You're listening to, atheistically speaking. Oh, Hello and welcome to Atheistically speaking.

This is episode number 112 with your host Thomas Smith.

Okay, today we are continuing the fantastic interview.

Not really an interview, it's more a discussion.

We just had a bit of a debate, bit of a discussion,

not really much interviewing going on now that they think about it.

So part two of our discussion, our

exploration with Justin Sheber. Very fun stuff and here we go. Well, yeah, so all I'm saying is that while Theism does predict moral agency, I would argue. It does not predict the particular kind of

moral agency that we actually see that is a embodied moral agency. That is a moral agency where quite clearly the moral capacities of it are very much

dependent on proper brain function of certain areas of the brain localized.

That's very surprising.

So you could argue, as Draper does, when he points out that arguments like the fine-tuning

argument, they understate the evidence.

They're pointing to a general fact about the observations, but they're not, they're kind of

ignoring the particulars and the particulars are very

countervailing the particulars seem to point much more towards naturalism so in one of

the episodes of reasonable doubts I kind of gave an analogy to unpack Draper's point on this where you move in

across the street from this or you live at a I love analogies you live at a house

and all of a sudden you have a new neighbor that moves in across the street right and and you just happen to be reading earlier that day and some some you know car and driver magazine or something that the car they're driving

they do they your new neighbors do you just pull up you happen to read that that car

won all the major tests in it is scored the highest possible rating and safety

all the way on down the line and every test right and you're like oh well quite

...