#SKEPTIMERGENT: convince an atheist of process

Welcome to our first official video project!

Please take a few minutes and watch the following intro video:

YouTube Preview Image

(I recorded and uploaded this video to YouTube in about five minutes. It’s super easy to do!)

For reference, here are the questions I listed:

  • What is gained by embracing a process approach toward reality that would not be gained via other approaches?
  • What kinds of questions does process answer that cannot be answered by a rigid naturalism?
  • What are some of the differences between traditional theistic approaches (which tend to be what atheists are reacting against) and process theism?
  • How does process thought respond to the most popular (“new atheist”) criticisms of religion (via Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett)?
  • How does process thought respond to the more academic criticisms of religion, the “masters of suspicion” (via Nietzsche, Freud, Marx, Feuerbach)?
  • What is a process-influenced “philosophy of science”?
  • How have process thinkers sidestepped the critiques of metaphysics (via Nietzsche, Heidegger, etc.)?

You can submit your videos via Twitter or Facebook, and then we will respond as soon as we can.

Let’s do this!

Also, fellow Skeptimergent contributor Kile Jones posted a video explaining some of his own problems with process thought as an atheist:

YouTube Preview Image

  • spinkham

    When I’ve listened to John Cobb and other process theologians, most of the reasons have been either “I don’t *really* accept human evolution” or “I want there to be true libertarian free will and mental causation”.

    As someone who has a background in AI and evolution that relieves me of the first concern, and is fine with a compatibilist view of free will, are there other reasons why I should accept the process view?

    • spinkham

      In interest of If you want to make an effective case to me this collection of posts tells how, with the first one being more critical:

      http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Mysterious_Answers_to_Mysterious_Questions

      In view of my views which track fairly well with that article series, there are two possible ways to influence me on this issue:

      1) Tell me what to anticipate, positively and/or negatively, if your views are true.

      If you can’t do that effectively:

      2) Tell me why that is an invalid epistemic test, and what sort of generally useful (IE not built specifically to armor your current views like Reformed Epistemology is) epistemological framework makes your mysterious answer better than so many others that have been proposed before it.

      • spinkham

        Bugger. Half edited my intro. ;-)

        Should read: In the interest of promoting a better discussion, I’ll specify more clearly what sort of answer would cause me to change my views. If you want to make …

  • Pingback: VIDEO PROJECT: some responses so far… – SKEPTIMERGENT

  • http://www.facebook.com/dkmiller62 David Miller

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Y5Huug-UA

    My attempt at a video response to Kile Jones’s points about interconnectedness and free will.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X