Is the Universe Contingent? Responding to @SansDeity

This clip is from my response video to Matt Dillahunty with Josh Yen. We talk about necessity and the cosmos. Full video linked below.

-------------------------------- GIVING --------------------------------

Please consider becoming a Patron! I am a full-time student, so your support helps make our content better and provides me Ramen money.


--------------------- YOUTH APOLOGETICS EMPIRE -------------------

----------------------------- SOCIAL MEDIA ---------------------------

-------------------------------- PODCAST -------------------------------

I now have a podcast! Be sure to give it a follow and to stay up to date on all of my content.

-------------------------------- CONTACT -------------------------------


-------------------------------- PLAYLISTS -------------------------------

[Oskar]

1:46 Sounds like that duality could be cut along abstract/concrete or causal/acausal lines just as well as the physical/non-physical

[LastDaysIntercessors]

Who's the guest? Does he have a YT channel?

[shefqetkupina]

I like this. How can I join you guy on this path. Because this is a pice of my puzzle and if i dont find this pice of the puzzle i fail the big test ?

[fanghur]

One point I'd like to make regarding this is that I don't think it's necessarily correct to say that physical things tend to be contingent whereas non-physical things like logic, numbers, etc. tend to be necessary. I don't think the relevant dichotomy there is 'physical and non-physical' as such, rather I think the actual relevant dichotomy there should be seen as being "concrete vs abstract". The examples you gave of numbers, logical truths, etc. aren't really 'non-physical', or at least I don't think that's the most useful way of labelling them. Concrete entities tend to be contingent, while abstractions tend to be necessary. Now, the obvious problem there for the theist is that if a God exists, that God would be definition be a concrete entity rather than an abstract one. Honestly, pretty much every argument against the universe/physical reality being 'necessary' would seemingly work just as well as arguments against the idea that God is necessary, especially if we're talking about any conception of God in particular.

[TPerez]

Good job
I think you could get your point across a little better if you slowed down a little and stopped saying “like” so often.
Your content is very good though

[royhiggins]

Christian appoligists always claim that there couldn't be morality without a God. My question is why is my morality superior to the morality of Christians? Which God do you think gives me my morality since it couldn't be the Christian God since my morality is superior to theirs?

[Oskar]

I can imagine God being different, I can imagine the universe being different. No symmetry breaker there.

The argument from limits seems to be the thing theist comes back to all of the time. I think it appears in almost any stage 2 nowadays. Putting all the eggs in one "intuitive" (to some) far from ordinary experience methodological hunch seems unwise to me.