Van Inwagen RESPONDS to William Lane Craig #Kalam #God #Infinity

The Kalam Cosmological Argument doesn't work.

[bruhfella]

When a top notch philosopher like Van Inwagen calls an argument “depressing”, I’ll take his word for it that it’s pretty bad 😅.

[danielboone]

I wish I understood philosophy better so I could more accurately determine whose arguments are stronger. But I am already trying to learn so many things and the learning curve is high!

[HarrisonDean]

I literally just found out that you clipped this video. 😂 Apparently, I don’t know how YouTube works. Thanks, Joe!

[heymike]

Infinite collections in mathematics are infinite relations. I fully appreciate how there are at least 2 different non-numerical values for these type of relations.

Ask any mathematician if infinity is a number. More than likely, they will say it is not a number.

[heymike]

Maybe the problem is treating a non-numerical value as if it is quantifiable

[hewhoyawns]

van Inwagen is famous for thinking that a lot of fine philosophy is bad. This is not one of those times.

[heymike]

The number of books, like the number of future events, may proceed to infinity.

[j]

Guy who believes in eternal life doesn't believe in infinities. Make it make sense

[Remiel_Plainview]

Why are those arguments bad? Just curious

[felixsanchez]

When the man who’s written about God removing and duplicating your brain and taking it to heaven when you die, calls your argument bad then you know you’re cooked (jk Van Inwagen is great sometimes)

[shassett]

Brutal. Craig isn't fit to open the door for Inwagen.

[TheBrunarr]

He might be right but the majority of van inwagen's positions are false so it's not saying much lol

[idanzigm]

Idk, like name me 1 object that there is an infinite number of 🤷🏽‍♂️ just because a concept is usable in math doesn’t mean that it actually exists in the real world. And when a concept is uninstantiable in the universe its conceivability does come into question.

[richp]

LOL. I love PVI, but he’s defended much dumber arguments than Craig’s arguments against actual infinites.

[beaulavergne]

Craig was talking about infinity in the past- if there was the sun would have burnt out already- (at least if the Big Bang is the beginning, which science says it was) so Craig is right-

[zemunacnoir]

This such a misrepresentation and a ignoratio elenchi ie a strawman of Craig. Craig isnt saying that you cant have actual infinite simpliciter. He is saying "A collection formed by successive addition cannot be an actual infinite".
I expected more from Peter and Harrison. What a waste. Beyond Brutal....

[aosidh]

"those arguments are really awful" "it's just depressing" 🤌🤌