Phenomenal Conservatism, Evidentialism, and Religious Epistemology (Dr. Chris Tucker)

Dr. Chris Tucker is a philosopher at the College of William and Mary. In this interview he joins me to discuss his paper, "Phenomenal Conservatism and Evidentialism in Religious Epistemology". In case you're wondering...Phenomenal Conservatism is the view that "If it seems to S that P, then S thereby has evidence which supports P." In the interview you'll see exactly how Dr. Tucker applies this in the context of religious epistemology.

To read the paper in advance, check the link below.

To learn more about Dr. Tucker check out the link below.

Also please consider supporting me financially on Patreon. I'm currently having to work a second job to make ends meet. That means with school starting back, I'm going to have very little time to spend making videos. By supporting me financially, you will help me reach the point where I can quit my second job, and devote that time to YouTube. And, by becoming one of my Patrons you get lots of perks. To find out more go to

[SentinelArchivist]

Various areas of interest and research have led me to this video years later (for the first time). And WOW. This is SO GOOD. Thanks for making this!

[lvincents]

Great interview! Thank you Jordan and Dr Tucker. I am working through this very topic of phenomenal conservatism right now, including a couple of Dr Tucker's papers, and I found this discussion very helpful.

[SolarxPvP]

Disagreeing with Michael Huemer is a rather bold thing to do, haha.

Thanks for the interview. As a phenomenal conservative and Christian, I am thankful that you have made a video on how they work so well together.

[TheologyUnleashed]

Trying to understand his objection to proper functionalism. It sounds like it's similar to my objection which is that it begs the question by assuming God exists and has given us an ability to know Him.

I think bother proper functionalism and phenomenal conservatism fall short due to not talking about qualification (Adhikara). The arborist has the same data as me but he has and ability to make sense of the data which I don't have. A derelict fails to understand the truth of basic moral values due to being in a degraded state of consciousness. I understand the moral standards I understand due to the quality of my consciousness. It follows from this that it's plausible that people in even higher states of consciousness then me perceive God.

Without talking about qualification then reformed epistemology runs into problems because it can't explain disagreements.