¶1Joe Schmid, my friend and a young philosopher, has changed his mind about belief in God. What happened? What explains that? I want to share with you my perspective as a philosopher who has been in touch with Joe Schmid since when he was in high school. Now, I've been trying to make this video.
¶2I've been wanting to make this video and every time I attempt to make it, I seem to get blocked for whatever reason. And I'm not sure what's going on here, why I keep getting blocked. Maybe it's because this is a very personal topic. And once I get into this mode of presenting philosophy, I get into kind of like a public persona, you know, like I'm performing. I'm giving you the argument with a sequence of steps.
¶3But when I'm talking about something more personal, the performance feels inauthentic. It feels like it's alien to the relationship. And what I actually want to do is be present with you and share with you a real story about my experience with Joe and offer my comments about his particular views, including his arguments for Catholic theism. He's got these arguments from miracles for Catholicism. Something that I love about my relationship with Joe, it's like a beautiful great relationship where we provide tension for each other.
¶4When I was arguing for the existence of God, giving my best arguments, Joe was giving his best criticisms of my arguments. And we've had public conversations and personal private conversations where Joe and I, it's like we're sparring, creating tension for each other in the idea landscape. And we're not just debating like any insignificant question. We're debating a question that seems to be at the heart of what people care about. So much meaning is attached to the question of whether God exists.
¶5In fact, there are even debates about whether meaning should be attached to that question. And those debates already reflect on a metal level the way in which people care about this question of God's existence. They even care about whether we should care about the question. So now Joe comes out as not only a theist but as a Catholic theist with a specific kind of Catholic apologetics from miracles. And I was thinking that since Joe is a friend, you know, he's he's part of my team in a sense.
¶6And because he's part of my team, who am I to critique his arguments? But the thing is is he's always given me the gift of a critique of my arguments for the existence of God. And so in the continuing tradition of our friendship, it seems actually fitting for there to be a new type of tension where he has arguments for a belief and I offer some critical commentary. The goal is not to destroy his beliefs, but it's the same goal that he had for me, which is to give me the gift of seeking truth with clarity. So, that's what I want to offer.
¶7But first, let me just share a little bit more about the backstory between Joe and I. When Joe was late in high school, he reached out to me with a question about one of my arguments and uh some ideas of his own. And at that time I discovered very quickly that Joe is a bright light. As I interacted with him on his questions, he continued to ask other questions and he also sent me a paper and he asked for my advice on on on the paper and I thought it it could be a publishable paper but the style of presentation was was not up to the standards of a professional philosophy paper. I was very impressed by Joe because what I did was I gave him a sample paper from from one of my writing mentors, Nathan Ballentine.
¶8He's got a skill and a gift for writing. I remember being in a a seminar with Alvin Plantinga and Nathan Ballentine was offering Elvin Planinga advice on Alvin Plinga's work and Alvin Planinga was nodding and integrating and listening to to Nathan Balentine's uh advice. And this is because Nathan Valentine has attentioned to presentation in such a a great and beautiful way. He's helped me to to see the value of presentation. And so I passed along that model over to Joe Schmid.
¶9And in one revision, Joe turns his paper into a paper that I consider to be publishable in a philosophy journal. Now, this was when he was in high school. So at that time, I became very excited. It was just like I found this treasure that nobody knows about and I get to be prideful about seeing the greatness of this this other person and seeing how I believe that he's going to rise and shine and uh and he has he has published as an undergrad in philosophy. He got into Notre Dame as an undergradu uh also Purdue.
¶10He he ended up going to Purdue and then at the end of his undergrad, he applied to graduate schools. I wrote him a a letter of recommendation to Princeton. And this was the best letter I have ever written for any student. It it wasn't like I said, Joe Schmid is in the top 1% of students. I just put my cards on the table.
¶11I said he's the number one young philosopher I have seen and you will not regret admitting him into your program. All right. Now, I feel like I could just go on about this. I I I want to say maybe something else about my connection to Joe behind the scenes. I mean, some of you may be interested um in my role and my mentorship.
¶12He would call me a mentor. And there was there was a point in my connection with him where I felt that I needed to kind of like let go of my mo my own interest in persuading him by my arguments. So early on there was this excitement. You know, he was an atheist. He was an atheist, not agnostic atheist.
¶13And I suggested to him that he could change his uh his screen name from naturalistically inclined. That was his I think he had like an email address. Naturalistically inclined. I said you could change it to um rationally inclined. That was my new identity that I I offered him because I didn't think that he needed to be a naturalist to have his core values towards reason.
¶14And it was around that time that he came up with the majesty of reason which I just love that that's so beautiful the majesty of reason. So he changed his name right from naturalistically inclined he was an atheist uh he became agnostic reading some of my work and through those conversations and um the work of my colleague Alexander Puce and others I mean he was a machine uh absorbing lots of information from many corners. So he changed he he became um agnostic. But at that time I got excited. And it was like okay well that's you know there's progress here so now let me give you my arguments for why you can go from agnosticism to theism and in the process of that Joe created some kind of I want to call this intellectual tension by critiquing my arguments step by step and this was a great gift to me I have the Joe avatar in my mind and he's a skeptic even when he doesn't talk to me I I can imagine what he would say I could just play the the Joe skeptic and it helps me to think, okay, there's an objection here and then somebody can say this and that and that sharpens me.
¶15That's good. So, he's offered me those gifts. But I had this moment of just letting go. I felt like something inside me said, don't try to convince him. Just support him.
¶16Delight in his work, you know, allow him to sharpen you. And so that that's what I did. And it was freeing. It this wasn't a strategy like, oh, if I let him go, then he'll come back or something like a relationship, you know, let her go and then she'll come back to you. No, it wasn't like that.
¶17It it was really just like I felt like my own integrity told me that I need to actually value his ideas as they are and think about them just for their own value rather than have any any kind of agenda. So that's what I did and we've just continued to stay in touch over the years. Uh he's continued to provide instruments for for sharpening me. So when he reached out to me and he told me that Josh, I'm very excited to share this news. And I haven't shared it publicly yet, but I will.
¶18He shared with me his transformation. I was kind of surprised actually, maybe shocked. Now, let me be clear. I saw him moving toward theism that the theism didn't really surprise me, but it was the specific Catholic apologetics and then the appeal to miracles that surprised me. And my first instinct was to tell Joe, here's my advice to you.
¶19Hold your cards close. You've developed a reputation for virtuous thinking and for um following, you know, the majesty of reason and the light of reason and clarifying. You're very good at clarifying things. And so I wanted to say hold your cards close. You don't need to share your personal private um views about religion.
¶20This, by the way, is the same advice people gave me when I was in graduate school. it, you know, it's good strategy to show up as a philosopher. Don't publish in the philosophy of religion. So, this was advice I was going to offer him, but I saw that it was too late and he's already on the train to share his story. And in a sense, good for him for the courage to actually just share what he thinks about whatever it is that he's thinking about.
¶21So, he's a very exciting person and I love to see his his inspiration and the work that he's doing and the passion and the energy that he brings. And I think that something that he consistently brings is a kind of virtue to really see where evidence and reason can lead while respecting a variety of rational standpoints. And this is something that comes through his work, he embodies and displays intellectual virtues. But now at this moment, you might think that because he's arguing for a a specific religious perspective, now that's calling into question some of these intellectual virtues that you've seen on display. if you followed his work over the years.
¶22Now, I think it's actually too simple and unfair to the atheist community who worries that there are psychological motivations. It's unfair to say to that community, look, you're being inconsistent. You saw his virtues when he was agnostic, but now if he has beliefs you disagree with, now you're not going to see him as intellectually virtuous. I think that there's a lot going on. And I want to talk about this because philosophers who are after the truth face a challenge.
¶23And the challenge is that many things call for our attention. And there are these sort of reverse patterns of pressure. Let me describe one of these that I've experienced. And I think many of you on the path to truths, there are many truths to have, can relate to these. So I find that in the popular sphere outside of academia, there's a certain kind of pressure to fit in with the majority view.
¶24If the majority view in your culture is some kind of theism and maybe there's a more specific religion of your culture, whether it's Islam or Christianity or Hinduism, you might feel that kind of pressure to be absorbed by the the safety net of the main view. And when you have that experience and you come to value truth and maybe you even come to find evidence in a pathway that leads you away from the mainstream view, you get a lot of push back and pull back. A common experience that people have and I can relate to this is where if you leave certain views behind and you go back to the community who has those views and you offer your treasures of insight, they weren't asking for those treasures of insight. They don't see them necessarily as treasures. They might see them more as threats that might now start responding to you by offering to you reasons that you already are aware of ideas that you already know that you were sort of um familiar with from childhood.
¶25It's like you're on a journey that includes some of these original ideas and you've gone past that and you've awakened in a sense to see that the the dominant view of your culture doesn't necessarily represent the truth. Especially when you see that other cultures have different views. And even if you talk about theism as sort of a a majority view, there are different versions of theism located in different places. And again, even if you have a core theism that's in common across many different views, it still takes a certain kind of courage to follow evidence to truth or to questions that threaten your safety and belonging to the community. So this is a common experience that many people face when they move into a realm of skepticism.
¶26Now I want to come back to this point about the reverse pressure because philosophers we're sort of strange I guess uh in different ways in many ways we're strange many different ways but in one particular way is that for many of us we've had that experience of seeing the value of truth realizing that truth doesn't necessarily align with what the groups believe what the majority believes and for some of us we have this experience leaving a certain kind of religious worldview, but then following reason and evidence back to a certain core that's located in that religion, let's say theism, the some general belief in the existence of God or even more specifically God's works uh specifically through revelation within the context of history that could support the lines of of a certain religious perspective. Well, now it looks like you're protecting the the religious view. I mean, it sort of looks like you haven't actually awakened to the value of truth. It looks like what's going on is that you're prioritizing your need to belong. But what's missing here is that philosophers have a very strong desire to belong to the community of philosophers.
¶27I've seen this time and again where young philosophers in grad school or in early in career, they will distance themselves from the mainstream religion of their youth or their community in order to have a greater belonging with their peers. Now, let me be clear. There's sort of an intellectual side of this and then there's a a sort of a practical side. On the practical side, I'm talking about you're not going to advertise your religious views. But on the intellectual side, there's also rewards for seeking and celebrating evidence that may be outside of the main lines because it's it's a clear signal that you're capable of independent thinking and you have the courage to be an independent thinker.
¶28Are are you following what I'm saying? It's it's like there's this pressure to belong. So that if you actually take a view that is in the minority among the philosophers like for example you you believe in idealism or you believe in uh theism or you believe in in Catholic theism. Now you can experience a structurally similar type of social pressure with respect to the philosophers that many atheists experience with respect to the dominant view in their culture. I've often had this experience where I felt like I was in a values alignment with skeptics of religion even while I was a skeptic of some of the mainstream views that philosophers were holding because it takes a certain amount of valuing truth independent of the tribes and independent of the communities to actually be honest with your own light to be honest with your your own view.
¶29I'm not saying anything specific about like which view is correct. I'm talking about what it's like to be a person seeking after the truth and having pulls and pressures to join majority groups. It's either the majority group in the in the culture outside of academia or it's a majority group within academia specifically among philosophers. Now, many of you know that the surveys of philosophers, they're they're mixed depending on the field of philosophy. So, philosophers in general tend to be more atheistic.
¶30And I think there's a partial explanation for this just in terms of of of the the job opportunities for people who become skeptics of mainstream religion or of theism. Many of these who become intellectual leaders, they don't have job opportunities to become like a priest or religious leader or to do anything uh within the communities that require belief in God. But there's this other area of research and of thought uh discussion and development that doesn't require belief in God normally. and and in these places then you have opportunity to become a professional philosopher. Now if you do believe that God exists then maybe you're more likely to be attracted to the field of philosophy of religion that deals with that question of of the existence of God and the problems of evil and the nature of God and so forth.
¶31So perhaps it's unsurprising that surveys show that that the majority of those who work in the philosophy of religion do lean towards belief in God. However, what these surveys leave out is this pattern of belief change that seems to be under the radar because most people aren't visible in the way that Joe Schmidt has become visible. Joe Schmidt is visible because his skepticism of the religion of his youth was visible uh through his YouTube channel, through his publications and writings. And so if he changes his mind about that, then that that gets more attention. But this is a this is a pattern actually that's not very uncommon.
¶32Quite a few philosophers have this experience of being skeptical of the sort of main views of their culture with respect to the existence of God and religion and then going through a stage of of agnosticism and and then studying the arguments and revising their belief and coming back to some form of theism. more sophisticated in that than that original childhood version of theism, but they come back to some form of of theism and often more specifically some some religious context for that theism. Now, not always. There are also cases where religion uh belief revision goes the other way where you have young philosophers who go into philosophy and they they lose their theism because and as they study the arguments. There was a study by philosopher Helen de Cruz who studied belief revision among those who go into the field of philosophy of religion and unfortunately the study has a small sample size and there are questions about how to interpret the data but it looks like among those who changed their mind about the question of God's existence more of them changed towards theism than away from theism as they went into uh the field of the philosophy of religion.
¶33Again, not every case, but just more goes in one direction rather than than the other. This could be explained in many different ways. And this also is is about the tribes and the communities because what I see is that a lot of times these tribes will now celebrate the person who has the belief on their side. So if I say I believe in God, then the theists can sort of celebrate me and then elevate me and help and tell me to to represent them in the debates. If I if I say no, no, I I don't believe in God anymore.
¶34I'm an atheist now. right now the atheists can celebrate me and elevate me and so that now again there's this kind of social pressure to belong to these communities. So how do you seek the truth? I mean really pay attention to what's actually true in the face of these pressures. So I mentioned Joe Schmidt uh that he had this pattern of doubting God and coming to believe in God.
¶35And I've I've seen him behind the scenes. We've talked about various arguments and he cites a philosopher Dustin Krummet uh as a co-author of a paper that influenced his belief on psychophysical harmony. Now I was in graduate school with Dustin Krummet and his story is actually similar to Joe's in the sense that he was raised in a religious context became skeptical of his religion valued truth and the evidence that would lead to a wider picture of reality and in grad school was agnostic. I remember having a conversation with him, friendly conversation about principle of sufficient reason and the existence of God and I I liked uh Dustin. I appreciated his his work and and thinking in philosophy.
¶36Um and later he told me that he was persuaded towards theism and he has a story I think it's on a capturing Christianity blog where he describes um some of that transformation for him. Well, his story is not very well known. It's maybe more wellknown because he's talked about it, but it's not as well known as Joe's story. Now, Joe is citing Dustin Krumman. If all you heard from Dustin about Dustin was through Joe, you would think, oh, Dustin is one of those Christian philosophers, you know, who didn't have the courage to leave the religion of his youth and just post hawk rationalize his beliefs.
¶37Like I said, I think it's it's more complicated. I don't think it's one way or the other. I think all of us are susceptible to these these pressures and in a sense I think that's why we do need each other instead of thinking of the other team the other team that disagrees with us as a kind of enemy or as a threat that we have to keep pushing away or belittling. If we can see them as actually playing a role to sharpen us to help us see things from new angles then we continue to expand. We don't just change our belief one way and then another way.
¶38I remember uh a young thinker out there in the internet sphere, I won't name him by name in this moment, uh said that he has changed his mind about some kind of Christian theism multiple times, like maybe five times or something. And that to me tells me that he's picking up insight through every change, through every transformation. Because as a as a truth seeker, if you're tracking the truth, what you see is that there are many truths to track. There's not just one version of theism. There's not just one version of Christianity.
¶39There's not just one version of Catholicism. I want to say it like this. There's like this epic connection that Joe and I have with each other. It's epic. In the epic story of reality, Joe and I have an epic connection.
¶40And it's a connection where we create tension for each other. And that tension provides gifts of opportunity to clarify our views. And so instead of saying you know what I just love Joe so much that I won't offer any critical commentary I will offer Joe the same love that he offered me which is was a consistent stream of critical commentary. So I'm going to just comment on his Catholic apologetics. This will be a brief sort of concluding section of this video.
¶41My main message that I want to share is just my experience behind the scenes of Joe's transformation. And just to say that um I see in Joe intellectual virtue as his core value that this shows up in his work. It shows up in the way that he deals with skeptics of his own ideas, the charity, the way in which he doesn't just simplify opposing views. I mean you should read his recent article on this new harmony harmony and you should read how he talks about ailian view and these other views. He he doesn't overplay his hand.
¶42He he doesn't say, "Oh, and the solution to this puzzle is Catholic theism." He's very sophisticated in his approach and very honest in his display of the the options for people to think about. He also is very careful. He he doesn't just rush to the conclusions. He's a very careful thinker. And so if he's saying there's some evidence here for a specific revelation of God that's sort of categorically in kind like it's a probabistic case for that specific revelation that's like the kind of evidence that led him to theism in general then I see this as pure intellectual honesty with the knowledge and awareness of the psychological reasons not to be honest in that way.
¶43Like he's not naive to know that he's going to get pushed back. And the push back is kind of a filter in a way. It's a filter for those who see him. I experienced this in my life. You know, who sees me?
¶44You know, I think there's a lot of people and people will see different aspects of you. But if you take the steps of courage to just shine whatever you are currently with the honest awareness that you might be wrong, with the realization that you are limited, I think you end up offering more to the world. And so this is something that that I see in Joe's story here is that he's offering his present best view of reality for all of us. And I think that is a gift. So okay, now my critical commentary I want to just grant you this is about his case from miracles for Catholic theism.
¶45And just a few disclaimers here. My commentary here is not about Catholicism. There are different versions for any tradition. There are different versions of that tradition. And there are many kinds of arguments for that tradition.
¶46rather my commentary is purely focused on his particular case for Catholicism for miracles. Also, another disclaimer is I'm not going to suggest that the case that he's presented embodies the fullness of all of his considerations. Obviously, it is not. I mean, he could talk for 100 hours and that wouldn't give you all of his thousands of hours of of considerations and experiences. However, I think it is helpful to focus in on um this one kind of argument from miracles for Catholic theism.
¶47And I want to just tell you why I'm not convinced that that argument points to Catholicism to the exclusion of other traditions. And it it comes down to really one simple idea. I'm going to just grant for sake of argument the the claims and that they're all vertical. Miraculous claims are all vertical. I've looked at lots of different types of claims of experiences and I I've analyzed experiences of of healing of um near-death experiences where people have experiences of healing and the experience of seeing God and all these different experiences.
¶48I've I've been fascinated by these and what I see is that every tradition tends to have a collection of these these particular claims. And if you have lots and lots of claims, then it's maybe not even surprising that each tradition would have a collection of claims that on the spectrum of credibility, these are more credible. But I want to just grant again that the claims are not just credible, but that they're true. The linking premise that this points to the core doctrines of Catholicism is the one that I want to challenge. And here I'll just be very honest.
¶49Like look, I I could be wrong. So, I I realize I can I can hide in the safety of the theory and be general. And um I'll just tell you where I'm at. This is where I'm I'm seeing things in experiences that people have of leaving their body in these classic near-death experiences. I' I've looked at thousands of these.
¶50Now, in these experiences, it's unanimous that the experiences point to a reality that is not exclusive to a particular uh tradition. I have not seen any experience from a near-death experience that pointed to a tradition and said this is the only way. Oftentimes quite the opposite actually. They get information that what matters most in life is love and lessons of love and uh developing through the trials of life an expansion of your understanding and that your life is important and you have a purpose here. that that purpose is not specifically tied to essentially to a particular religious perspective.
¶51Now, let me be clear. I'm not advocating pluralism that all roads are equal paths to God here. What I am saying is that when it comes to miracle claims, it looks like there's accommodation going on. It looks like what's going on is that God in his grace, if I can use that term, God, fundamental reality, cosmic consciousness, the supreme source of love and all that is, shows up in various contexts to connect to us in many different ways. We're not all the same and we all need different things.
¶52And sometimes there's a form of connection that is very meaningful to us and it plays an important role. the form is important even if there's a greater more fundamental reality that's not essentially tied to that form. So in my view this doesn't rule out a certain form of inclusivistic Catholicism but it does I think challenge a certain kind of argument from miracles to the vindication of Catholic doctrines. Um I don't think that that is true to be honest. There might be other ways of arguing for those Catholic doctrines, but the testimony of those near-death experiences convinces me together.
¶53I mean, it's not just the testimony of those near-death experiences. I also have an independent argument from reasoning from the foundation of reality and my concept of love and pure goodness to the idea that God's connection to beings would be more inclusive, that the story would include many episodes, including larger narratives. And if we get stuck in one story, we're actually missing a greater story. I think all the different different lives, not just human beings, but all the beings are part of a nested epic adventure of expansion, of integration, of understanding. And every one of us, every one of you has a part to play in this adventure.
¶54And some of you have a part to play as a critic of certain beliefs. And some of you have a part to play as a proponent of some beliefs, at least for a while. And you can take off that hat and put on a different hat because we're not limited by our characters. We're not limited by the parts we play. But when we play our parts and we play our parts well and from integrity, being honest, being aligned to love, listening, being careful to consider the person as more important than their particular position, then we play our parts well and we contribute to the value of all the beings.
¶55in my view because in my view the foundational reality is actually connected to all the beings. It is God and him in whom we live and move and have our being. And so as we live and move and have our beings and we do that well then we in a sense contribute to the great story of reality. So, I do believe that everyone has a part to play and I am excited to be in the story with Joe Schmidt and the tensions that we create for each other as Joe has been a uh formidable skeptic of my views and of my my favorite arguments. I would say the most formidable skeptic of everybody that I've encountered, including various professional philosophers.
¶56Joe has given me the sharpest and most helpful and the most interesting considerations that have helped me think through. I am a skeptic of Joe's particular case for Catholicism through miracles. So, let the tension continue and let the story continue to emerge in ways that I cannot predict. just like making this video. I I felt like I wanted to make this video and I kept starting and going, starting and going and I I had this feeling like I just can't do it.
¶57In fact, I even decided that I wasn't going to make this video. But inspiration caught me again and I thought, let's just try again. And when I tried again, same thing. I felt like I had the stumbling block. Well, I didn't let the stumbling block stop me.
¶58This is beyond philosophy. This is beyond your favorite team or your favorite tribe. This is about living a life connected to your center where you actually have the courage to follow the lines that call you to play your part in the great story. And for me, I really believe I I feel like I' I've felt this that is part of my purpose to share the things that I see not with more confidence that I have and not with less confidence that I have. And presently what I believe is true is that our lives really do matter.
¶59That if you think that God exists, that thought does correspond to an aspect of reality. And if you're skeptical that God exists, that thought also corresponds to some important aspects of reality because not every concept of God corresponds with reality. So, I think that if we can work together and see the treasures that we have to offer while not being afraid to disagree with each other sharply, then I think we'll learn the most, discover the most, and bring about the greatest worldview that the world has ever known. All right. Well, thank you for your consideration.
¶60I hope this video serves you on your journey, on your quest to truth. And I am really serious about this. I mean, I I smile about creating the the best worldview, but I I really do believe that there are more truths than any current package has captured. And even if Catholic Christianity is true, Catholic Christianity is still itself a lens that doesn't give you all of reality. There's more to see.
¶61And I and I would say this about any faith tradition for any faith tradition, whatever value that faith tradition is picking up about reality, there's always more to see. And this I think is a time for human beings to see more through a collective not only understanding of each other but personal alignment and the courage to offer what we presently think is true. So Joe Schmid I commend you for the courage to share what you presently see and to give us the gift of your insight and your understanding. So, thank you for that and I hope that you uh receive everything that I have to offer you in a similar way as a gift of love contributing to the epic tension of our relationship.