
Walden Pod
Emerson Green
Show overview
Walden Pod has been publishing since 2019, and across the 7 years since has built a catalogue of 113 episodes. That works out to roughly 90 hours of audio in total. Releases follow a monthly cadence.
Episodes typically run twenty to thirty-five minutes — most land between 15 min and 1h 5m — with run-times ranging widely across the catalogue. None of the episodes are flagged explicit by the publisher. It is catalogued as a EN-language Society & Culture show.
The show is actively publishing — the most recent episode landed 2 months ago, with 4 episodes already out so far this year. The busiest year was 2022, with 23 episodes published. Published by Emerson Green.
From the publisher
Walden Pod is a philosophy and science podcast with an emphasis on the philosophy of religion and philosophy of mind. Hosted by Emerson Green of the Counter Apologetics Podcast and the Emerson Green YouTube Channel.
Latest Episodes
View all 113 episodesPhilip Goff x Graham Oppy | Finite Theism vs. Naturalism
Philip Goff and Graham Oppy discuss finite theism and naturalism! You can now buy the paperback of Why? The Purpose of the Universe hereLinktree
Is Consciousness Physical? w/ Miles K. Donahue
Here's my appearance on Mile's Donahue's channel! Linktree
Alex Malpass on Demons and Questions for Atheists
This was originally a livestream on Alex Malpass' channel. Linktree
Finite Theism vs. Unlimited Theism
Finite Theism YouTube Playlist Linktree
Terminal Lucidity: A Failed Anti-Materialist Argument
Does terminal lucidity refute physicalism? Linktree
Young Apologists Interview - Atheism, Hell, Aliens, Mormonism, and the Simulation Hypothesis
I was graciously invited on the Young Apologists Podcast to discuss my backstory, apologetics, atheism, aliens, the simulation hypothesis, the LDS religion, panpsychism, religious experiences, what would convert me to Christianity, and what I would ask God if I had the chance. Young Apologists - SubstackWorldviews - YouTubeMusic by Joseph NiedLinktree
Moral Argument OBVIOUSLY TRUE???
Crashing out over a tweet about the moral argument. Moral Argument Debunked (Playlist) https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLg... Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreen
Bigfoot: Living or Legend?
Micah Edvenson and I have a reasonable discussion about Bigfoot, the no body argument, the difficulty of finding remains in the woods, footprint casts, the Patterson-Gimlin film, the comparison with gorillas and chimpanzees, the compatibility of the volume of eyewitness sightings and the supposed elusiveness of Bigfoot, and many other topics. We also touch on eyewitness reports of ghosts, different types of apparitions, and whether a materialist can credit certain ghost sightings as veridical. Linktree
Michigan Dogman: My Encounter with a Cryptid
My appearance on Otherworld about my experience with a cryptid. YouTube https://youtu.be/bBU8vXNmyFw?si=VD98PzHdcD26nK-aSubstack post going into more detail: https://emersongreen.substack.com/p/t...Linktree https://linktr.ee/emersongreenEpisode 113: The Michigan Dogman Pt. 1 https://www.otherworldpod.com/blogs/e...Episode 114: The Michigan Dogman Pt. 2 https://www.otherworldpod.com/blogs/e...
God & Philosophy of Language (w/ Joseph Lawal)
Does philosophy of language give us reason to think that God, if he exists, is more like us than classical theists expect? I’m joined by philosopher of language Joseph Lawal to discuss an argument from his paper, 'God An Alien or An Alien God?' His argument aims to push us away from the strongest versions of divine simplicity and aseity, but is also potentially a problem for theistic personalists who affirm God's timelessness. The argument, which focuses on the otherness of God (on non-finitist views), leads us to the conclusion that ordinary theological language is either false or meaningless on classical theism. (E.g., “God loves you” would either be false or meaningless.) This poses a major problem for the religious theist and destroys their ability to make predictions and inferences about God based on his attributes. This would not only undermine natural theology, but also harm the sorts of inferences we make about God in ordinary life. *In the conversation, I use the word “prediction” at a few points where it probably would have been clearer to use the word “inference” instead. *There is a lot of information packed into this episode; it may be beneficial to listen more than once. Joseph's channel SPECIAL THANKS TO JOSEPH NIED FOR THE MUSIC FOR THIS EPISODE Support the show
Is mind-body interaction a problem for dualism? Ralph Stefan Weir vs. Ben Watkins
Ralph Stefan Weir and Ben Watkins debate whether there is a sound argument from mental causation to materialism. Is the interaction problem for substance dualism fake or fatal? My interview with Dr. Weir on substance dualism: • You Are A Soul — w/ Ralph Stefan Weir Dr. Ralph Stefan Weir is the author of The Mind-Body Problem and Metaphysics: An Argument from Consciousness to Mental Substance. He teaches philosophy at the University of Lincoln and is an Associate Member of the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of Oxford. Ben Watkins is the co-host of the excellent philosophy of religion podcast, Real Atheology / @realatheology Linktree
Free Will: Still Real
I respond briefly to Alex O'Conner's free will skepticism, specifically to an objection attributed to Schopenhauer: You can do what you will, but you can't will what you will. While I agree that we can't have ultimate responsibility for our actions, I think we can be responsible for our actions. Being the author of one's actions doesn't require anything magical, just that we are (in some sense) the source of what we do and that we (in some sense) could have done otherwise. As long as we have sourcehood and the ability to do otherwise, I think we have free will; and I think determinism is fatal to neither of these criteria. In defense of alternative possibilities, I appeal to Kadri Vihvelin's dispositional compatibilism, the thesis that "the most fundamental free will facts are facts about our causal powers (for instance, our power to decide on the basis of deliberation) and that our causal powers differ in complexity but not in kind from dispositions like fragility, elasticity, and flammability." Kadri Vihvelin on Dispositional CompatibilismInterview with Kadri Vihvelin Linktree
Emerson Green, Tim Mulgan, & Joanna Leidenhag at Durham University
Durham University hosted a conference about panpsychism, pantheism, and panentheism last November, and I was graciously given the opportunity to respond to Joanna Leidenhag and Tim Mulgan. Professor Leidenhag and Professor Mulgan both spoke about alternative models of theism, and I offered a few thoughts and objections to their respective models of God. On Durham's website, you can listen to all the full lectures from the event: https://sites.google.com/view/panpsychismandpanentheism/project-events/durham-workshop?authuser=0Linktree00:00 Emerson Green 15:40 Joanna Leidenhag 23:37 Tim Mulgan 31:00 Q&A
Philosophy of Dreaming
We explore the nature of dreams. We discuss Daniel Dennett's cassette theory, which questions whether dreams are genuine experiences that occur during sleep, instead suggesting that dreams are spontaneous memory insertions at awakening. This theory contrasts with the common view that dreams involve phenomenal states in real time. However, lucid dreaming challenges the cassette theory. We also question the reality of "dreamless sleep" and examine prophetic, precognitive, and shared dreams. Linktree
Aetherism: A New Theory of Consciousness
We explore Paul Draper's "psychological aether theory" or "aetherism". In addition to gravitation, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak interactions, there is a fifth fundamental interaction: A field of consciousness, a world-soul or mental aether that interacts with our brains. "How does the brain produce the mind? It doesn't. Instead, mentality exists quite independently of the brain." Draper's recent work on aetherism is a refinement of a view proposed by William James in his 1898 Ingersoll Lecture on Immortality. James doesn't deny that thought is a function of the brain. Rather, he challenges the assumption that the function in question is one of production. He defends what he calls the "transmissive function" view over the theory that thought is produced by the brain. For James, consciousness pre-exists, with our brain giving finite human shape to experience, like the pipes of an organ shape the trembling air as it escapes from the organ's air-chest. Aetherism can explain the tight correlation between mental and physical states while allowing for their conceptual and ontological distinction, and dispensing with the need for any spontaneous production of consciousness de novo by the brain. Both Draper and James recognize that aetherism leaves the door open to an afterlife, as well as certain psi phenomena. As Draper puts it, "perhaps William James was right to challenge the confidence that most philosophers and scientists have that there is no life after death. For if we don't know that aetherism is false, then we don't actually know that the subject of our psychological properties does not continue to exist after our bodies are destroyed.” William James - Human Immortality Paul Draper - Psychological Aether TheoryLinktree
FATAL problem for dualism?? Response to Monistic Idealism
Monistic Idealism's videoBoth Sides Brigade - Interacting with the Interaction ProblemMy dualism playlistMajesty of Reason on the interaction problemYou Are A Soul w/ Ralph Stefan WeirLinktree
Could you have been an alligator?
We dive into the philosophy of personal identity, exploring whether a consistent "self" persists through time despite physical and mental changes. Is there an essential core that endures transformations? We examine the Ship of Theseus, the deadly and murderous teletransporter which murders people, the “no self” view associated with Hume, mind uploading, Ralph Stefan Weir’s dilemma for transhumanists, and whether Socrates could have been an alligator. Linktree

Philip Goff, Re-Animator
Explore zombieland with Philip Goff and I as we discuss type-b physicalism, the link between conceivability and possibility, Goff’s differences with David Chalmers, and much else related to the conceivability argument against materialism.First Zombie Argument VideoSupport the podcastLinktree
You Are A Soul w/ Ralph Stefan Weir
Ralph Stefan Weir joins me to discuss his book, The Mind-Body Problem and Metaphysics: An Argument from Consciousness to Mental Substance. We talk about the myth of the interaction problem, the connection between theism and the soul, the implausibility of property dualism, substance dualism in Eastern thought, the causal closure argument and energy conservation, a posteriori necessities, modal rationalism, panpsychism and idealism, personal identity, transhumanism, mind-uploading, split brain cases, whether souls are eternal, and much else. Dustin Crummett's interview with Dr. Weir. . .For reference, here are the two arguments from the book we spent the most time on:DISEMBODIMENT ARGUMENT(i) The phenomenal facts do not a priori entail the existence of anything physical.(ii) If the phenomenal facts do not a priori entail the existence of anything physical, then they do not necessitate the existence of anything physical.(iii) Therefore, the phenomenal facts do not necessitate the existence of anything physical.PARITY ARGUMENT(i) If you accept the conceivability argument, you must accept the phenomenal disembodiment argument.(ii) If you accept the phenomenal disembodiment argument, then you must accept the existence of nonphysical substances.(iii) Therefore, if you accept the conceivability argument, then you must accept the existence of nonphysical substances.. . .Linktree
Atheism & materialism are not the same thing
I am once again begging apologists to stop treating atheism and materialism as interchangeable concepts. It's intellectual laziness at best and dishonesty at worst. This was originally a short video posted on my youtube channel. Linktree