of good
19:24
association
19:25
images then people pursue certain kinds
19:27
of goods right
19:28
temperance the virtues and so the goal
19:31
in that entire process is ultimately
19:34
truth for those that are
19:36
able to gain access to truth but more
19:38
importantly it's habituation
19:40
it's it's orthopraxy and something i
19:43
found and
19:43
perhaps if if you were going to label
19:45
any of my experience with fundamentalism
19:47
as a trauma i think it's this
19:49
the the idea that in fundamentalism your
19:52
beliefs can be weaponized against you
19:53
which is a peculiar thing because you
19:55
can't choose what you believe
19:56
right right this idea that faith is
19:58
something that that we will
20:00
ourselves toward is ludicrous right
20:02
that's that's not what belief is
20:03
belief is something that you need to be
20:05
comfortable being honest about
20:07
and so other religions i think do this
20:09
better than christianity does frankly
20:11
the idea that you can be part of a
20:13
community and again
20:15
i'm not trying to suggest that that
20:16
either judaism or islam don't have
20:18
their own versions of of orthodoxy that
20:21
are every bit as
20:22
as pernicious and constraining as
20:25
as fundamentalism and christianity is
20:27
but quite often you can see expressions
20:30
of
20:30
communities where here are our two
20:33
members of a jewish congregation
20:35
that feel that they're in community with
20:37
one another one of them believes in god
20:39
one of them doesn't
20:40
they are still part of the same
20:42
community they're still both jewish
20:44
according to one another's definition
20:46
they still both follow torah
20:48
and so they're part of a community
20:50
because they're part of a certain kind
20:51
of orthopraxy
20:52
there's a certain kind of way of being
20:54
of doing
20:56
life of of of being in the world and and
20:59
so that doesn't break your community
21:02
there's something really weird
21:03
about the idea of who's your family the
21:05
church is my family
21:06
what happens once you believe in
21:08
evolution you are no longer part of the
21:09
church
21:11
that's weird the idea that if you
21:14
think something different all of a
21:16
sudden
21:17
you are going to be broken off from your
21:19
family that's abuse
21:22
so this is fascinating in it these
21:25
questions aren't on the
21:26
list that we sent you obviously that's
21:28
fine you just said you you can't
21:30
choose your beliefs that's fascinating
21:32
can you can you flesh that out a little
21:34
bit
21:35
yeah i mean people do what they believe
21:39
kyle and i were actually having a
21:40
conversation about this a few weeks ago
21:41
i i think i was annoying him because
21:43
because i i rejected the distinction
21:45
between believing and acting
21:48
right so because at the end of the day a
21:50
lot of people say that they believe in
21:51
things
21:52
but then they don't do anything about it
21:53
yeah and that's not a belief right right
21:55
you say oh oh i believe that racism is
21:57
bad and then i keep voting for racists
22:00
right you don't believe that racism is
22:01
bad you believe that it's permissible
22:04
right right you don't actually hold that
22:05
belief just because you have the thought
22:06
in your head occasionally
22:08
that that oh i'm considering this
22:11
proposition
22:11
i consider a lot of ludicrous
22:13
propositions i have a three-year-old and
22:15
so every single time we imagine
22:16
i consider ludicrous propositions i
22:18
never believe i'm a unicorn
22:20
right right i consider it but then at
22:23
the end of the day i act like a human
22:24
being so that's clearly the
22:26
the the firmer underlying belief and so
22:29
when it gets back to the story that i
22:30
was talking about in terms of me having
22:32
that realization about intellectual
22:34
honesty and in the issue of evolution
22:36
well i knew i didn't actually believe
22:39
fundamentalism
22:40
anymore because when i tried to process
22:42
the world
22:43
my actions belied the fact that i cared
22:46
about
22:48
the truth and the truth was that i
22:49
thought in an evolutionary mindset
22:52
and and so i i think sometimes we we
22:54
want to make these distinctions
22:56
and and i don't think they're helpful
22:57
right this distinction between
22:59
belief and action right this is the
23:00
entire uh argument about faith and works
23:03
and right jesus rejects as distinction
23:04
over and over and over again right
23:06
a tree bears fruit what comes out of
23:08
your mouth that's that's what's in your
23:10
heart right
23:10
right over and over again we we have
23:12
this rejection of the distinction
23:14
between this kind of feigning of a
23:16
belief
23:17
and your actual being and so i'm just
23:20
not
23:21
i'm not particularly interested in in
23:24
belief that's not tethered to action
23:26
yeah and i i think so often
23:29
that allows it to be an excuse right you
23:31
you believe certain
23:32
you say you believe a certain thing and
23:34
now all of a sudden
23:35
it's used as a kind of permission
23:37
structure for you not to do anything
23:39
and so as a result of that it it kind of
23:43
separates you from what's going on in
23:45
your belief but but when belief is
23:47
something embodied
23:48
there's no separation any longer and so
23:51
and so there is no there is no
23:55
ability for you to
23:58
say that oh well well i believe this
24:01
thing because i want to believe this
24:02
thing
24:03
well if you want to believe that thing
24:05
you'll be doing that thing and if you're
24:06
not doing that thing you don't believe
24:07
that thing
24:08
and and so you can't choose
24:12
who you are in the core of who you are
24:14
other than by a
24:15
very long process of habituation right i
24:18
i'm not saying there's not any kind of
24:20
choosing that goes on in faith i
24:21
i i don't want to push that radically
24:24
but
24:25
it's not something that you just flip on
24:27
right it's not something that like
24:29
like oh yeah uh someone dies
24:32
and you have a moment of of crisis in
24:35
your faith
24:36
and then you just flip a switch it's
24:38
like oh but i believe
24:40
because i say that i believe well maybe
24:42
you'll habituate yourself and you'll
24:43
keep going to church and you'll keep
24:44
doing these things and then you'll get
24:45
back into a position of belief
24:47
but quite often in those moments it's
24:50
revealed by our actions
24:51
by the way that we mourn by the way that
24:52
we act that we don't
24:54
and that's okay it's better to honestly
24:56
reflect on that and and decide whether
24:58
or not that's something you want to keep
24:59
pursuing
25:00
rather than pretending like oh i'm
25:02
already arrived at this other place
25:05
that's fascinating i was just i mean
25:08
this is just taking it down to the jesus
25:10
level now where i was just preaching
25:11
from first john last week where
25:12
the apostle john talks about living out
25:15
the truth and living you know
25:16
uh this in chapter two he talks about
25:18
living out the way of jesus and that's
25:20
how you can actually tell if
25:21
if if you claim to know the truth and
25:23
walk into light but you actually don't
25:25
act
25:25
in a certain way that is christ-like
25:27
you're actually walking in the darkness
25:28
it doesn't
25:29
it doesn't compute it doesn't make sense
25:30
the apostle john is
25:32
you know high-fiving you from 2000 years
25:35
of
25:36
you know being dead but um i i i doubt
25:38
that
25:39
he doesn't know the other stuff that i'm
25:40
willing to say
25:43
it's we're not done yet exactly no
25:45
that's great this is a good segue so
25:48
the topic as build of the podcast
25:50
episode is certainty
25:52
so even though that kind of
25:53
overconfidence and that kind of you know
25:55
trying to convince yourself into a
25:56
belief even though that's obviously not
25:58
peculiar to religious people
26:00
often in my experience it seems like
26:02
certain religious structures really lend
26:04
themselves
26:04
to that kind of practice they really
26:06
lend themselves to a sense of
26:08
feigned certainty it's not exclusive to
26:10
them but but my god it's common
26:13
um so so in your view what is that
26:15
relationship
26:16
between certainty and religious belief
26:20
yeah so so the problem is if you build
26:22
any
26:23
if you build anything or you look let me
26:26
rephrase it this way
26:27
if you bill anything as the truth you've
26:29
set yourself up
26:30
to fail in your humility
26:34
right once you start selling yourself as
26:37
being the the people that have access to
26:40
you or
26:41
or the the people that have a certain
26:42
kind of privileged um
26:44
way of understanding the truth already
26:46
you've ended the conversation
26:48
and so and by the way this analogy
26:51
obviously we can use religion right
26:53
right the the entire
26:55
pastoral structure is often built around
26:57
this not only by the way
26:58
in denominations that i'm uncomfortable
27:00
with right this this is what happens you
27:02
go into a place
27:04
and the place is oriented in a certain
27:05
direction and there is a
27:07
physical space in that direction with a
27:09
spotlight pointing at the
27:11
that direction and a book that's open
27:13
for someone to speak
27:14
and when they do so they are feigning
27:18
that they have some kind of privileged
27:19
access to the truth to teach
27:21
more than the people that are below
27:22
which might be true but very rarely
27:25
are the caveats being put beforehand hey
27:27
i'm going to preach
27:28
and i'm going to preach about this
27:30
particular topic because i focus on this
27:32
particular topic in my research
27:35
same thing happens in a classroom though
27:37
right i i know i know plenty of
27:39
philosophy professors
27:40
that are going to insist on people
27:42
calling them doctor
27:44
and there are some reasons why right
27:46
right if if you're
27:47
a member of a community that that is
27:49
historically disenfranchised in the
27:50
academy
27:51
sometimes wearing that doctor moniker is
27:53
really helpful right
27:54
if if you're a person of color or if
27:56
you're a woman who who is the professor
27:58
and might deal with students not not
28:00
recognizing you as the voice of reason
28:02
in the room
28:03
sometimes that's a really really helpful
28:04
thing to have i'm not denigrating this
28:06
practice entirely
28:07
but i know some people that use it
28:09
purely as a whip it's purely to to
28:11
prevent
28:13
students from engaging with the research
28:16
in a way
28:17
that questions in a way that that is not
28:20
satisfying to the professor at the
28:21
moment
28:22
and at the end of the day expertise
28:23
shows out right if you genuinely have
28:26
expertise
28:26
you don't really have to use any of
28:29
these
28:30
tools which which gets back to the the
28:32
the notion that we find in alfa robbie
28:34
and maimonides right the idea of
28:36
truth as being expressed as poetic
28:39
symbols someone else
28:41
wrote about this and did not come to the
28:43
conclusion that alfa robbie and
28:44
maimonides did
28:45
which is plato and plato kicks out the
28:47
poets from the city
28:48
why because what do the poets do they
28:50
lead the people astray
28:51
because all they do is they give images
28:54
they basically give
28:56
these things that are pleasant for
28:58
people but
29:00
they're not backed by anything and he
29:01
does consider at one point in time in
29:03
the republic he says
29:04
perhaps we could consider a more austere
29:06
and less pleasure giving poet
29:08
and this could be useful for the
29:10
communication of philosophy and this is
29:11
where the
29:12
the phoenician tale the noble lie comes
29:13
from for those of you that are familiar
29:15
with the republic
29:16
and that's what alfa robbie is building
29:18
off of in his philosophy is this idea
29:20
that
29:21
well we can use images in a useful way
29:23
to train people
29:24
toward truth but the first thing is that
29:27
you need to know the truth
29:28
and then you can get images that link up
29:30
to the truth in a proper way
29:32
but i mean i've walked into lots of
29:34
churches and almost all of them have
29:35
smoke machines and pleasant music
29:37
and very few of them are concerned about
29:39
truth
29:40
i should tell you elliott used to be the
29:41
guy that ran the smoke machines in the
29:43
pleasant music
29:45
maybe i should have announced that no
29:46
that's that's that's fine
29:48
i i again i'm i'm ornery and willing to
29:51
offend this is the philosophical
29:52
tradition right
29:53
we model our behavior after a guy who is
29:56
so insufferable
29:57
that more people voted to kill him than
30:00
people that thought he was guilty
30:01
literally the jury barely said that he
30:04
was guilty
30:05
and then a vast majority said that he
30:07
should die
30:08
that's how annoying socrates is i
30:11
personally one of my favorite
30:12
philosophical quotes is from kierkegaard
30:14
and i don't remember the exact reference
30:16
but he describes himself
30:18
in his his mission as making things more
30:20
difficult
30:21
yeah it is my job as a religious person
30:24
as a christian he would say to make this
30:26
harder for you
30:27
yeah so so i i i don't know where we are
30:30
in time i know that eventually you want
30:31
to
30:32
uh ask some questions about evangel
30:34
evangelism
30:35
but but i think this is precisely the
30:37
problem with evangelism right
30:38
you you have this uh you have this
30:40
structure that shows up in the new
30:41
testament and again i
30:42
i want a caveat right we're talking
30:44
about certainty here we're talking about
30:45
epistemic humility
30:46
when i'm talking about scriptural
30:48
interpretation here i'm providing
30:50
uh hermeneutic that i know quite well
30:52
but i
30:53
very few biblical scholars are going to
30:55
be okay with the way that i'm using any
30:56
of these scriptures so
30:57
so so ignore it at your leisure that's
30:59
fine time off for a second dr nick
31:01
epistemic humility epistemic humility
31:04
can you describe that for our
31:05
non-philosophical yeah so so all i mean
31:08
by that
31:09
is episteme what you believe what you
31:12
know
31:13
right so so epistemic is just talking
31:15
about knowledge and so being humble
31:16
about that right
31:17
so so so one of the things that happens
31:20
with the issue of certainty
31:21
is that people think certainty means
31:23
conviction
31:25
and certainty has nothing to do with
31:26
conviction so so
31:28
many people really believe in something
31:31
firmly 100
31:32
the whole way down but they're wrong
31:35
and the reason why they're wrong is
31:37
because they're they're not equipped
31:38
with the methods that are reliable
31:41
that allow them to know right one of the
31:43
principles that shows up in plato and
31:45
then
31:45
shows up in alpha robbie it shows up in
31:47
the pro pro clean tradition proclass the
31:49
arabic proclasm shows up in aquinas
31:51
actually
31:51
and in the latin uh it it's uh quid quid
31:54
recipitor
31:55
uh ad modem uh recipientius recipiter
31:59
right i think we just found our episode
32:01
title there yeah
32:03
so so the latin is is uh that which is
32:06
received is received according to the
32:07
mode of the receiver
32:08
and so one of the things aerosol talks
32:10
about in topics one
32:12
one of the things that that alfa robbie
32:14
is absolutely obsessed with
32:15
is that the mode by which you know
32:17
matters
32:18
right the way that you know matters and
32:21
and
32:21
certainty isn't just about examining
32:23
what you believe and have conviction of
32:26
it's examining the method that you
32:28
gained that knowledge through
32:30
it it's examining is this a
32:32
universalizable doctrine that other
32:34
people can have access to this truth as
32:36
well
32:37
is this testable in in a kind of way of
32:40
experiencing the world and
32:42
most people's conception of certainty
32:43
doesn't involve any of that and so
32:46
epistemic humility is recognizing that
32:48
when you receive something you're
32:49
receiving it
32:50
in the mode of the receiver and in this
32:52
case for all of us the receiver
32:54
is an ape-like creature that walks
32:57
around and we have no reason to believe
32:58
uh is oriented toward finding the truth
33:02
all the time
33:03
right human beings are fallible we make
33:05
mistakes so no one should ever presume
33:07
even though afarabi does even though
33:09
maimonides does no one should ever
33:10
presume
33:11
that we have access to absolute certain
33:14
knowledge
33:14
and so when someone presents
33:18
their images as being certain they
33:21
present the images as the truth
33:22
wholesale
33:24
is a kind of deception which is why my
33:26
work focuses on political deception and
33:28
by political i just mean
33:30
the kind of deception that happens in
33:31
groups
33:34
i mean i think a lot of which you
33:35
articulated right there so
33:38
you know on such a high level i i was
33:40
i'm listening and i'm just
33:42
as a pastor walking with people who've
33:45
put together or had this world view and
33:47
and faith journey that's been put
33:49
together and given to them by
33:51
you know their family and by their
33:52
church by all that stuff and they've
33:54
realized they've gotten to the point
33:55
where you just articulated
33:57
where um this wasn't a reliable way that
34:00
um that my faith was constructed that
34:03
what i believe actually
34:04
was put together it was it was in a
34:06
faulty method
34:08
and and now all of a sudden it's all
34:10
falling apart and i don't know what to
34:11
do
34:11
or it's actually a freeing thing but for
34:14
most people it's actually a scary thing
34:15
to realize that
34:16
all of what i've believed for the last
34:18
you know the first 20 years of my life
34:20
first 30 years of my life
34:21
the foundation's rotten yeah one of the
34:24
things that plato says
34:25
in book two of the republic which i
34:27
think is really helpful to think about
34:28
is he talks about what he calls true
34:31
lies and
34:32
and this isn't the noble lie this isn't
34:34
a lie that somehow
34:35
is able to imbue truth at least
34:37
according to plato he thinks that the
34:38
noble eye does this
34:39
uh what he means is a real lie a lie
34:42
that is damaging
34:43
and what a true lie is is a lie in the
34:46
place of your soul
34:48
that is involving the highest things
34:51
because when it comes to the highest
34:53
things no one wants to be wrong
34:55
in that place most of all and he says
34:57
that it's hated by gods and men
34:59
and i think something that's happened
35:03
i i think something that is true about
35:05
human nature
35:06
but but but i i see it as being
35:08
pernicious and kind of the
35:10
the structure of the way some of the
35:12
american
35:13
white christian church i want to clarify
35:15
who i'm talking about here
35:16
is that the fear of being wrong
35:20
in that part of the soul is so
35:23
strong that it's more important not to
35:26
find out that you're wrong
35:27
than to actually be right right you care
35:30
more about the appearance
35:32
of being settled in that place than
35:35
caring about whether you are
35:36
authentically engaging in the truth in
35:38
that place because you're right it's
35:39
terrifying it's terrifying not to know
35:40
the truth
35:41
right all of us want to know the truth
35:42
there's nothing wrong with being scared
35:45
about the prospect of holding falsehood
35:48
in oneself
35:49
but there's something liberating and
35:52
freeing about
35:53
recognizing where falsehood exists
35:54
because at least at that moment you have
35:56
a little truth
35:57
right when you get refuted you you have
36:00
this liberating feeling
36:01
you might not know uh in the refutation
36:04
if the person that refuted you if their
36:05
position is right
36:06
but you do know that your old position
36:08
was wrong that's a true proposition you
36:10
can build off of
36:11
and that's helpful but most most people
36:13
don't like being wrong
36:14
they'd rather seem to be right than
36:16
actually be right
36:18
i'm having a fun time okay just just let
36:21
it be known
36:23
i i i i meant to be much more uh
36:26
obstinate than this
36:29
so nick two questions one personal one
36:31
not the personal one being i'm impressed
36:34
by your
36:35
passion for the truth and your
36:37
unwillingness to
36:38
compromise what's true for the sake of
36:41
what you believe
36:42
and yet you say i still hope i'm a
36:45
christian
36:45
how did you get there how do you how do
36:47
you still say i hope i'm a christian
36:49
while saying
36:49
i really have this high value of truth
36:51
it's encouraging to me
36:52
as a pastor and as a christian but yeah
36:54
so i mean
36:56
i'm not going to give you a
36:57
sophisticated philosophical answer here
36:59
i i'm a christian because i keep
37:02
doing christian things right i
37:06
like i i remember so so after my mom
37:08
died
37:09
i remember i i had this this kind of
37:11
crisis of faith this was shortly after i
37:14
found my hermeneutics but it still
37:15
wasn't perfectly satisfying to me
37:17
because
37:17
i was trained to what to believe what i
37:19
was supposed to believe
37:20
and i remember i was sitting as an
37:22
undergraduate
37:24
out in one of the common areas of
37:26
vanderbilt's campus
37:27
and i remember i was telling god
37:31
how much i didn't believe in him anymore
37:34
and someone who tells god they don't
37:36
believe in him believes in god
37:38
one of two things is true and and i i
37:41
don't deign to know which one it is
37:44
either i am so habituated to
37:46
christianity
37:48
that christianity is meaningful to me uh
37:51
there's a medieval work called the
37:52
khazari that uh uh it talks about the
37:55
the conversion of the king of the
37:57
kazaars to
37:58
to judaism but before he does this he
38:00
gets a dream from god and god tells him
38:02
to convert to the true religion so he
38:03
has to find out which one it is
38:04
and all these people make speeches a
38:06
philosopher makes a speech a christian
38:07
makes a speech
38:08
my favorite one though is when when the
38:10
um when the muslim comes in to make the
38:12
speech
38:13
one of the things that the the muslim
38:15
speaker says is
38:16
proof of the truth of islam is the
38:18
beauty of the quran
38:20
there has been no book that is more
38:21
beautiful than the quran and so you must
38:23
know this is the truth
38:24
and the king of the khazars which
38:26
obviously this is being written by judah
38:28
hallelujah jewish author right so this
38:30
is tongue-in-cheek by the author put
38:31
into the king of the
38:32
kazaar's mouth he says this wonderful
38:34
line where he says
38:36
my friend i believe that the quran is
38:39
the most beautiful book
38:40
to you and perhaps if i was raised on
38:42
its images i too would agree
38:45
but basically what what he's saying
38:46
telling cheek there is like no it's not
38:49
but but he's not saying he's saying it
38:50
in this polite way and it's entirely
38:52
possible that the reason why
38:54
i find this idea of the infinite
38:58
becoming finite because that's the
39:00
that's the hook for me right the idea
39:02
that that
39:03
what love is what goodness is is not
39:06
mere benevolence
39:07
it's not that god created a good world
39:09
and then kind of let it hang out it's
39:10
not deism
39:12
the hook is this kind of super
39:13
derogatory story this idea of
39:15
of a love that overcomes
39:18
what its own limits are right the
39:20
infinite as being not just a
39:22
large number but the infinite as being
39:24
something that
39:25
overcomes even the limitations it sets
39:27
for itself and then by doing that
39:29
becomes finite
39:29
that's a really interesting idea to me
39:31
but
39:32
i was raised on this idea i i find the
39:36
images of it beautiful
39:37
and so it might be that i'm just hooked
39:38
on the images and and i i have to
39:40
acknowledge that that's a possibility
39:42
it's also possible that the reason why i
39:44
keep getting drawn to it is because
39:46
some part of me some some intuition
39:48
within me
39:49
thinks it's really true and i i can't
39:52
say that maybe there's not some hook
39:53
there
39:54
right that that something keeps pulling
39:56
me back that's external to me
39:57
i don't know which it is i don't think
39:59
i'll ever know which it is
40:01
yeah i love it nick would as a
40:03
philosopher who
40:04
really would you say loves reason and
40:07
truth
40:08
in reality perhaps am i still still on
40:11
the right track yeah
40:12
so so i wouldn't use the word love right
40:13
right
40:16
no no not even that there's an itch
40:18
right okay i i i
40:19
am a compulsive truth teller okay i i
40:23
it's i i really don't feel there's a
40:26
choice about it
40:27
i i maybe cal can speak to this more but
40:29
but but it's
40:31
like when you see me engage with other
40:34
people's philosophical work which most
40:36
fosters are like this so luckily we have
40:37
grace for one another
40:38
but like kyle has presented papers in
40:41
front of me
40:42
and i'm sure it's miserable because my
40:44
face is scrunching up and i'm like
40:46
wiggling in my chair and i want to
40:47
object and it's like it's just
40:50
it's just bursting out of me and it's
40:51
not something i'm doing willfully i
40:53
like really i mean my poor family right
40:56
if i could choose to be otherwise i
40:58
would
41:00
but i can't it's it's just
41:03
to the souls of my feet this is this is
41:05
the thing that drives me
41:07
it's it's it's a compulsion and so one
41:10
of two things is true
41:11
uh again i keep doing this right i kind
41:14
of give these probabilistic ways of
41:15
viewing the world because i'm not
41:16
certain
41:17
either philosophy is the method by which
41:19
we attain the truth in the best manner
41:21
we get closest
41:22
or socrates is someone that had
41:26
some fascinating mental illness
41:29
and got a lot of people on board and
41:34
i mean from the inside of what it's like
41:36
to do philosophy
41:38
the latter seems a little bit more
41:39
probable to me honestly
41:44
nice good let me i was asking i started
41:47
down that route
41:48
because i'm interested to know you you
41:50
had your time in the charismatic crew
41:51
for a while and and i enjoy a good
41:53
charismatic experience and
41:55
the feel of the spirit of god the
41:57
supernatural and i'm sure
41:58
i'm sure you have a fun and uh you know
42:02
worth hearing take on uh how reliable
42:05
or how do you fit that into your
42:06
experience things that you felt
42:08
that were outside of your own body
42:10
perhaps
42:11
there's a uh there's a 20th century
42:14
pragmatist
42:15
who i think deals with this nicely
42:17
william james
42:18
who who talks about the varieties of
42:20
religious experience and he deals with
42:21
this as a philosopher and ultimately
42:23
argues that religious experience is
42:26
authoritative
42:28
for the person that experiences it
42:30
because they've experienced it it's it's
42:32
direct
42:33
but that doesn't mean it's authoritative
42:35
for people outside
42:36
and that that's kind of my inclination
42:39
about these kinds of things
42:41
i i honestly don't know i i am
42:43
simultaneously
42:45
drawn to that community in certain kinds
42:47
of ways i
42:48
i still am there there's a certain kind
42:50
of certainty that that allows right
42:51
direct experience
42:53
that that i'm not sure i believe in but
42:56
but that's satisfying right i mean the
42:58
idea that that
42:59
oh yeah i've experienced god's presence
43:00
and therefore i i do it
43:02
i also can look at a lot of the people
43:05
that are in that community and i'm not
43:06
gonna name any names in particular
43:08
but but a lot of people that i found
43:10
reputable that i bought into when i was
43:12
a much younger person
43:13
that i think are charlatans like i i i
43:18
think that they
43:18
they are not not mistaken i'm not
43:20
talking about people that
43:21
that are sincere and just don't believe
43:24
the right thing which i think everyone
43:25
should have the freedom to do
43:27
but but these are people that know they
43:29
are deceiving other people
43:31
and and actively choose to deceive other
43:32
people and again i'm not going to name
43:34
names because i also think that there
43:35
are a lot of
43:35
genuinely sincere people that are not
43:37
doing that i also know about some of the
43:39
psychological tricks that you can
43:41
imitate these things in other religions
43:43
you can imitate these things with with
43:45
other rituals because it's the images
43:46
that are so important
43:47
if you notice the reason why a lot of
43:49
these these
43:50
uh faith healings and things like this
43:52
they work they work in very particular
43:54
contexts
43:55
right they they there's a specific tone
43:57
of voice that is affected
43:59
there's a specific type of music that
44:00
goes on in the background there's a
44:02
specific number of people that happen
44:04
and and there is this kind of
44:06
psychological effect that is very very
44:08
powerful now maybe that's powerful
44:09
because as they would say
44:13
worship brings the presence of god and
44:15
does this
44:16
really miraculous thing or
44:20
maybe the reason why this can be found
44:21
in other places is because
44:23
human beings care about ritual and care
44:25
about images and so
44:27
there's there's a very very strong um
44:30
effect of of willing it into existence
44:34
almost like a sugar pill would be right
44:37
that you can you can heal yourself by
44:39
believing you're taking proper
44:40
medication
44:41
i don't know which it is i i mean i i'm
44:43
inclined toward
44:45
being very skeptical of this community
44:46
but i also
44:48
i almost feel perhaps this community has
44:51
has
44:52
a stronger hold on me because i have
44:53
very very dear friends who are still
44:55
all in on it and i i value them i value
44:59
their voices but
45:00
i mean as a philosopher i'm very very
45:02
skeptical okay two follow-up questions
45:04
one for both of you
45:05
well actually both for both of you is
45:08
that okay
45:08
so as a philosopher then as philosophers
45:12
when we think about how to build our
45:13
faith and how to how to how to
45:15
coherently think about it in a
45:17
reasonable fashion
45:19
basing our faith 100
45:22
or a majority of it off of supernatural
45:26
experience you know in
45:27
in quotes seems like a pretty unhealthy
45:30
thing to do
45:31
to me even but using supernatural
45:33
experience
45:34
as a piece of the reason why i still
45:37
follow
45:37
this certain faith tradition that seems
45:40
that seems like intellectually that it
45:44
has some integrity to it would you say
45:45
or
45:46
should we throw out experience
45:47
altogether
45:49
can i ask a follow-up before you you
45:50
answer i'll i'll let you answer this
45:52
first but
45:52
what do you mean by faith by faith what
45:55
i believe in my set of beliefs about
45:57
life reality and a higher power okay
46:00
so but
46:04
okay i'll let cal answer and then
46:08
so let me make sure i understand the
46:10
question 100
46:11
experience or vast majority partially
46:14
experience
46:15
good yeah it's it's it's one of the
46:17
pieces
46:18
yeah you and by experience you mean
46:20
supernatural experience
46:21
experiencing somehow the presence of god
46:23
seeing a miracle happen
46:25
having it happen to me getting the
46:27
shivers get it you know having hands
46:28
warm
46:29
you know there's a million things that
46:30
you could say okay good that helps so i
46:32
want to draw a line between
46:34
experience and uh what you might call
46:38
uh manifestations of the holy spirit
46:40
okay as described in the new testament
46:42
that seems to be what you're focused on
46:44
because if we mean just experience
46:45
generally my view is that there isn't
46:48
anything else
46:49
so 100 percent of my religion is
46:51
experienced okay but but not a hundred
46:53
percent of it is
46:54
manifestations of what the holy spirit
46:56
is okay
46:57
so i'll just tell you in my own
46:58
experience when it gets down to brass
47:01
tacks why
47:02
am i a christian to use nick's
47:04
vernacular why do i keep acting in this
47:06
way
47:07
it's big it's almost entirely at this
47:10
point
47:11
but let's say 75 because of
47:15
experiences that i had where i felt like
47:17
jesus was present in the room
47:19
and and you know i i have really really
47:22
good friends who i trust and i know
47:24
they're not making it up
47:25
who tell me about some really crazy [ __ ]
47:27
that's happened to them
47:28
and you know maybe at one point in my
47:31
life that was part of it but like
47:32
at least 75 percent of my religious
47:34
faith right now
47:36
is because of particular experiences of
47:38
god's presence
47:39
that i've had and the rest of it is just
47:42
because it kind of makes sense of the
47:43
world to me
47:44
we've talked about that before and you'd
47:45
love it that is my that is my experience
47:48
and
47:48
obviously i think that's healthy or i
47:51
wouldn't because
47:52
that's something you can trust is that
47:54
that's something that's sexual
47:56
felt and experience well as nick
47:57
described talking about william james
47:59
it's something unavoidable to me
48:01
the question of whether or not i can
48:02
trust it doesn't even come in
48:04
if it came in then i would have to be a
48:06
skeptic about everything okay
48:08
because i trusted in the same way that i
48:09
trust that i see you right now
48:11
my perceptual experience is just as true
48:14
to me as that experiences
48:15
that i had which is why a lot of
48:17
calvinists describe it as a separate
48:18
sense
48:19
by the way god's presence is just like
48:21
the other senses that you have
48:22
physically i think they're right about
48:24
that
48:24
if i doubt that i doubt everything okay
48:27
fun fact a post kantian named rudolph
48:29
otto
48:30
wrote a way that had holiness as a
48:33
separate category of the understandings
48:35
in a kantian framework
48:37
and i presented a paper on this at the
48:40
very first time i met kyle as
48:41
undergrads
48:44
and we bumped into each other and then
48:47
we met again in grad school
48:48
and we didn't know that we had met until
48:51
probably a year into our friendship
48:52
and then we remembered each other's
48:54
papers and how bad we thought
48:55
each other one each other's papers were
48:59
this separate sense of excitement i
49:00
actually went and found a notebook where
49:02
i was taking notes at that conference
49:03
and i got to your paper and it was just
49:05
blank
49:07
because i checked out right at the
49:08
beginning
49:11
so i i think there might be some
49:13
confusion between
49:15
what should orient our lives right right
49:17
what what should be a constitutive
49:19
factor of the way that we
49:20
act and truth right i think
49:24
that things that you find beautiful
49:28
should affect the way that you behave
49:31
but they
49:31
don't give you access to the truth right
49:34
the fact that you have certain kind of
49:36
aesthetic tastes
49:38
doesn't actually give you a kind of
49:39
privileged access so so let's say
49:41
you uh you really enjoy being on top of
49:44
a mountain and enjoying a sunset
49:47
okay great do that but that doesn't mean
49:51
that you
49:52
somehow have found the meaning of other
49:54
people's lives in that process
49:56
you haven't found the the nature of what
49:58
it is to be a human being or something
49:59
like this that you have to stand on a
50:01
mountain
50:01
you have to face west and you have to
50:03
enjoy the sunset
50:04
right no that's not what that's not what
50:07
the human life is about
50:08
and the reason why we can't trust i at
50:11
least i don't think that we can trust
50:12
these kinds of religious experiences as
50:15
religious experience in this very
50:16
particular way right because i
50:18
i as kyle said i think this is a nice
50:20
way of rejecting a distinction that i
50:21
don't think is appropriate
50:22
right we always every single time we do
50:24
something religiously which i would say
50:26
is always
50:27
we're always being religious every
50:28
person is always being religious and
50:30
every person is always being political
50:32
but but every single time that you're
50:34
doing one of these activities
50:37
and now we've gone into this kind of
50:39
mystical mode
50:40
well it might be true but if it is true
50:44
it's true accidentally
50:45
and and what i mean by this is a very
50:47
technical sense of the term
50:48
which is you don't know the method by
50:50
which you feel that thing
50:52
and if you don't know the method by
50:53
which you feel that thing you can't be
50:55
certain
50:55
in your feeling of that thing and in
50:56
fact in a lot of charismatic communities
50:58
they acknowledge this
51:00
because they're very worried about
51:01
demons
51:03
because they understand that okay even
51:06
even though they affirm
51:08
miraculous experience all the time they
51:10
recognize that
51:11
they don't know where it's coming from
51:13
and so you have to be very hesitant and
51:15
put put tests to it and these kinds of
51:16
things
51:17
you see this in the bible as well about
51:18
prophecy right the idea of testing
51:20
prophets
51:21
because there's something going on there
51:26
who knows what that is but you don't
51:28
know where it's coming from
51:29
why it's happening and what kind of
51:32
truth value it has
51:33
and so the idea of basing your life in
51:36
terms of
51:37
the way that you know the world on
51:39
something that you don't know where it's
51:41
coming from
51:42
well that's that's dubious
51:44
philosophically but saying something
51:45
along the lines of
51:46
oh well when i go to worship at this
51:48
particular place
51:50
i i enjoy it quite a bit i have this
51:52
kind of sensation
51:54
assuming that it's not not in line with
51:56
the values that you're getting
51:58
from other more reliable sources i don't
52:01
think there's a harm in that right there
52:02
are lots of things that we as humans do
52:04
that aren't they're not based off of any
52:07
rational activity
52:08
other than their other than pleasure and
52:10
so far as pleasure is a rational
52:11
activity but
52:12
but but it's just it's aesthetically
52:14
nice to us and and i think that's fine
52:16
i i know i know that charismatics are
52:18
going to be very upset with that answer
52:19
i
52:20
i i don't mean to i don't mean to
52:22
belittle their experience
52:23
i would have been upset about that
52:24
answer at a previous point in time in my
52:26
life
52:26
but any time that that someone is
52:30
vying for power because that's what it
52:33
is that's what truth is all the time
52:34
anytime you're conveying truth
52:36
you're basically asserting power anytime
52:38
someone is
52:39
vying for power and you can't see the
52:41
mechanisms by which they're worthy of
52:43
that power
52:44
you should be skeptical
52:48
friends before we continue we want to
52:49
thank story hill bkc for their support
52:52
story hill bkc is a full menu restaurant
52:54
and their food is seriously some of the
52:56
best in milwaukee
52:57
on top of that story hill bkc is a
52:59
full-service liquor store featuring
53:00
growlers of tap available to go
53:03
spirits especially whiskeys and bourbons
53:05
thoughtfully curated regional craft
53:06
beers and 375 selections of wine
53:10
visit storyhillbkc.com for menu and more
53:13
info
53:14
if you're in milwaukee you'll thank
53:15
yourself for visiting story hill bkc
53:17
and if you're not remember to support
53:19
local one more time that's
53:22
storyhillbkc.com
53:27
there's a really common example when
53:29
people are talking about
53:30
the context of your belief and how it
53:32
can affect the justifiability
53:34
or the reasonableness of holding that
53:36
belief let's say you're in a strange
53:38
town and you don't know how to get
53:39
around and you need to find the bank
53:41
and so you approach a stranger on the
53:43
street and you ask
53:44
can you tell me where the bank is and
53:46
this person says yeah you should go up a
53:48
couple blocks
53:49
take a left bank right there and you
53:51
form the belief that the bank is where
53:53
that person said
53:54
okay unbeknownst to you you're in a town
53:56
where everybody lies
53:58
now under normal circumstances wouldn't
54:01
be anything strange about this belief at
54:02
all you'd form the belief that the bank
54:04
is over there it'd be totally justified
54:05
because
54:06
given your past experience that's how
54:07
beliefs work people don't lie about that
54:09
stuff
54:10
but then you find out that this is a
54:11
town of liars
54:13
now let's assume for the sake of
54:15
argument that this person was the one
54:17
honest person in that town
54:19
is your belief justified the answer of
54:22
contemporary epistemology is
54:23
no even if that person happens to be
54:26
telling the truth you form a belief that
54:28
is true and under normal circumstances
54:29
would be justified
54:31
in this case it's not because of the
54:33
context
54:34
or another simpler example you have a
54:37
watch that's been really successful the
54:38
whole time you've had it
54:40
you look at the time it says it's 12 30.
54:42
it really is 12 30
54:44
you form the belief that it is 12 30 but
54:46
unbeknownst to you your watch died 12
54:48
hours ago
54:49
is that a justified belief no because
54:52
the method
54:52
by which it was formed is no longer
54:55
reliable
54:56
so even if in this particular case that
54:58
was a genuine word from god
55:01
me as a spectator my epistemic
55:03
responsibility
55:05
is to not believe it or to be very very
55:09
suspicious of it
55:10
okay so that's a similar answer from a
55:13
very different context yeah yeah
55:14
chiming in for philosophers uh listening
55:17
i
55:18
i actually like this example and aerosol
55:20
would be fine with the two so so i know
55:21
it's contemporary
55:22
i i know the examples are contemporary
55:24
give them credit but but but this
55:26
this caring about method is right there
55:28
in topics one it's
55:29
this is this is a foundational
55:32
philosophical principle i have a good
55:33
friend who got
55:34
saved because he was sitting in a
55:36
worship service
55:37
repeating a phrase to himself someone at
55:41
a different part of the room stands up
55:42
and speaks in tongues
55:44
someone from the other side of the room
55:45
stands up and translates
55:47
and it's the exact phrase he was
55:48
repeating to him
55:50
i've seen really crazy stuff yep and for
55:53
all of that
55:54
my responsibility both as a philosopher
55:57
and also as an individual
55:59
is to ask does believing that that was
56:03
what it was claimed to be is that
56:05
reasonable for me
56:07
given the evidence that i possess and
56:09
the answer
56:10
almost always is no now
56:14
if that thing was really meaningful to
56:16
me and that thing changed my life and
56:18
i've had words that changed my life
56:20
frankly
56:20
and it plays a really good role in my
56:22
life and there's no
56:24
negative uh there's no harm done by
56:26
assuming that it was true
56:27
fine i'm fine with letting that play a
56:30
positive role i'm even fine
56:32
saying that god spoke to me totally fine
56:35
with that
56:35
but as a third party and as a
56:38
philosopher i have to ask
56:39
well what is the evidence support and in
56:42
the overwhelming majority of cases and
56:44
this is why i'm a really bad pentecostal
56:46
in the overwhelming majority of cases
56:48
the work is just not
56:50
done to figure out what the evidence
56:52
supports
56:53
i've been at benny hinn gatherings where
56:55
people
56:56
are slayed in the spirit and you know
56:59
the they
57:00
are immediately healed of cancer and
57:01
they get out of the drop their crutches
57:03
and run around the room and whatever
57:05
and nobody ever follows up with those
57:07
people no but nobody ever tries to find
57:09
out scientifically if they were actually
57:11
healed of course
57:13
in fact there's a specific structure
57:15
that is built into this community
57:17
to prevent that from occurring so so for
57:20
example if i as an outsider make the
57:21
claim
57:22
okay fine you say you're a prophet great
57:26
i'm thinking of a number 1 to 1 million
57:28
pray to god
57:30
tell me what the number i'm thinking of
57:31
is and then the person says wait
57:33
wait you're testing god here god god's
57:36
not some monkey that performs tricks for
57:38
you
57:38
but that itself is a kind of a
57:40
justification that allows for these to
57:42
never be testable claims
57:43
there's no falsifiability here so
57:45
there's not any kind of reliable method
57:47
that's provided
57:48
the idea of a truth that is only
57:50
accessible in one moment in one instance
57:52
there's no way that it's
57:53
testable and it's intermingled with a
57:56
bunch of falsehoods all the time
57:58
that's that's not a method that you
58:01
should orient your entire life around
58:02
sure no i hear you two follow-up
58:04
questions sorry we're going down a
58:05
rabbit hole here but
58:06
i'm thinking of these questions i'm
58:08
wondering if the listeners are um kyle
58:10
you
58:10
you just spent you know a few minutes
58:12
talking about how
58:14
you shouldn't trust supernatural
58:16
occurrences
58:17
let's say but then you also just said 10
58:20
minutes ago
58:21
that 75 of the reason that you believe
58:24
in
58:24
the god that you do is because of those
58:26
experiences that you've experienced
58:28
that seems contradictory i shouldn't
58:30
trust them as a third party
58:32
if i'm looking out a window with my
58:34
friend standing next to me we're looking
58:36
out the same window and my friend says
58:37
hey isn't that joe over there and i said
58:40
what are you talking about
58:41
there's no one out there he's like look
58:43
and he guides my eyes right there that's
58:45
joe we just talked to him a couple hours
58:47
ago he's right there
58:48
and i say i legitimately don't see
58:49
anyone standing out this window
58:51
now what are what are my
58:53
responsibilities towards his belief and
58:55
what are his responsibilities towards
58:56
mine
58:57
seems obvious to me that we should both
58:59
stick to our beliefs
59:01
i have no no epistemic responsibility
59:03
whatsoever
59:04
to consider his belief as stated to me
59:07
to be more strong than the evidence of
59:09
my senses
59:10
and same thing is true for him he sees
59:12
him i don't
59:13
uh he should absolutely conclude that
59:15
he's standing out there and that
59:16
something has gone wrong in me
59:18
something similar is happening here it's
59:19
similar to what nick said earlier about
59:21
william james
59:22
it is absolutely authoritative for the
59:24
person having the experience
59:26
and i've had the experience okay and it
59:28
is authoritative to me in the same way
59:30
my perceptual
59:31
is but when it's happening to somebody
59:33
else and when
59:35
the circumstances of that happening are
59:37
easily explainable
59:38
by other means and when i know no one is
59:41
actually doing the work to make those
59:43
methods reliable
59:45
and and and and i can keep adding to
59:47
that list
59:48
then it becomes unreasonable for me to
59:50
believe what is absolutely reasonable
59:51
for someone else to believe
59:53
so so one of the things that happens in
59:55
these kinds of discussions
59:57
the only people that are interested in
59:59
religious experiences like this
60:01
are people that have religious
60:03
experiences like this
60:04
so so the questions very rarely go the
60:06
other way or when they do it it's about
60:08
the falsifiability of the claims and
60:09
like
60:09
like like you have people that go in and
60:12
do documentaries and things about
60:13
showing people or charlatans and these
60:15
kinds of things
60:17
which every pentecostal should watch by
60:18
the way absolutely google
60:20
google the four effect and look up some
60:23
videos of some talented
60:24
mediums and cold readers don't read
60:26
about jim james james james
60:28
yeah yeah is it no what's what's his
60:30
name the
60:31
kool-aid guy oh jim jones
60:35
kim jones yeah jim james is a great
60:37
artist
60:38
musician but uh jim jones but but i i
60:42
want to just step back for a second and
60:43
think about this in terms of the context
60:45
of
60:45
of what i would call i mean this is
60:48
theology but
60:49
but this is firmly in in the field of
60:50
philosophy and in terms of
60:52
the nature of the divine attributes
60:55
think about what you're
60:56
saying in your theology if you're saying
60:59
that this is the way that god
61:00
speaks to people if god speaks to people
61:04
via this method in his unreliable way
61:07
that anyone that has been part of the
61:08
pentecostal movement knows that it is
61:10
unreliable
61:11
that you get all these words of people
61:13
that sometimes are giving words that
61:15
enable their abuse of other people
61:18
that says something very odd about the
61:21
nature of god if this is his chosen
61:23
method
61:24
right this gets back to abu bakr al-razi
61:26
right the idea
61:27
of special revelation oh him of course
61:31
i mentioned him about the beginning i
61:32
mentioned him once this is
61:39
the the guy they call the prophets billy
61:41
goats jackasses right the tears because
61:43
they have the long
61:44
long beards because there's something
61:47
weird if you want to say that god loves
61:49
people
61:49
and then you say oh god loves all people
61:52
but he privileges certain people
61:53
and those people are responsible for
61:56
telling the truth to these people
61:58
and that's the way they access the truth
61:59
of god's word
62:01
and along with those people they're
62:03
going to be a bunch of false people
62:05
right next to them and those people are
62:07
going to be imitating the true people
62:10
in a way that allows them to
62:13
enable abuse or accumulate power
62:16
and you could say i i understand the
62:18
justifications that some of the the
62:20
listeners might be having they say well
62:21
this is a question about
62:23
man's fallen nature and blah blah blah
62:25
and they justify it this way
62:27
but it kind of makes god a luddite
62:30
right like like as if he hasn't adapted
62:33
to the circumstances
62:34
as if he doesn't recognize that this is
62:36
going on or he he lacks
62:38
omniscience or lacks omni benevolence
62:42
because he allows it to continue over
62:44
and over and over again it's a profound
62:46
problem of evil that you're pushing
62:47
yourself into by affirming this
62:50
okay here's here's my perspective on you
62:53
guys
62:54
talking about this in the last couple of
62:55
minutes it seems and i i'm guessing you
62:58
don't think
62:59
you wouldn't agree that this is a
63:00
cynical way of looking at the world but
63:02
it sounds cynical to me
63:03
um it sounds like your everything that
63:06
you see needs to be broken down and
63:08
torn apart to see if it's true which as
63:11
as i say that that's healthy that sounds
63:12
that sounds reasonable
63:13
but it also sounds like you could easily
63:16
be given as philosophers to cynicism
63:19
is that just a comfortable place for you
63:21
or do you not see it as cynicism do you
63:23
see it as logic and reasonable
63:25
kyle you wanna go well cynicism is named
63:28
after a school of philosophy that nick
63:29
probably knows more about than i do
63:31
i'm sure you're going to hear all about
63:32
that in a second i'm okay being
63:35
a little bit cynical i guess in this in
63:37
the sense of
63:38
if if by cynical you just mean
63:40
suspicious
63:42
then you can't you can't be a
63:44
philosopher and maybe even known as an
63:46
honest person and not be a little bit
63:48
suspicious
63:49
and if you mean more more than that then
63:51
i'm not sure what you mean by
63:53
yes okay so let's say suspicious is a
63:54
good word suspicious
63:56
overly suspicious could be a thing or
63:58
where does
63:59
where does the hope hopeful and
64:01
suspicious
64:02
posture where's the healthy balance
64:05
there would you say then
64:06
yeah so good question so i would see the
64:09
balance between
64:10
hope and something like suspicion maybe
64:12
that's not the best word but let's go
64:14
with it
64:14
as similar to the balance between faith
64:17
and doubt
64:18
so you cannot have the one unless you
64:21
have the other
64:22
it is impossible to have faith without
64:24
some doubt otherwise it would just be
64:26
belief or knowledge or certainty or
64:28
something like that
64:29
similarly it would be impossible for me
64:30
to have hope in anything if i wasn't
64:32
also
64:33
questioning if i wasn't also suspicious
64:35
about it either i have certainty about
64:37
it or i don't and if i don't then i
64:39
either view it as something good
64:41
or i don't and if i do then i hope for
64:43
it
64:44
i want it to be the case even if my
64:47
evidence suggests that it's not
64:50
and and that that kind of describes my
64:51
relationship to a lot of core christian
64:54
doctrines at this point in my life my
64:56
evidence strongly suggests to me
64:58
that resurrection is metaphysically
65:00
impossible
65:01
that it's actually a kind of nonsense
65:04
but
65:04
man i hope for it i'm suspicious
65:08
of it but i hope that it is true and i
65:10
think that's a reasonable position to
65:11
hold
65:12
and i also think it's an unavoidable
65:13
position to hold for an honest
65:15
person yeah i i think part of this is
65:19
and this this again this goes beyond
65:21
christianity this is this is not
65:22
something that's
65:23
specific to religious people people are
65:26
invested
65:28
in pretending that they know things
65:32
and there's very little reason to do
65:36
that when you don't know something right
65:38
it's a it's a dishonest activity
65:41
to puff your chest and pretend you have
65:44
knowledge where you don't
65:46
you can act without knowledge in fact we
65:48
do all the time
65:49
you do things because you want to you do
65:52
things because you hoped
65:53
to you do things because you're
65:55
intrigued by something or
65:57
curious right you don't have to know to
66:00
to act to habituate yourself to live
66:04
the danger of the kinds of things that
66:05
you're talking about is that people
66:09
are pretending like they have a certain
66:11
kind of epistemic
66:12
access to the truth that they don't and
66:15
i know that they don't
66:16
because if they did have epidemic access
66:19
to that they would be able to tell me
66:20
the method by which they gained that
66:22
epidemic access
66:23
certainty means not just knowing
66:26
but knowing that you know and knowing
66:29
how you
66:30
and so many people pretend oh i've
66:32
reached certainty why well because i've
66:34
had a religious experience
66:35
or every certainty why because i've been
66:36
convinced of this argument or i
66:39
there are ways to convince yourself that
66:42
you've reached
66:43
a certain kind of level of certainty but
66:45
you haven't actually
66:46
examined it the whole way down and
66:49
pretending like you have
66:50
is lying right by the way this is a
66:53
controversial claim that i
66:54
i'm making here i also make it in my
66:56
research this is
66:58
my entire point the entire point of my
67:00
dissertation and
67:01
the conversion of it into a book that
67:03
i'm i'm trying to make
67:04
is that there is no such thing as a
67:06
noble lie
67:08
there is no such thing as a lie that is
67:10
for someone's benefit politically
67:12
and the reason why is the only way you
67:14
can construct a noble lie
67:15
the only way you can construct an image
67:17
for someone's sake
67:18
that is noble presented not as an image
67:21
but as the truth as it is
67:23
is if you have certainty that justifies
67:26
this nobility
67:28
because if not you're gambling with
67:29
someone else's life
67:31
and so if if you were to ask me the
67:34
question in a different way
67:36
are you intrigued by the idea of
67:39
mystical experience
67:41
yeah of course it's fascinating
67:44
i i think it's interesting uh i i think
67:47
i'm probably more in kind of a william
67:49
james camp now than
67:50
than i was in my younger life where
67:52
where i'm really fascinated by it but
67:54
but i'm not necessarily
67:56
even close to endorsing it but like i
67:58
like the idea
68:00
i like it quite a bit it's aesthetically
68:02
very pleasing to me i
68:03
have these problems when it comes to the
68:05
theology behind it and all these kinds
68:06
of things
68:07
but but yeah it's intriguing but but
68:09
that's not what people want to claim
68:11
not that it's intriguing or that it had
68:14
good
68:14
practical ramifications for their lives
68:17
no no no
68:18
god says
68:21
the lord speaks they put on this
68:24
air of authority that they now have a
68:27
certain kind of privilege
68:28
access to the truth and i mean frankly
68:31
if we're going to
68:31
talk about in the christian context if
68:34
we're reading the old testament the
68:36
the response to this every single time
68:37
someone's wrong is that they get stoned
68:40
right the the scriptures recognize the
68:43
danger of the idea of someone puffing
68:45
themselves up and presenting themselves
68:46
as an authority to the mouth of god
68:49
and yet the charismatic movement
68:50
movement doesn't engage with the
68:52
negative side of things right they
68:54
most most often they engage with the
68:55
prosperity gospel side of things
68:58
right always be skeptical of someone
69:00
that's selling you something sweet
69:03
this is this is a key philosophical
69:05
principle so so the person that goes to
69:07
the doctor
69:08
and the doctor says hey you need to lose
69:10
50 pounds
69:11
i'm sorry this is not a healthy weight
69:13
for you you are going to have problems
69:15
unless you lose this weight well that's
69:18
an uncomfortable thing to believe and
69:20
they say i don't like that doctor
69:22
i like the other person that's telling
69:25
me that i'm
69:26
okay at exactly this weight why because
69:28
it's it's more comfortable
69:30
it's more satisfying and so you could
69:33
say
69:33
man those doctors they're so
69:37
mean they're so skeptical
69:41
they're saying just because i'm at high
69:43
risk of a heart attack or whatever it
69:45
happens to be
69:46
they're saying i need to change my
69:47
entire life well i don't want to change
69:49
my entire life
69:50
and right there you've inverted the
69:52
epistemology and you've
69:53
made once more important than knowledge
69:57
which is okay if you're doing it
70:00
knowingly
70:01
if you're saying i don't have reason to
70:03
believe this thing fully
70:05
right i don't have certainty about this
70:06
thing but i like it and i'm going to do
70:08
it that's a choice
70:10
but if you pretend that you have
70:12
knowledge and it's just the knowledge of
70:13
it that's driving you
70:14
you're being dishonest with yourself and
70:15
with others
70:17
and so so part of the problem with all
70:19
of this is that
70:23
people that present images or
70:26
accidents or laws or whatever it happens
70:30
to be
70:31
out of some kind of method that isn't
70:33
grounded in anything that they can share
70:35
with other people
70:37
are saying just trust me
70:44
i'm making a cringy face for those those
70:46
of you that are at home
70:47
i traditionally
70:50
people that say just trust me rather
70:53
than your own reason
70:54
don't do good things in the world yes
70:56
yep and
70:58
let me just say it to bookend this this
71:00
whole little section
71:01
for for the pastor in philosophy
71:03
community
71:04
that's listening and maybe bent on more
71:07
of the religious end
71:08
that's probably me i'm doing what you're
71:11
doing which is
71:12
having all sorts of biblical quotes that
71:14
refute what these guys are saying in
71:15
some way shape or form or make ourselves
71:17
feel better about it whether it's
71:19
test the prophets test the prophecies at
71:21
all time and blah blah there's all sorts
71:23
of scriptures that all of us are
71:24
thinking of right now that could we
71:25
could actually sling back at these guys
71:26
and say you know we could get into a
71:28
debate
71:29
i want to encourage you to just turn
71:31
that down
71:32
and listen this is what i'm trying to do
71:35
i don't
71:36
agree with every single thing that's
71:37
been said in the last 15 minutes but i
71:40
sure do respect where these guys are
71:42
coming from
71:42
and i sure do want to hold my faith
71:45
in a place where i can i can receive
71:48
some criticism and i can receive some
71:49
challenges
71:50
and just still breathe in and out and
71:52
have the world be okay
71:54
and actually have that be a healthy
71:55
thing that we're actually
71:57
submitting our faith submitting our
71:59
beliefs submitting what we think is true
72:02
to the light of day and that's okay
72:05
basically what i'm hearing from you what
72:08
i'm taking away
72:09
is pastors need a whole lot more
72:11
humility
72:12
pastors need a whole lot more honesty so
72:15
i would 100
72:16
agree with you on that and you're
72:17
actually then when you do that when you
72:19
come from a place of epistemological
72:20
humility
72:21
you're building a culture that is
72:24
actually a little bit
72:25
quite a bit more mature and quite a bit
72:28
more
72:28
i don't think you're going to have all
72:29
the faith crises that you see in the
72:31
church right now when you have a little
72:32
bit
72:32
of epistemological humility and you hold
72:35
your faith with open hands knowing that
72:37
doubts
72:37
and uncertainty is just part of the
72:39
thing because we're operating in
72:41
faith not certainty and i would also say
72:44
this the word pastor you know our
72:46
podcast is called pastor and philosopher
72:47
walking to a bar
72:48
but i think actually i think the word
72:49
pastor is way
72:52
too far stretched in our church world
72:55
that like for me being i'm not a very
72:57
good pastor to be honest with you and i
72:58
don't even look at my
72:59
if i could change my title i would i
73:01
don't see myself as a pastor
73:02
because i see pastors as shepherds of
73:04
people's souls who
73:06
the people who are uniquely equipped or
73:08
have that in them to walk with people
73:10
and care for their souls and to hear
73:12
about
73:12
all of their world that's pastoral to me
73:15
that's not so much me
73:16
i'm more of a church leader i'm more of
73:18
a preacher i'm more of
73:20
a a leader and i leave the pastoring to
73:23
people who are really good at that
73:24
around us but we take
73:26
all of those things and we lump them
73:28
into this one role this one title called
73:29
pastor and
73:30
give that man usually all the power and
73:33
all the authority
73:34
and what he says goes and that's a super
73:36
unhealthy dynamic so
73:38
i'm i'm with you nick hey i know the the
73:41
book is still
73:42
in progress but is there a way that
73:43
people can follow i didn't see on
73:44
twitter or anything like that but is
73:46
there is there a way that we could
73:48
have have people aware of when no
73:52
no i you i have a website i uh i
73:55
so so so i am very much of the mindset
73:58
that the uh that the artists that create
74:01
work and then burn it immediately
74:02
afterward are
74:03
are right um
74:06
like i i don't have anything to promote
74:08
nor am i interested in promoting
74:10
uh i
74:16
so you don't want me to put your website
74:18
in the show notes no
74:20
no of course not because then people
74:21
will go to my website my website
74:23
has one function for listeners
74:26
that i will absolutely not put nicholas
74:28
oshman's
74:29
website in the show notes no really
74:31
really do not see
74:32
that m-a-m
74:37
self-promotion is such an odd thing to
74:38
me and and i
74:40
i would quite like to die in obscurity
74:43
frankly like the idea of doing a podcast
74:45
is
74:46
is something that i would only do as as
74:48
a deep
74:49
obligation i have to my friend
74:53
i was shocked you said yes i
74:56
uh if you would have sent me the
74:57
questions first and especially if it
74:59
would have been the questions
75:00
about me just conjecturing about
75:02
charisma for
75:04
45 minutes um then
75:07
i would not have but
75:10
here's what it is well i'm i'm glad that
75:13
i can make you uncomfortable you are
75:14
very gracious with me nick
75:16
i appreciate it so what i will say is uh
75:18
i hope i wasn't uh
75:19
too frustrating and and one of the
75:21
things i told kyle was and
75:23
everything i've seen evidenced obviously
75:24
i don't know you well randy but
75:26
the title isn't the thing that matters
75:28
for you and so
75:29
that i'm critical of the structure i'm
75:31
even critical of you
75:32
in the structure because it's the
75:33
structure itself that i'm critical of i
75:35
don't want you to take that
75:36
uh as me being critical of you and your
75:39
activities
75:40
which i appreciate that is something
75:41
really worthwhile i appreciate it elliot
75:43
i don't know you so i
75:45
you seem like a good sound designer
75:46
don't don't uh do don't put any nice
75:48
music behind anything i say or they say
75:51
except the moment when i am uh
75:54
pretending to be saying something
75:56
meaningful then you can really lay it on
75:58
it's happening right now it's it's
75:59
already too late
76:02
nick nick really thanks for thanks for
76:05
being here it's my pleasure thank you
76:18
guys
76:22
thanks for spending this time with us we
76:24
really hope that you're enjoying these
76:25
conversations as much as we are
76:28
and if you are help us get the word out
76:30
before you close your podcast app leave
76:32
a rating or a review if you'd like to
76:34
share the episode you just heard
76:35
with a friend or a family member you can
76:37
find those links on our social media
76:38
pages
76:39
this has been a pastor and a philosopher
76:42
walk into a bar