Catholic vs. Atheist – 2016-08-02 – David Rand

Mr. Rand is the president of the Atheist Freethinkers association. We had a nice long chat in behind the Sanctuaire Saint-Sacrament church. He was a great speaker, which made editing a breeze.

Transcript

Please excuse any errors as these captions were automatically generated by YouTube.

0:00	my name is David Rand and you’re
0:01	listening to Catholic vs. atheist let’s
0:08	start by just having you introduce
0:09	yourself a little bit your philosophical
0:11	journey up until this point how you got
0:13	where you are what you believe in why
0:14	you believe it I’m an atheist and I have
0:16	been for most of my life since I began
0:20	to think consciously for myself I was
0:23	raised in a Christian household but I
0:24	realized as a teenager that or even
0:28	earlier that Christianity was not for me
0:29	and by the time I was in my early 20s I
0:33	was consciously calling myself an
0:34	atheist but I was nae this since before
0:37	that but I didn’t know what it was
0:38	called for the folks that might not know
0:40	you already by name in Montreal or
0:43	elsewhere what is the group that you
0:45	represent the group is atheists
0:47	freethinkers or liberal apostle at a in
0:50	French my name is David R and I’m the
0:52	president of the Association we’ve
0:54	existed since about 2010-2011 and our
0:58	website is a theology CA or at the ology
1:03	panacea our focus is to defend the
1:09	rights of atheists defend atheists
1:12	against defamation to throw the rights
1:14	of religious non-believers such as
1:17	ourselves to prote secularism as one
1:21	aspect of that and to promote
1:24	philosophical materialism you personally
1:27	and or your group would deny
1:29	supernaturalism anything supernatural is
1:32	that yes we deny the we deny the
1:34	existence of the supernatural although
1:36	it’s a little more subtle than that if
1:38	supernatural phenomena exist and they
1:42	can be detected in any way whatsoever if
1:44	they can be observed no matter how
1:46	indirectly or matter how poorly if they
1:49	can be detected then they’re part of the
1:51	natural world and they’re not
1:52	supernatural anymore and they they’re
1:54	just part of this world and we can
1:57	examine them and study them and and
1:59	that’s part of the natural world and so
2:02	and if they cannot be detected in any
2:04	way then it’s as if they didn’t exist
2:07	and they may as well not exist so either
2:09	there are supernatural phenomena which
2:11	are badly named and they’re just part of
2:12	the natural world we don’t know
2:13	well or they don’t exist
2:16	you mentioned something about the
2:18	defense of the atheist or the defense of
2:20	the non believer in our society it seems
2:23	to me that you’re not in a position to
2:25	need that oh yes we are could you
2:28	explain a little bit about that well
2:29	because things are not too bad you know
2:33	here in a country like Canada but the
2:36	attitudes toward atheism atheists are
2:38	very negative throughout the world and
2:40	atheists are often subject to direct
2:43	persecution for example in in Saudi
2:47	Arabia is an extreme example they
2:49	classify atheism as a form of terrorism
2:51	which is absolutely ridiculous basically
2:53	atheism is illegal in many other Muslim
2:57	countries as well the Saudi Arabia
2:59	apostasy is a crime it’s criminalized
3:03	and maybe in some countries punished by
3:05	death and apostasy means leaving a
3:07	religion and what they what they mean is
3:09	leaving Islam and so to leave Islam to
3:12	become a Christian or to become an
3:14	atheist or anything else is a crime
3:16	which may even be punished by death
3:18	that’s extremely severe even in the
3:20	United States the idea being an atheist
3:23	is considered very bad it’s worse than
3:26	being gay being gay is more acceptable
3:28	now than being an atheist a person who
3:30	is openly atheist could probably never
3:32	get elected in the United States one of
3:34	the ways in which apparently some people
3:36	in the Democratic Party wanted to
3:38	slander Sanders was to call him an
3:41	atheist which turns out he isn’t but
3:44	that was a that’s a form of slander
3:46	because atheists are so badly looked at
3:49	as as having no morality it’s an old
3:51	prejudice which has been around ever
3:53	since Plato or longer called a Thea
3:56	phobia and that’s a major focus of our
3:59	aboot you mentioned Saudi Arabia as an
4:01	extreme example but it brought to mind
4:04	martyrdom are there martyrs of the
4:06	Atheist movement well martyr I don’t
4:09	like the word martyr because there are
4:11	atheists who have been killed for being
4:13	atheists in Bangladesh and in Pakistan
4:18	especially Bangladesh recently very
4:20	well-known high-profile cases I can’t
4:23	recall the names of the victims right
4:24	now but there’s been several in recent
4:26	months and years and they have been
4:29	murdered by is extreme radical Islamist
4:33	groups because they published a blog
4:36	which defended secularism more which
4:38	criticized Islam or which criticized
4:40	religion and so to be an explicit
4:44	non-believer an atheist or secular and
4:46	to talk about it openly can be very
4:49	dangerous in some countries now in my
4:52	religion Catholicism if you explicitly
4:56	die for your faith and it’s your faith
4:57	you’re dying for you are a saint you go
4:59	straight to heaven what is the case well
5:01	the best case scenario for an atheist an
5:03	atheist that atheism is not a faith
5:06	there is no faith it’s simply a
5:09	rejection of fears and and by extension
5:15	supernaturalism in general theism being
5:17	the most important supernatural belief
5:19	the belief in a an all-powerful God as a
5:21	supernatural entity and so it’s not a
5:24	question of faith it’s a matter of
5:25	saying we don’t buy your faith in a
5:29	Creator God you do not share your belief
5:31	and death is the end of life there is no
5:35	afterlife where that’s why this life is
5:38	so important because the only one we
5:40	have and that’s why it is so important
5:41	to live it to the best you know as as
5:43	best we can that’s why it’s important to
5:46	warp drive for justice in this life
5:47	because there’s nobody’s going to get
5:48	punished in the afterlife or get
5:50	rewarded in the app tonight do you
5:51	believe that justice is achieved in the
5:55	overall balance no I think that Justin’s
5:58	vestas is very often not achieved and
6:00	it’s up to us to do it justice will
6:02	never be achieved if we human beings
6:03	don’t work for it that’s the only way
6:06	justice gets done the scales of justice
6:08	they’re supposed to be impartial but if
6:11	the bad guys are getting away with stuff
6:13	and the good guys are suffering then I
6:15	would say the scales have been tipped
6:17	are the scales tipped a little bit a lot
6:19	what is your I think I can’t put a
6:21	number on it but the scales are being
6:22	tipped a lot there’s a whole lot of
6:24	injustice standards of living are rising
6:27	globally so am led to understand from
6:30	the statistics that so there is good
6:31	news nevertheless there is there are
6:34	massive inequalities and there are
6:36	people who don’t have adequate water
6:39	there were adequate food there are
6:41	a women who do not are not able to
6:44	control their own reproduction and and
6:46	so they and their families are condemned
6:48	to poverty by restrictions on their
6:50	sexuality and the reproduction and that
6:52	is a gross injustice it seems that you
6:55	have a picture of reality such that
6:58	justice is an ideal that hasn’t been
7:01	achieved and if we all could get
7:03	together and work towards it maybe we
7:05	could help tip the balance but
7:07	ultimately the record is marred
7:09	throughout history such that will never
7:11	have a perfect record of justice but we
7:13	could just fix it a little bit over time
7:15	and perhaps forget about the bad old i’m
7:17	not i’m not working for perfection i’m
7:20	working for improvement ok the concept
7:22	of perfection is probably a religious
7:24	concept anyway there’s no such thing as
7:26	perfection we want to improve things and
7:28	that we certainly can do when you
7:30	improve are you moving towards the good
7:32	and the perfect and the just we’re
7:34	moving towards towards justice for the
7:36	good yes ok but not toward the perfect
7:38	as I say I don’t really think because we
7:41	would have to agree absolutely wondrous
7:43	on what is what is the perfect situation
7:45	for perfection to exist there’s there’ll
7:47	always be lots of disagreement about
7:49	what direction we should be working in
7:50	but we can most humans can agree that we
7:53	would like to get rid of hunger disease
7:55	or war you know we can agree on a lot of
7:59	things and work toward those things the
8:02	notion of good better best that seems
8:05	valid to a scientific to you well that’s
8:09	good better yeah it’s just if we improve
8:11	from good to better and better to best
8:13	that seems like a logical progression
8:16	yes it’s not offensive to you to move
8:19	from better to best offensive no it’s
8:22	just that I think that these definitions
8:24	are very abstract there they’re abstract
8:28	in there I don’t know if they’re well
8:30	defined I mean the only thing we can
8:33	work for is the better ok ok I mean the
8:37	best is I don’t know what your best
8:39	you’re a bit hesitant to embrace the
8:41	notion that there is a best well I in
8:44	absolute what I what I will not embrace
8:46	is the concept of perfection because I
8:49	don’t think such a thing as possible or
8:52	I don’t think it can even be defined
8:54	pragmatically is it is
8:55	useful to strive for this perfection it
8:58	is pragmatic to strive towards and
8:59	betterment yes it’s making things better
9:01	you don’t aim high you’re never going to
9:03	even yes mediocrity it’s probably a good
9:06	strategy when you talk about justice
9:08	when you talk about achieving justice is
9:10	there an eternal objective standard by
9:13	which you’re judging justice no like I
9:16	said I don’t I don’t think there’s
9:17	perfection but I know that one thing we
9:19	can do is to completely neutralize the
9:22	power of the Catholic Church
9:24	internationally that would be an
9:25	excellent thing because the Catholic
9:27	Church is a motor of poverty and misery
9:29	throughout the planet it doesn’t
9:32	necessarily do it deliberately and
9:33	explicitly but it denies women control
9:36	over their own bodies by restricting
9:37	contraception and family planning and
9:40	abortion and all the various tools that
9:42	that people need and it’s specifically
9:44	women need so that they can plan their
9:47	lives and live better and by not
9:49	allowing them to do that they’re
9:51	condemned to be at the whim of their
9:54	body they get pregnant or they don’t
9:57	they have five children instead of they
9:59	only wanted to or whatever and the
10:01	situation condemns women in particular
10:05	and societies in general to poverty
10:08	creates a whole lot of misery and so one
10:10	thing we can do to make the world a
10:11	better place is to kill the power of the
10:14	Vatican to stop the Vatican to stop the
10:16	Catholic Church from preventing women to
10:18	control their own reproduction I want to
10:20	present you with the two enemies of
10:22	atheism that you mentioned Islam and the
10:24	Catholic Church which one do you fear
10:26	most of which one do you hate more Islam
10:29	and Catholicism being one very large
10:33	current in Christianity are both very
10:37	negative they’re very harmful to
10:40	humanity in different ways it turns out
10:43	that Islam is currently on a bit of a
10:45	roll and it’s extremely dangerous
10:47	because of the radical terrorist aspect
10:51	of Islam Islamic fundamentalism but
10:54	there was a time when Christianity was
10:57	worse than Islam and it’s Christianity
11:00	remains of a force a very very harmful
11:05	force worldwide as well what can you see
11:08	that I
11:09	can’t see about how the church’s harming
11:11	me as a man a white privilege Western
11:13	man or am I not in a position to be hurt
11:16	by the Catholic Church your harmed a lot
11:18	less than other people just be and so am
11:21	i am harmed a lot less than a lot of
11:22	people simple by virtue of living in a
11:25	relatively well-to-do country where we
11:28	have certain basic freedoms that I mean
11:31	it’s not perfect but as a whole lot
11:32	better than to some other countries
11:34	being a man it things like that to the
11:36	harm is highly mitigated for us but it
11:39	still exists I think everyone is harmed
11:43	when people are denied basic rights will
11:47	you be willing to hazard a guess as to
11:50	how I’m suffering in the church I have
11:52	no idea I can’t talk about you
11:54	personally know well I would say that
11:56	Roman Catholicism distorts the relations
12:00	between the genders women by virtue of
12:03	the reproductive capabilities are more
12:06	directly harmed but that harms everyone
12:09	it means that people in general cannot
12:12	plan their reproduction it impacts women
12:15	directly but in it impacts men
12:18	indirectly man who are in relationships
12:20	with women or you know men who want to
12:24	be Father’s or don’t want to be father
12:26	is it the church’s attitude towards
12:29	sexuality in general towards
12:30	homosexuality is very damaging basically
12:32	for the Catholic Church homosexuality is
12:35	okay as long as you’re a member of the
12:37	clergy and you’re sufficiently
12:38	hypocritical but if you are honest about
12:41	it and open about it it’s a sin or
12:43	there’s something wrong with it and it’s
12:45	it basically the Catholic Church is an
12:48	engine for hypocrisy in the field of
12:51	sexuality in general and homosexuality
12:52	in particular and the trouble is it says
12:55	this with the pretense of divine
12:57	authority a priest who happens to to
13:02	abuse someone sexually or even abuse
13:06	them in some other way it’s a little
13:09	different from just an ordinary human
13:11	being who abuses another person because
13:12	that priests is imbued according to the
13:16	Catholic Church with divine authority
13:17	and that means that that gives that
13:20	person a great deal of power which means
13:22	a great
13:23	you love a potential for abuse the
13:25	corruption of the best is the worst well
13:27	I wouldn’t say they’re the best but you
13:31	let their corruption can be the
13:33	corruption of those who have who are
13:35	reputed to be of the best who have the
13:38	authority of as if they were the best
13:40	their corruption yes can be very helpful
13:42	which form of Christianity were you
13:44	raised with I was raised in a Protestant
13:47	church a very liberal Protestant church
13:48	d know the name of the denominations oh
13:51	yeah the United Church of Canada it’s
13:52	the most important Protestant
13:54	denomination in in Canada that’s the
13:56	church I was baptized in okay as a child
13:58	okay and it so it’s very you know it’s
14:01	very open minded compared to two
14:03	probably the majority of Christian
14:05	churches but I think it’s naive to
14:08	credit them or give them too much credit
14:10	for what they’ve done they still hang on
14:13	to the idea of morality being situated
14:18	to create Creator God they’re a big
14:22	proponent of multiculturalism which his
14:28	is become very damaging in Canada
14:30	because it’s used as a as a sort of as a
14:33	vehicle to oppose secularism and I mean
14:37	by multiculturalism it used to mean
14:39	cultural diversity it doesn’t mean that
14:40	anymore and now it means more like
14:42	cultural relativism means that people’s
14:44	attachment to their ethno-religious
14:47	community is more important than their
14:48	citizenship and that’s what’s that’s
14:49	what’s harmful for example when a
14:51	previous Quebec government tried to
14:53	implement secularism here they’re
14:55	accused of being racist and intolerant
14:58	and xenophobic all of which is nonsense
15:00	but and this is all based on the
15:03	ideology of multiculturalism if you
15:05	don’t like it to erase this whereas in
15:07	fact I think that multiculturalism is
15:09	like a soft form of racism but anyway
15:11	the United Church of Canada is a strong
15:12	proponent of that it’s it’s it’s very
15:15	much I call it the religious left we all
15:17	know the religious right you nitrogen
15:19	Canada that’s the religious left do you
15:21	place the Catholic Church on the writer
15:22	in the center oh it’s more on the right
15:24	okay it’s it’s sort of in a classified
15:26	stuff it is the biggest Christian
15:30	organization on the planet I think yeah
15:32	it’s very right-wing but it’s also very
15:36	large and varied and the
15:37	there are left-wing Catholics and would
15:40	you include the Pope by the left-wing
15:41	path no I would consider him as a clever
15:45	marketer and someone not to be trusted I
15:47	think he’s very sort of fashionable
15:49	these days because he says a lot of nice
15:52	things but basically it’s the same old
15:54	same old he’s just a very good he’s a
15:56	really good propaganda it turns out the
15:58	pope is catholic yes yes how you say it
16:01	seems pretty catholic and if we go um I
16:04	don’t know the details but I believe he
16:06	has some pretty close associations with
16:08	the dictatorship in our in his native
16:10	argentina I need to research that
16:12	further but I do know that he was
16:15	involved in administration of a Catholic
16:16	University in Argentina and the
16:18	Declaration of Principles of that
16:20	university and there were there were
16:21	three basic principles and I forgotten
16:23	what two of them were but the first one
16:25	of them and the first was the fight
16:27	against atheism and I don’t think he’s
16:30	changed his opinion on that at all
16:32	basically the idea is that atheism is
16:35	bad because atheism atheists have no
16:38	morals because morality belongs to the
16:41	Catholic Church we we own it that’s what
16:43	the Catholic Church says we own morality
16:44	and that is nonsense what you’re saying
16:46	makes me think immediately of
16:49	Freemasonry because Freemasonry seems to
16:51	have your same objective in mind which
16:53	is the eradication of religion and the
16:55	elevation of reason I wouldn’t say the
16:58	eradication because i would say remove
17:01	its power and then it it will fade into
17:04	insignificance but removing its power is
17:06	a big job I’m not familiar with the
17:09	Masons I’ve heard of them i think i was
17:12	actually accused of being one because i
17:14	was involved in the fight for secularism
17:15	and and sort of the Masons are sort of
17:18	like the Jews of secularism like you’re
17:21	the Jews of anti-catholicism if somebody
17:25	criticizes the Catholic Church so no
17:26	goddamn freemason and so I got accused
17:29	of one of her boots what’s a freemason
17:30	but I believe the Freemasons are there’s
17:33	a large variety there’s a whole gamut of
17:36	them and some of them are religious and
17:39	some are not and some are more
17:42	progressive than others some are more
17:43	anti-catholic than others but there is a
17:46	very old organization or a very old
17:47	movement with many organizations what I
17:50	would say is that I’ve met vegetarians
17:52	who eat meat but that doesn’t change the
17:53	definition of vegetarianism Freemasonry
17:55	has a doctrine your movement and has a
17:59	clear agenda and it seems to me that you
18:01	should be working together because
18:03	you’re you’re very United in your gold a
18:05	secular world with reason as its well
18:09	the most the most secular non-religious
18:12	Freemasons have apparently a political
18:16	position which is compatible with ours
18:18	to my understanding but I don’t that the
18:21	older such an organization exists in
18:23	Quebec of oh yeah this is that there’s a
18:24	freemason lodge right by a church that I
18:27	go to I consider them sort of very
18:30	old-fashioned like sort of old boys club
18:33	almost medieval that like they’re like
18:36	they’re among the original critics of
18:37	Christianity which I think gives to
18:40	their great credit there’s a lot of rich
18:42	pseudo religious ritual apparently and
18:46	also then because they’ve been around
18:48	for so long they it’s a movement that
18:51	started at a time when it was extremely
18:53	dangerous to criticize the Catholic
18:55	Church and so they had to be very subtle
18:57	and careful and and I think that’s part
18:59	of their tradition is that they’re not
19:01	quite open enough in their criticism now
19:03	what do you think of another group that
19:04	I think is very similar and that’s the
19:06	Satanist I’m not familiar with Satan
19:08	this either very similar goals reason
19:11	Liberty from religion what yes I mean
19:14	religion I considered to be at best
19:17	harmless but generally harmful and often
19:20	extremely harmful and we have examples
19:22	that today but the Satanists I’m not
19:25	familiar with they have a taboo to be
19:28	associated with someone with that well
19:30	not me you know no I do have one sort of
19:32	a reservation Satan is it’s a myth it’s
19:36	a supernatural mythological character
19:38	and I can understand if they’re using it
19:40	in a strictly metaphorical boy it means
19:42	and that’s fine but that’s something I
19:44	need to clarify the atheistic Satanists
19:46	are the theistic Satanist also there are
19:49	always like the Freemasons there’s
19:50	something okay well then she I don’t
19:52	know enough about it they seem like
19:53	resources that you have not yet tapped
19:55	but maybe you’re busy enough with the
19:57	regular Joe Blow atheist well I mean in
20:00	addition to atheists there are humanists
20:04	who
20:04	have very similar goals to us there are
20:06	people who call themselves secular but
20:09	they don’t necessarily call themselves
20:10	atheists and they have goals very
20:11	similar to ours and you know there are
20:14	people who call themselves agnostic and
20:16	you know we reject that term but you
20:18	know often they have similar goals
20:19	sometimes not but there’s a whole gamut
20:21	of people with whom we share some values
20:23	do you know any closet atheists that go
20:26	to Catholic Church I don’t personally
20:28	but I’m sure there are he’s probably a
20:30	lot of it is probably have a lot of
20:31	closet atheists in the priesthood for
20:33	that matter yeah I mean I mean those who
20:36	are who have studied the have studied
20:39	the theology long enough who come to the
20:42	conclusion that it’s a house of cards my
20:45	journey from atheism in to Catholicism
20:49	was via western philosophy how do you
20:52	view me psychologically as someone
20:55	that’s gone off the rails how would you
20:57	describe my I don’t know I don’t know
20:59	you personally I don’t know how you
21:01	could get from Satanism to Catholicism
21:03	but at least you’ve informed me that
21:05	your Satanism was atheistic okay so I
21:07	know that now my leap was a very short
21:11	jump from me as God to God has got a
21:14	very short leap you as God yeah this is
21:17	logical outcome of atheism if you’re
21:19	going to ask yourself Who am I how did I
21:22	get here what is the source of my life
21:24	there only two answers I am the source
21:26	of existence or God is no no that’s not
21:29	that’s not correct atheism does not
21:31	posit that the individual is God you am
21:34	NOT God you would lose membership for
21:36	sure if you explicitly said that but
21:38	that is the lodge out in very much you
21:41	do realize that there’s a gnostic
21:42	new-age mole right that people are
21:46	expressly coming out of the closet
21:48	saying i am god you do understand oprah
21:50	winfrey and people like that she said
21:51	are saying that yeah I find the whole
21:53	concept kind of silly anyway why there
21:57	is no God and so we don’t have to be one
22:00	the point I know where we came from we
22:03	came from evolution of other species
22:05	that happened over billions of years and
22:08	you know that’s where we came from do
22:10	you believe in the Big Bang I don’t
22:12	believe in anything in the sense of
22:16	being attached to that as
22:18	belief if if the scientific evidence
22:21	points to that okay then show me the
22:23	evidence would you be opposed to the
22:25	idea that the universe has no beginning
22:27	that i think is plausible yes i mean
22:30	there could of if if there was a big
22:32	bang at the beginning then maybe there
22:34	was something before the Big Bang and
22:35	though so that wasn’t really the
22:36	beginning and you know maybe there’s a a
22:38	bang and is in a shrink and a bang in a
22:41	shrinking every 30 gazillion years you
22:43	know would it be safe to say that you
22:45	prefer a universe that’s infinite in
22:47	both directions past and future would
22:49	you prefer that philosophically because
22:51	then you don’t need to deal with that
22:53	troublesome beginning going from nothing
22:56	to something an eternal universe is
22:59	simpler than one that was created so I
23:03	would have some preference for that but
23:05	it’s only a time you don’t you don’t see
23:07	the logical necessity of a first cause
23:09	in the universe where cause and effect
23:11	determines every no I don’t accept the
23:12	idea that you go back and back and you
23:14	have to stop and there oh and then
23:15	that’s God do you believe in cause and
23:18	effect of course there’s cause and
23:19	effect but there’s also random
23:21	fluctuation and randomness do those
23:24	random fluctuations obey the laws of
23:26	nature the laws of nature are not
23:28	written down in some big book that we
23:31	discover them we see patterns and we
23:33	recognize them and and we predict events
23:35	based on those laws which we make up
23:38	from the data we’ve observed and if our
23:40	predictions turn out to be true then
23:42	that violates the law is probably being
23:44	a good one but it’s there’s nothing
23:45	sacred about them do you believe that
23:47	randomness is truly random and uncaused
23:50	do you believe that randomness is
23:53	uncaused it is not part of the cause and
23:55	effect chain I could ask you I could ask
0:03	you another way are you a determinist or
0:04	do you believe in free will oh that’s a
0:08	huge question and my mind is not made up
0:11	from my limited knowledge of philosophy
0:14	is an extremely difficult question that
0:17	philosophers have been bending their
0:18	brains around for millennia and still
0:21	not solved would you prefer to have free
0:23	will real free will as opposed to just
0:25	the illusion of freedom do you
0:28	experience the illusion of free will at
0:29	least oh yeah I experience the illusion
0:32	but as you say it may be an illusion it
0:34	may be a reality it may be a reality as
0:36	well would that damage your determinism
0:39	with cause and effect in science I would
0:40	have to see how they fit together I mean
0:42	the reality may be some combination of
0:45	determinism and randomness and with some
0:47	portion of free will mixed with a
0:49	certain degree of determinism is free
0:51	will by definition supernatural no free
0:55	will is a scientific notion in the
0:57	laboratory can we test free will can we
0:59	find free will or you’d have to define
1:01	it first before you can test for it I
1:03	mean what are you going to test a human
1:06	being or some animal and how do you
1:08	define free will an action where no
1:13	cause can be found or in principle even
1:17	though in the lab it’s difficult there
1:18	are many things in the lab that are
1:19	difficult but in principle do you think
1:21	that free will follows cause and effect
1:24	is free will bound by cause and effect
1:29	clearly if we have free will it’s not
1:31	infinite you can’t do everything some
1:33	things are possible where where where we
1:35	are bound by certain constraints I can’t
1:37	fly no matter how much free will I have
1:39	if you watch water tumbling over a
1:42	waterfall you would agree that its
1:45	movements are all bound by the laws of
1:46	nature and by cause and effect no its
1:49	general movements but there’s a there’s
1:52	probably a great deal of random motion
25:55:00	within the water at a microscopic
25:57:00	submicroscopic scale I mean molecules
26:00:00	moving around randomly because of their
26:03:00	other particular temperature that’s
26:04:00	thermodynamics if I flip a coin is the
26:07:00	outcome determined by the laws of nature
26:10:00	and cause and effect well if you could
26:14:00	describe and quantify all the variables
26:17:00	maybe but there’s a help a lot of
26:20:00	variables what if it’s a little little
26:22:00	current air current they didn’t take
26:24:00	account of is you know if we in a vacuum
26:26:00	we let a coin fall if it’s in a vacuum
26:29:00	that simplifies things greatly it
26:31:00	removes a lot of variables and you know
26:35:00	it’s completely deterministic unless it
26:37:00	happens to land on its edge and the edge
26:39:00	is infinitely thin and I don’t know what
26:41:00	are you and the
26:43:00	this is when you decide to have
26:44:00	chocolate versus vanilla ice cream is
26:46:00	that decision deterministic in the same
26:49:00	way or is there a different process I
26:50:00	don’t know he’s the complexity
26:52:00	preventing you from having an opinion
26:53:00	about free will just the complexity
26:56:00	that’s probably it yes because I’m I’m
26:59:00	not a professional philosopher and I
27:01:00	think I would have to be one to fully
27:02:00	understand these concepts of free will
27:04:00	in principle would it change your a
27:07:00	theistic worldview if you realize that
27:09:00	free will is real and that it’s
27:12:00	supernatural well first of all a free
27:15:00	will were real and on delusion I don’t
27:18:00	think that would change anything but
27:20:00	your statement that that it could be
27:23:00	supernatural I’d find that a meaningless
27:25:00	statement okay what about your mind if
27:29:00	you came to understand that your mind is
27:31:00	not just activity in your brain it’s not
27:33:00	an epiphenomenon what your mind itself
27:36:00	is supernatural with that change your
27:38:00	atheistic worldview the mind is simply
27:41:00	the result of brain activity if a
27:44:00	criminal commits a criminal act and the
27:47:00	judge sentenced him to prison do you
27:49:00	think that the deterministic scientific
27:51:00	nature of his act removes guilt from him
27:54:00	if there’s no free will if there is no
27:59:00	free will okay but that’s a big if I
28:03:00	think it’s pretty clear that punishment
28:05:00	doesn’t work very well anyway and so I
28:08:00	expect an evolution of criminal law in
28:11:00	the future but I can’t say I can’t give
28:15:00	any details in principle you believe
28:18:00	that we are moral agents we have
28:21:00	morality
28:24:00	well morality is simply intelligent
28:28:00	self-interest who’s a better example of
28:30:00	a moral person the one who lives in
28:32:00	reality or the one that lives in a
28:35:00	delusion I would say the one who lives
28:37:00	in reality would you agree would you be
28:40:00	willing to agree in principle that if
28:42:00	God created you that you owe him worship
28:46:00	and love and obedience in principle not
28:49:00	necessarily and to say that God exists
28:53:00	is it is a humongous leap of faith to
28:56:00	begin with but then even if we accept
28:59:00	that and take that leap of faith why the
29:03:00	hell with that entity need to be
29:05:00	worshipped or adulate it God doesn’t
29:09:00	need anything but let me let me ask you
29:11:00	a different way if you receive love is
29:14:00	it natural for you to reciprocate that
29:16:00	love not necessarily it may be undesired
29:21:00	love his loves about stalking our child
29:28:00	abuse her you know love is not always a
29:32:00	good thing and hate is not always a bad
29:33:00	thing is that all depends on context if
29:36:00	we define love as the church does that
29:38:00	love is the willing of the good of the
29:40:00	other would you say that that’s always
29:42:00	good the willing of the good of the
29:46:00	other it’s I where you well if it’s
29:51:00	limited to simply a wish which app does
29:53:00	nothing then it’s harmless it’s
29:55:00	irrelevant but if it if it leads to
29:57:00	action then that action may have
30:00:00	consequences and it may be misguided if
30:04:00	somebody does something for me without
30:06:00	me asking for it they could do something
30:08:00	I don’t like and I could interpret that
30:11:00	as hostility and not love did you
30:15:00	consent to every loving gesture your
30:18:00	mother made towards you when you were an
30:19:00	infant no but that doesn’t mean I
30:22:00	children are unable to consent to
30:25:00	everything and even adults and we have
30:27:00	our limitations in principle if there is
30:30:00	an all-loving God who doesn’t need
30:32:00	anything but just gratuitously created
30:36:00	you and loves you
30:37:00	and knows that what’s best for you is to
30:41:00	go to him because he’s the source of
30:42:00	everything good and only with him can
30:44:00	you be happy would you be willing and
30:46:00	principle to go to god I’m not going to
30:49:00	answer that question because it starts
30:51:00	with a whole lot of ifs each one of
30:56:00	which is a humongous assumption if you
31:00:00	had a distant relative that you were
31:03:00	unaware of that has lots of money and
31:05:00	that is eager to get in touch with you
31:08:00	to help you with whatever projects you
31:09:00	have yes would you be willing in
31:12:00	principle to meet with that person share
31:15:00	have you heard of Pascal’s wager yes
31:18:00	what do you think of Pascal’s wager I
31:20:00	think it’s a pretty lame excuse to
31:24:00	believe in God I think it’s pretty lame
31:26:00	if you believe in God and God exists you
31:28:00	win if you believe in God and God
31:30:00	doesn’t exist you lose nothing and if
31:33:00	you don’t believe in God but he or she
31:35:00	or it exists then you lose big time but
31:38:00	it’s not true i mean if if you believe
31:41:00	in God and God does not exist and if you
31:46:00	spend your entire lifetime basing your
31:49:00	actions on a belief in God which causes
31:52:00	to do you to do a whole bunch of things
31:54:00	you wouldn’t have done you may end up
31:56:00	wasting your life I mean you could be
31:58:00	doing other things more interesting if
31:59:00	you spend your entire lifetime trying to
32:02:00	please a fictional entity in ways which
32:06:00	do not please you’re either yourself or
32:10:00	other people then why not go through
32:13:00	life enjoying this short precious time
32:17:00	we have here instead of attempting to
32:20:00	please a fictional entity in the hope
32:22:00	that he she or it will somehow reward us
32:25:00	after we’re dead or I’m not sure I have
32:29:00	11 interesting thought experiment for
32:31:00	you I think you find it interesting in
32:33:00	your atheistic worldview what’s
32:36:00	preventing someone if in principle they
32:38:00	could find a way to hide their sick and
32:41:00	malicious pleasure seeking which is at
32:44:00	the expense of helpless victims but he
32:47:00	covers it up to such an extent that no
32:49:00	one ever finds out of course the victim
32:50:00	is fine
32:51:00	they’re they’re not going to tell anyone
32:52:00	and he he gets extreme pleasure from
32:55:00	exerting this power and all the sexual
32:57:00	things he does and he lives life to the
33:01:00	fullest he has all the things that all
33:04:00	of us want in terms of money and
33:05:00	pleasure and dies peacefully in his
33:09:00	sleep in your atheistic worldview what’s
33:13:00	wrong with the choices that that man
33:14:00	made what’s wrong with the choices yeah
33:17:00	because he maximized his pleasure those
33:20:00	types of others and no one ever
33:21:00	suspected him he was treated as a pillar
33:23:00	of the community the what’s wrong is
33:25:00	that we human beings are social animals
33:29:00	we live in societies and no person is an
33:31:00	island but he was the talk of the town
33:33:00	he everyone thought he was a saint well
33:36:00	he was extremely lucky that’s all okay I
33:38:00	mean people were harmed by this person
33:41:00	at first I thought you were positing the
33:43:00	idea of an evil god but you were talking
33:45:00	about an evil human being okay but
33:47:00	that’s another interesting idea the
33:49:00	hypothesis about a idea of it of an evil
33:50:00	God pretends to be good and loving but
33:52:00	no okay you’re talking about an evil
33:54:00	person get that never gets found out
33:56:00	well I mean that that’s that there are
33:58:00	limitations to human justice you know we
34:02:00	don’t always detect injustice you know
34:04:00	there were imperfect we’re limited but
34:06:00	we nevertheless have laws and procedures
34:10:00	to enforce those laws and all of which
34:13:00	are highly imperfect but they’re better
34:15:00	than nothing and the idea is to is to
34:19:00	read out or prevent the most egregious
34:22:00	examples of harming other people do you
34:25:00	think that that person in principle
34:27:00	could exist even though he’s rare
34:28:00	because it’s a rare form of genius but
34:30:00	do you think that that sort of person
34:32:00	would be violating his own conscious
34:35:00	necessarily because there is like you’re
34:38:00	describing a psychopath they have such
34:39:00	people do exist and there are people who
34:42:00	are devoid of the sort of voice of
34:47:00	conscience the the psychological makeup
34:49:00	that most of us have the majority of us
34:51:00	have that that caused us to feel what
34:54:00	you might what I might call emotional
34:56:00	pain mmm that is guilt remorse things
34:58:00	like that that is a handicap for which
35:03:00	the person him
35:04:00	for herself does not apparently suffer
35:08:00	but other people do and but it’s still
35:12:00	suffering and we are social animals and
35:14:00	you know if you want to be absolutely
35:16:00	one hundred percent egotistical about
35:18:00	that one person okay they’re happy great
35:21:00	but you know no person is totally
35:24:00	isolated and you don’t you don’t think
35:26:00	he’s in an env Obel position really
35:28:00	objectively speaking no because this
35:34:00	person is apparently unable to connect
35:35:00	with other people emotionally it sounds
35:38:00	like the person is a psychopath and they
35:39:00	probably lose out a lot in the quality
35:41:00	of life for the same way like don’t they
35:42:00	don’t feel that guilt and remorse but
35:44:00	they probably don’t feel other feelings
35:45:00	that are more friendship love loyalty
35:48:00	the whole range of human emotions is
35:50:00	probably perverted or distorted or you
35:53:00	know in that person I don’t know but so
35:55:00	it it seems that you value these
35:58:00	intangible things Justice loyalty
36:00:00	friendship that doesn’t seem
36:01:00	inconsistent to you as my fist no these
36:04:00	are these there are plenty of intangible
36:06:00	things that are that we use to describe
36:08:00	behavior I mean loyalty is a form of
36:10:00	behavior it’s not it it’s not tangible
36:12:00	but we can recognize it can they be
36:13:00	reduced to a Darwinian mechanic survival
36:17:00	of the species sometimes yes that’s so
36:20:00	that Darwinian worldview is it a big
36:22:00	part of your world yes certainly of
36:25:00	course evolution is essential everything
36:28:00	evolves I mean and not just animals and
36:32:00	plants but you know the universe evolves
36:35:00	societies evolve Darwin’s worldview the
36:42:00	Darwinian world world view will be
36:44:00	interpreted with increasing subtlety and
36:46:00	got more nuanced he laid the foundation
36:49:00	what it was was crude from our point of
36:52:00	view but it was the essential beginning
36:54:00	he got they got their guts right and
36:56:00	we’re adding all the new ones as
36:59:00	research continues if there happened to
37:02:00	be any religious listeners what would
37:04:00	you say to them on a personal level we
37:07:00	all want to be good people is your
37:10:00	religion really necessary for you to do
37:13:00	that do you really need your religious
37:15:00	beliefs in order to be the good person
37:17:00	you want to be
37:21:00	if you like a world view if you think
37:24:00	it’s got some questions at the end I’ll
37:27:00	tell all you got to do is all you got to
37:31:00	do is