In this video I take a look at subjective morality and how it is incoherent.

In this video I look at how everything—including everything true—has been refuted by someone, somewhere, so it doesn’t mean anything to say, “that’s been refuted”.

In response to a question to go into the specifics of how theistic evolution works, I do that. It’s still a bit of an overview of the subject, but that’s because going into true detail would take quite a lot longer than the hour and fourteen minutes this video ended up being. Still, I hope that this helps to get people started, at least.

In this video I talk about unsustainable things are intrinsically seductive because they suggest that they have more power/strength/ability/life/etc than they actually do.

In this video I look at rhetorical arguments and accusations of straw men. I also take a look at what rhetoric is and when it is good.

In this video I look at what symbolism isn’t—a secret code for a simple message that could have just been said in a sentence or two—and what it is—the structure of reality presented in a simplified form to make it easier to grasp. Symbolism isn’t a code or a cipher, it’s not about hiding a simple message where clever people will find it. Symbolism is about what makes stories good—it’s about reflecting the structure of reality.

In this video I take a look at when you should do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

In this video I look at the song The Big Rock Candy Mountains and how it describes a dime-store heaven, and how you can see this same sort of thing in all sorts of bad political philosophies which don’t even take themselves seriously.

In this video I look at what I think is the easiest proof for the existence of God, Saint Thomas’s fifth way—the governance of the world.

In this video I talk about the problem of ex-hominem arguments, that is, arguments “from the man”. These are arguments in which the person making the argument uses himself (or, more often, some trait of his) as a premise in his argument. The classic example is “I did X as a kid and I turned out all right” but it’s surprisingly common once you watch out for it. It’s not invalid to do, but it does cause some problems when a person does it, namely, that an ad-hominem argument becomes a necessary and valid response. In the example above, if the guy didn’t actually turn out OK, then how he turned out is not proof that the X was fine to do as a kid.

In this video I look at what artistic interpretations are and how multiple artistic interpretations of the same piece of art can be valid without devolving into nonsense like saying that it’s all in the eye of the beholder or every interpretation is valid.