Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
What is this?
Less
More
Inspiring Philosophy Academy

68 members • $25/month

53 contributions to Inspiring Philosophy Academy
What logic does for us...
Logic gives you what you are rationally committed to based on what you already believe. Here you go @David Cruz and @Cedric Evans . From today's call.
The Resurrection PROVES Christianity (not aliens, not other gods)
I'm free from the writing dungeon, I can finally live! 😆 Okay, the Skool title is a little bit clickbait😅, but here's the manuscript I submitted to a certain Philosophy of Religion journal. Feel free to read it and let me know y'all's feedback regarding the argument's validity and/or how to popularize it! Thanks everyone!😎 Btw, I've made some slight adjustments in the manuscript from the last email I sent y'all @Than Christopoulos @Tim Howard Abstract. The hypothesis “Jesus became alive after execution” leaves open one persistent objection, that its cause remains underdetermined - deceptive spirits, advanced beings, syncretic deities, or natural laws could explain it. However, read against Jesus’ public claims, the signal fixes its meaning (Israel’s god vindicating Jesus). I argue that rivals are either parasitic on the Christian hypothesis or forfeit predicted specificity. The Christian hypothesis is antecedently constrained, while rivals lack independent attestation - causal adequacy does not entail evidential parity. Other evidence or priors can affect posterior probability, but the resurrection with historical context is discriminating evidence favoring the Christian hypothesis. Keywords: signaling theory, resurrection, agent identification, underdetermination, divine deception, Bayesian model comparison
0 likes • 15h
Dope! I'll take a read bro!
🏛️ IT'S TIME 🏛️
Hey guys, the new course is finally HERE and we're super excited to roll it out to everyone here in the group. This will be a course that EVERY tier will have access to. It's called FOUNDATIONS. This course will help you build a firm foundation for learning, answering objections, building logic, and MUCH more. Today we're proud to release our first video within the Meta Skills module of FOUNDATIONS - "Distinguishing Claims, Arguments, and Evidence". This video will start you on your journey of understanding what objections are actually worth your time, and which ones are just straight up baseless claims. These new videos can be found in the "Classroom" Tab We hope to have a new video for you guys every week moving forward! So stay tuned!
🏛️ IT'S TIME 🏛️
2 likes • 22h
B a s e d
I just taught this argument to a bunch of 5th graders.
This past Sunday, I taught the ontological argument! It was pretty cool trying to teach the argument itself, mock objections, and conclude with how we need to use arguments as Christians like a web that holds things together, or as Craig/Moreland put it, chain mail that is interwoven; not like a stack of arguments that necessarily depend on each other. It was super dope seeing them all say the argument in their own words and also have them try at some of the objections (listen in the docs). A takeaway I have is not to underestimate these children. As suggested in the docs, I taught them what possibility means and possible worlds according to philosophy as taught in Craig/Moreland and gave them examples that could make sense to show the difference between possibility and imagination. They also learned about Occam’s Razor when handling an objection, believe it or not. Now, granted, I don’t think I exactly defined it for them so there’s room for growth on my part, but overall, I pray it was a successful class. Now my class has 3 arguments they can give to backup their basic belief that there is a God: Cosmological Argument, Kalam, and the Ontological Argument. They’ve written them down and my hope is that they’ll get the chance to practice them. Feel free to steal these and lmk how it goes for any other teachers. Lmk if there’s feedback on these few things: - As a teacher, if I gave you this lesson, could you follow it and teach it? - is the lesson fun? Or could there be some physical element that really hits all learning styles? - Is it too much, too little, or inaccurate? Thanks fam!
0 likes • 3d
Onto the argument from motion!
0 likes • 2d
@Ben Heinrichs I'm not perfect by any means, but something I notice good teachers do is that they repeat themselves a lot. So they say what they are going to teach (overview), say what they're teaching (diving in), and lastly they say what they just taught (recap). I learned this from Mike Winger I think and it seems to be true, at least that's how I learn. Applying this has been so helpful. Another thing that is useful is mocking real examples/objections similarly to how we do in the community. Asking questions about what was just learned and how the student individually would articulate it themselves is key, then mocking an objection to cause them to critically think is helpful. I do warn you, however, that you shouldn't mock an objection that you don't know the answer to. It kind of defeats the purpose of it all since, to the student, you seem to have just given them a defeater to what you taught so why even learn it? Another thing is practical application. How does what I learn actually apply to my life? This is the hardest part tbh because every student is going to have their own answer. As teachers, it's key to know the needs of the students on an individual level.
Today's Study Hall Hangout
Hey fam! I'm studying trope bundle theory and if there is a contradiction with this and Conciliar Trinitarianism, specifically the Council of Chalcedon (in relation to @Liam Moore 's new video). I'm at work at the same time, but I have long pauses between calls to chat a bit if anyone would like to join :)
1
0
1-10 of 53
Jermaine McClellan
4
52 points to level up
@jermaine-mcclellan-6074
Just a common man sorting through difficult ideas. Such is life!

Active 13h ago
Joined Aug 3, 2026
Powered by