CVS Live - 2021-06-27 - The Atheist Experience and the PSR

Author Streamed Sunday June 27th, 2021


Lately I have been responding to a lot of comments from Mediocre-Atheists on the AE video I was on way back in 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsaVRqZ4MKcThis CVS Live episode is just a light-hearted survey of the tsunami of inane comments.


CVS Live - 2021-06-27 - The Atheist Experience and the PSR

Author Streamed March 13th, 2021

audio


video

transcript
These YouTube transcripts are generated automatically and are therefore unformatted and replete with errors.
hey been a while since i've made a video so just spilling my water all over myself here just thought i'd uh go live and give some reactions to some of the comments that i've received lately on my atheist experience video that i did a while ago back in 2017 i'm going to put a link here in the live chat for anyone that shows up there because uh i've never tried this before but i thought we would do uh an improvised session if anyone feels like joining not expecting a lot of people to watch this on a beautiful sunday afternoon but i just put the link there just in case and this video that you're seeing of me right now is actually a screen grab of my other monitor over here which is a google meet that matches the credentials of that if you want to join in and just chit chat on this sunday afternoon seems like it would be a fun way to pass the time so i'm going to hop over and take a look at my video sorry multitasking is not my thing so i go over and take a look at this video here i'll pop in there myself and i'll go over and start navigating this as you can see this is a call that i made caller david montreal back on what date was it june 3rd 2017 it's not a super popular it's not their most popular video they've ever done with this atheist experience call-in show but 167 000 views pretty good it's up there with uh you know it's in and you can see here i have a little comments plug-in youtube comment search it's showing that i have 23 019 comments i'm not sure why that differs but no big deal i find youtube comments the comments section annoying for many reasons not only because of the stupid comments that people leave for the most part but also because of the way you have to scroll and expand read more and uh i understand there's a lot of data they have to manage so i understand why they do it that way but it's that lazy load thing you have to scroll to the bottom of the screen and it loads in and you have to expand every thread to see what's going on in the conversation i just find it time consuming i don't get it i don't always get a notification by email when someone comments or responds to my response to their comment but it is what it is i just uh i get to the silly comment and then i take a little cruise around and take a look around to see what's going on so let's maybe sort this by top comments which it already is the first comment here is just me doing a little statistical analysis last week 362 unique youtube users who have commented here's the long list it's since gone up a little bit handle awards and i say sarcastically here internet points with lots of girly exclamation points because i think it's so silly that people these keyboard warriors think they're winning internet points and i'll have several categories best comment most comments so someone some of these people give a lot of comments so they'll win some internet points for that most characters used in comments some people are verbose they may not comment as frequently but they're verbose i gotta give an award for that funniest comments i've had a couple i mean uh by funniest i mean where you're trying to be funny and you are funny i'm not talking about someone who's so incredibly dim-witted that it makes me laugh out loud because that's pretty much every comment that i get is so stupid that it makes me laugh out loud that's not what i mean by funny what i mean by funny is when someone's actually being clever with the intention of making me laugh and so someone's going to get some internet points for that eventually i don't know when i'm actually going to analyze all this but silliest comment most fair-minded comments well that's i've had a couple maybe two or three most absurd comments that's going to be a tough category so many competitors for so here i remind as usual i remind everyone of the thesis of my call why i called into the atheist experience what my idea was that i wanted to have challenged by the atheists and sadly no one including matt dillahunty himself no one was able to offer any sort of challenge very pathetic but the psr is the principle of sufficient reason you can see that that is actually the title that they chose to give to my call the principle of sufficient reason which simply states that everything has its being its existence from itself or from another another way of saying it is that there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for another corollary of this principle is that every effect has a cause these are self-evident truths okay so nothing controversial but there are implications for that if you're a naturalist that's why i said here principle of sufficient reason plus naturalism meaning that they're not super not there's no supernatural free will it's just everything's natural if the psr is true then you've got hard determinism that was the reason of my call you can hear matt floundering around and squirming and trying to avoid dealing with that and his co-host brings up quantum mechanics which is just absurd and ridiculous and you're going to see a lot of comments here they bring up this quantum stuff as a justification for denying that the psr plus naturalism equals our determinants doesn't hold water i also mention here a little statistical analysis i'm interested in finding out how many women are in the comments section i've noticed a couple my hunch is about two to five percent and i am interested in the differences between biological men and biological women and here just to be clear i make a point of stating that i only count biological women as women no offense intended to anyone who but uh i am interested in the differences between men and women why is it that when i go to play chess it's 90 95 men uh when i studied physics it was 85 maybe between 80 and 90 men and when i'm at a party and i start talking about philosophy the women leave and it's just men who seem to be interested in talking about abstract ideas metaphysics philosophy religions these sorts of things of course you can have a lot of women interested in religion but when it comes to i've noticed that it's mostly men that are so it's just an interesting difference i don't know if it's it's influenced by cultural factors probably is i'm not trying to dwell on my own comments but there's another comment here at the top it's showing up at the top probably because i'm logged in as catholic versus but i said uh that my call should have been over in a jiffy because if matt had been honest then there really isn't much to talk about i would have said quite plainly there are no exceptions to the psr so therefore if you deny the supernatural you must be our determinist and he would have responded yes that's correct i am a hard determinist because i deny the supernatural and the psr is universally valid there are no uncaused effects this is what matt should have said just for fun i said that he should have ended the call by saying thanks for your call take care of yourself brother okay who's our next caller in other words uh with honesty comes good-natured uh you know pleasant uh cheerfulness simplicity and getting on with business not just squirming and changing the trying to obscure the issue because there's nothing to obscure here if there are no exceptions to the psr and if you deny the supernatural then you are a heart determinist that's just the way it is no one has come with even an attempt to so because during the interview i talk about uh the skeptic this guy's taking pot shots at me he's not a skeptic he's a catholic ooh and he's also spamming the comments on so i'm i'm the guest on the atheist experience i'm the one in the video i'm the one who's bringing up the principle of sufficient reason it's my it's my thesis that's under consideration here and yet when i receive an email notification saying that someone has commented on what is essentially my interview meaning that i'm being interviewed by mad or my interaction with matt whatever you want to call it my call into matt when i get that email saying that someone has commented i'm not supposed to respond when someone says that i'm dishonest which means behaving and or prone to behave in an untrustworthy or fraudulent way i'm not supposed to respond to that when it says i'm coming to the comment section under false pretenses i'm not supposed to respond to that this got 176 likes on his comment i don't see what's so brilliant about that i mean i am a skeptic it's skepticism that brought me to monotheism because i rejected all of my faith-based beliefs that's that's how i went from atheistic obviously with over 2000 comments i don't have time to go through all this sort of dribble but here i just remind them of my central claim in case you missed there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for every natural event in the universe do you agree if so good welcome to classical theaters do you reject my claim well you're free to do so but in doing so you will have rejected reason and science and of course a lot of comments here a lot of drivel tend to respond to these morons and i just cop this one off with atheism as silly made you may need to actually think about it but it is true if there is no uncaused first cause then every effect is prior to its own cause why do i say because there are only two cases if there's no one uncaused first cause the eternal return of nietzsche are the stoics that's absurd it's absurd for many effect always is always prior to its own cause there is no privileged position on a circle that's why we can say that the effect is before the cause which is before the effect which is before the cause which is before the effect because it's a circle it's an infinite loop the other case there are only two cases to consider here the other case if there's no uncaused first cause linear and no one's taking the bait i want someone to argue for this because i've got so many easy ways of refuting whichever path they take if they want to use the temporal timeline a temporal chain of cause and effect this is what we call an accidental chain or an accidentally ordered chain of causality both of those are temporal in nature they're not causality strictly speaking they are not immediate causality they are mediated through time that's what temporal means it means mediated through time the only true causality is what's called essential or per se causality which is always a temporal it's always simultaneous and the example i like to use is when these morons are responding on their device they're pressing some sort of keyboard of some sort on some sort of device and as they press if they were to examine that simultaneous essentially ordered chain of cause and effect in that moment without considering your history the history of the device the history of science the history of religion the history of anything without examining where these parts came from that are currently involved in this essentially ordered series of causality if you just examine that you will see that it is necessarily an essentially ordered series that is immediate causality there is no mediation and there is a finite necessarily a finite number of causes in that chain there may be many many causes in this essentially ordered chain of cause and effect but we know it's finite because the effects manifest this is the subtle reasoning of scotus that eludes so many even catholic philosophers of scotus's day is that we can and must us isolate these essentially ordered series of causality and that because the effect we're examining choose whichever effect you like i use the typing of a response on the device of some sort but you can use pushing a rock with a stick in a bank of a river whatever it is that's the classical example that they used in the middle ages whatever the example is the effect under consideration is manifest it's an a priori proof of the existence of the first deficient cause it's a priori it's excuse me it's a posteriori not a priority it's a posteriori which carries more weight uh it just like like um like anselm's proof so-called uh is controversial because it's a priori so they accuse us of defining god into existence excuse me they accused us of defining god into existence but that's not they can't say that within a posteriori proof especially when it's a strict demonstration according to aristotle's very severe criteria all of this to say that the infinite chain of cause and effect that is the second case of how it might be possible that there's no first uncaused first cause this infinite chain of cause and effect right away we can eliminate it from the essentially ordered series which is causality proper speaking properly speaking so that eliminates the infinite chain but if even if we wanted to examine the accidental causes the accidentally ordered causes and an accidental cause would be like when i went to the mountain today i just so happened to see my friend and i haven't seen him in a while and we exchanged notes and the accidental cause of the data that i got from him was the fact that i was going there to play chess he happened to be there it was completely accidental and by happenstance one thing led to another we met and i got some information from him and he got some information from me so that was the accidental cause of that data exchange and in an accidentally ordered causality it would be members of the same class of being meaning the same level of perfection the same level of being the same species if you want to use that word so one generating another but not in a way that has any time dependence for the essential ordered series for example i'm taking actions right now but my father who is of the same species the same kind the same he's a human he has the same human nature that i have he is one of the causes of my existence but that cause is although it's ordered i mean the uh you can't skip a generation i mean my grandfather was a cause a cause of my father my father was a cause of me we can't skip out any of those people in my timeline in my heredity and my ancestry we can't skip them they're all part of this chain one human to another human to another human down the line father to son all the way down to me but in the actions that i take there's no strictly per se causal role that's played by my father by my grandfather by my great-grandfather etc and so on so this is what we call an accidentally ordered chain of cause and effect very important very interesting but completely relevant when we examine the first efficient cause using essentially ordered causality so uh i'm not going to dwell on any one thing i just want to get sort of an overview of these comments so you can get a sense of the flavor of the atmosphere what sort of what sorts of comments i get and what here we have another emphasis on their complete shock and awe that i claim to be skeptical with its radical doubt that brought me to monotheism as i said without radical doubt i would not be a catholic today it is radical doubt 100 ask any of my close friends who followed my spiritual journey they will tell you that i was obsessed with philosophy and that i was going through the history of western philosophy and that when i hit descartes i was deeply entrenched in hard solipsism and it's descartes who helped me out of the heart solipsism and descartes exposed me also to the solution to solipsism indirectly i mean in his own way i mean he's not he's not a great catholic he's a uh i would venture to say that he was a heretic of some sort certainly not an orthodox catholic but he had a lot of ideas that helped me out of my solipsism and radical doubt although it brings you it can bring you to solipsism and that's essentially the the crisis of faith that i had and the lack of faith that i had is what brought me from atheistic satanism to hard solipsism because it doubted everything but watching how descartes struggled to find a philosophical justification for taking the leap of faith it helped me to put the pieces together to use pure reason so i had abandoned faith it was a crisis of faith but using doubt using that doubt to my advantage knowing that i am knowing that i can have certainty of certain truths such as embracing that radical doubt in a conscious way in a philosophical way that really helped me to escape from my heart solipsism so yes i am a skeptic i to this day consider myself a skeptic i consider myself to be way more skeptical than your average mediocre atheist the atheists that i meet in these comments are subscribing to naive realism they believe that the world exists and they have zero justification philosophically much less empirically for that naive belief they've never examined their most cherished assumptions about absolutely silly and childish their atheism is barely worthy of the word i would i would say they're not worthy of the title atheist only a hard determinist i would say is worthy of the title atheist everyone else should just be called a naive realist i've talked about this in several of my here i give a little solution to those who don't believe me when i say the psr is universal there are no exceptions to the principle of sufficient reason i just say do a reduction to absurdity test assume that there are exceptions and then follow that exception follow that assumption to its logical conclusions which are all absurd called a liar or pedophile or whatever it is by the atheist because it shows that they believe in god and they trust god and they measure everything against the standard so i respond the irony is delightful and it really is when the atheists accuse me when the atheist accuses me of lying or being unreasonable because both of those among countless others imply the existence of an absolute and objective standard of truth and goodness which standard everyone calls god and i firmly believe there's literally nothing the atheist can say without contradicting his peril worldview i understand why god laughs when you say it is delightful it is the essence of humor is to see through to see beyond the facade to see beyond the shell game and the magic trick and the deception and all the fancy lights and the smoke screens the mirrors the music the alcohol is flowing everything is there to sweep you away into the illusion that you can call yourself a a man of science and uh a rational atheist everything is there for you to make you feel comfortable and complacent in your absurd worldview in your naive realism where you take for granted the existence of the world the material world anyway this goes on and on and on and on and on and on you can see how it goes on so finally i ask him are you admitting that your judgments are merely subjective relative fleeting mutable and eminently imperfect because he railed against the idea that there was any objective eternal standard of truth and goodness well if that's the case then i trump all of your merely subjective relative fleeting mutable and eminently imperfect judgments with my absolute objective eternal and immutable standard of perfect truth and goodness aka god you brought a limp noodle to a gunfight and you know i'm goading him i am goading him but i sincerely believe this is self-evident truth to me this is what other proof do you need that god exists what are the proof you need either you have a standard by which to judge or you don't clearly you atheists feel all high and mighty and so you're worshiping my god so i commend you for that but i sternly warn you that uh you're playing with fire by disrespecting the same god that you're bowing to when you bow to those blah blah blah so many comments maybe i'll just focus on the big guys blah blah let me go straight to the punch line at the end and see what this there are only a few really only a few themes this ted grant i have to give him credit he's one of the best he has a sense of humor he's funny uh he's creative he brings a lot of stuff uh to talk about i must admit i don't read it because i don't have time to read all this crap uh but i've scanned his comments and they're funny they're they are interesting you can see in these threads it's like tag team right it's like me versus uh david versus goliath goliath is this leviathan with a thousand heads so this other guy plastic vision has taken over he's got a darker persona not quite as lovable as that other guy it goes on and on and on and on and on how does this thread and you're only a handful oh here my friend jeremy bentham showed up so how do i know this guy i know him from somewhere i think i may have interacted with him i get this a lot special pleading special pleading is when you have an unjustified exception to a general rule but the uncaused first cause is not unjustified it's justified because the alternatives are circular causality or infinite chain of causality those are both absurd which i can prove so it's not special pleading i get this a lot but it's not special pleading it's not pleading at all we can actually start by assuming that i'm wrong and just see where that takes you rude and arrogant i get this a lot probably partly true here i'm giving it some more internet points that's pure sarcasm just showing how silly these idiots are here i use my tick tock thing which is the clock is running out your time's this guy says he's not scared of my threats of eternal damnation i say you're not scared because you're not alive but dead enjoy the rest of your time and the irony is that the ones who are on their way to hell have a pretty pleasant time of it in this life because god has stopped goading them and giving them graces for conversion because every grace every additional grace is just a deeper darker torment in hell so there comes a point where it's just uh enjoy your time the clock's running out there's always hope there's always hope so just a little reminder plant that in the brain tick-tock time's running out you're going to die soon prepare to die this is in my call to matt dillahunty and the atheist experience i did how atheists are not comfortable with my thesis of the principle of sufficient reason plus naturalism equals her determinism they're not comfortable with it because no one wants to think that their mother's love is just a robotic programming no one wants to believe that or that their spouse's love is just a robotic programming no one wants to believe that no one's comfortable with that they're all uncomfortable with our determinism i was a hard determinist i was not comfortable with that you know somehow deep down i knew god was real and that free will was real and it's just absurd but uh i get a lot of pushback on this comment that i made during my call that atheists get nervous so i guess there was some mention that mines are material so i just reminded him that that's not the case the pope is more of a skeptic than this guy so again emphasis on my claim to be a skeptic i gave a skeptical rebuttal i doubt it just emphasizing that i doubt everything there's no point looking at a lot of same old stuff here i say all truths belong to us us catholics and he says i know that really and i'm sure here we have more emphasis on this nervousness of the atheists when i talk about the supernatural and how free will is necessarily when people wonder why i'm emphasizing the psr just remind them that that's the title of this video that's what we're here to discuss that's what i wanted to discuss during the call you know i got railroaded into talking about faith here's another comment about this me this guy's saying that i'm using post hoc arguments for the existence of the uncaused first cause but i'm starting with the assumption that right pure reason forces us to conclude that god exists that's why it's a dogma of the church that we can know with certainty that god exists by the light of natural reason without recourse to supernatural faith without recourse to special revelation it's because reason forces the thinking person to acknowledge his creator that's just the way it is so here i just tell them assume that you're right and i'm wrong and follow all of the logic it's not hard here's another theme that comes up a lot it's this idea of faith oh the conversation turned to faith oh boy well who who brought up faith it wasn't me i didn't want to talk about faith i wanted to talk about the psr matt railroaded the conversation matt dillahunty railroaded it to talking about my faith-based beliefs i don't want to talk about my faith based beliefs with an atheist what's the point you have to learn to crawl before you learn to walk you need to learn to walk before you learn to run you need to learn to run so there's no point talking about the bible talking about my faith-based beliefs with an atheist it makes no sense not gonna you're not gonna make any progress okay now we come to this quantum mechanics and i rebuff him saying only a complete would claim to love science and then proudly announce in public that quantum mechanics is exempt from the laws of nature hey i didn't notice this before i got five likes what is going on what who who's reading this and liking my side of the who who's on my side i didn't know anyone was on my side i thought i was completely alone here maybe there are five people who infiltrated the atheist experience channel were actually sympathetic to logic and reason i ask if quantum physics violates the principles of causation then how is it a science it's a serious question people think because a guy who sells a lot of books and has a space on the news and it's a physicist a great physicist i'm not denying that these people are good at math and modeling what i'm denying is that their philosophical assumptions of their models are always catholic they're not always catholic in fact i don't know too many household name physicists who are catholic and they understand what science really is what where science really came from there's so much scientism within the scientific community it's embarrassing there's so much bad philosophy by otherwise intelligent physicists and scientists it's so no the principle of causation is alive and well despite all of the rumors to look at all the comments it's so the burden of proof these people think that they're very scientifically minded and that i have the burden of proof to prove and i invite this guy on my show not good at naming things because i had a pretty interesting conversation with that's another thing i'm disappointed with in the atheist community at least online is the unwillingness or the apparent unwillingness to engage in conversation that's all i want i say right here i just want conversation casual conversation at that i never do but why are these people reluctant what are they afraid of i mean if you're so rational and so scientifically minded and everything everything in the culture supports your worldview of atheism science trust the why not have the balls as aaron raw did to come and talk with me i mean he was you know so i guess that maybe answers my question these people intuitively know they're just gonna be frustrated and annoyed by me because i don't my ways are not their ways my thoughts are not their thoughts i see clearly what they don't even see at all cases which are so few in number usually two two cases either x or not x it's boiled down powerfully that there's literally nowhere to run and nowhere to hide except in agnosticism well we don't know it's like that in our local universe our local presentation of the universe but we don't know we haven't discovered other universes yet maybe the laws of nature are different over it's very weak and guess what it's not empirical it's not scientific to say well yeah you're right for this local presentation of this universe but there might be other universes and the laws of nature might be different over there that's not scientific you don't have any evidence to support your claim and you claim to like evidence-based beliefs you don't like faith-based beliefs what i call an inordinate agnosticism the things i don't know there are things the pope doesn't know there are things the greatest saints of all time didn't there's a healthy agnosticism possible but to hide to attempt to hide and to the most axiomatic fundamental philosophical principles of the natural sciences to do that it's like shoving a spike up your nose into your brain and just stirring because i don't want to hear you can't you you can't run away there's nowhere to run there's nowhere to hide there is no other universe to run to okay this is the universe this is it there's one world we're in it okay so i know the physicists have models mathematical models for all kinds of fantasy worlds where you can escape a difficult metaphysical conversation a confrontation a or not a there's no middle way so i understand you want to run and hide in these mathematical models that are flawed not in their coherence because they're coherent but they're flawed in their fundamental assumptions and they don't correspond and you must admit this if you're an atheist they don't because if you're an atheist you have to are not comfortable with faith you want evidence-based beliefs only and there's zero evidence for any other universe by definition there will never be any evidence for any other universe ever you just have mathematical models that you can escape into when you're confronted with the reality that god exists god is good and your sin is not good another guy attacking me with the quantum thing so i just emphasize quantum mechanics is i know you want to co-opt into your absurd and childish faith-based naturalism but physics remains hard science no matter how much atheist fairy dust you dust it with etcetera etcetera etcetera it's painful how dim of what these people are this david a new man he's a nice guy i think he's if i'm not mistaken i think he's christian protestant i did interview him so i could find out pretty easily louise but i just gave him one of my love hearts when it's not my channel i don't give everyone a love uh although i am praying for these people for their true and lasting conversion because that's the christian way to do it that's intelligence self love want for them what is this thread about 26 things long is attacking the saints okay yeah this guy rama krishna kamath suresh pretty sure that guy should believe in some kind of god i see you're back with even more nonsense i don't believe in the irrational i believe only those things for which really is there hard evidence to support your belief that you should only believe things that have our evidence where's the evidence for that that it's absurd that an atheist should consider one configuration of matter energy and space-time more reasonable than another and it's true what is it about one configuration for example your brain with its neurons obeying the laws of nature compared to another configuration over here my brain with its neurons that are all confused and mentally ill and obviously disobeying the laws of nature atheists have nothing they have nothing to bring either everything is just shifting configurations matter energy and space time or there's a supernatural realm above this natural realm our minds our souls our free will our that interacts obviously with nature with our body with our brain with our neurons you think and your neurons light up here i just emphasize your very manifest belief in nonsense quote unquote proves my entire point because there is no such thing as nonsense according to your naturalist worldview that's what i've been saying this is why it's so amusing to discuss philosophy with heretical atheists and by that i don't mean atheists are heretical from the christian perspective because they are not their apostate or heathen but rather that you are straying from the orthodox tenets of atheism itself this is embarrassing but true the mediocre atheist is an enemy of his own it's hilarious and yet tragic blah blah blah blah blah it's going to prevent you from humbling yourself and applying radical skepticism which i believe is the truth and i'm i let him know because i like him that i'm praying for him blah blah blah how long have i been at this now i don't know how many minutes i've been going on this thing no one's listening but this is just for my own amusement anyway and if i can i can redirect i'll put a link to this sloppy live stream in the comments and see if i can siphon over some traffic from these people with hopes that eventually i'll be able to interview one or more of them on a live video stream no one's taking the no one's brought an argument i don't know if you've noticed here but uh he hard determinism no morality no free will etc doesn't follow yeah it does if everything is natural then it's just a great machine well-oiled machine doing what it does and it is literally what it is that's all you can say is an atheist naturalist if you believe in the psr now if you don't believe in the psr then you're saying there are uncaused effects in the natural world good luck with that and you claim to be a lover of science here i'm walking him through the essentially ordered series of causality that is manifest when he types his response on and what does he say your last premise fails cause and effect as you are describing it only exists on the macro level within the universe not the universe itself oh boy so here we have uh an interesting reverse composition uh fallacy or something like that where he says well yeah everything's well ordered on the macro level but if you zoom in it's random meaning uncaused or it's uh indeterminate this is the bs that floats around the new science the new physics and of course i encountered it when i studied physics at the university of waterloo and we encounter it we're exposed to all kinds of interpretations of the observations of quantum physics and the other new but it's presented as an interpretation it's on top of the observation we're trying to interpret the observations so that gives rise to different schools the most famous of course is the copenhagen school the copenhagen interpretation everyone's familiar with this stuff so but people have a hard time making that all-important distinction between hard science and sloppy philosophical interpretations of here i not to brag but i do have a paper that i co-authored it's in a peer-reviewed reputable peer-reviewed quantum and my name is the second name listed i mentioned that i only ever studied science because i'm interested in how the natural world works and that not not because i care about natural science per se but because i'm interested in first things philosophy that's why i study i really should have studied philosophy but i studied physics naively thinking that i would be exposed to a genuine quest for a holistic understanding of the nature of things because that's what that's what physics means it means nature the study of nature feces so i just put a ribbon on top by saying the laws of nature the laws of physics because as i said physics means nature the laws of nature are never ever violated period period god suspends them with his miracles the same way the programmer attacking the his own video game that he made he's introducing exceptions and giving himself all sorts of powers that the players don't necessarily always get to enjoy none of that violates the computer the computer code the principles of computing none of it it's a higher level though the programmer is at a higher level it's an imperfect it's a very imperfect analogy as all analogies are but it's nonetheless an interesting analogy the computer programmer versus the blah blah blah blah blah so let me just see how long have i been recording this 55 minutes so i guess i'll wrap things i could go on and on and on and on because but there really aren't that many themes they don't like my laughing during the call they don't like the fact that i say that the supernatural makes them nervous they don't like the fact that i say that i understand quantum physics they there there were a couple who were honest and said you're absolutely right and that's why i'm a hard determinist there were a couple people like that and i just gave them my love and respect and said keep seeking the truth because when i was a hard determinist it was not easy but i kept seeking i kept seeking the truth and it got darker to be honest with you it did get darker and darker it didn't get better until i reached rock bottom which is the atheistic satanism and then the hard solipsism it's a dark and lonely place to be but if you want to discover the truth you can't just sit there and be complacent you can't just say well we know the real world exists because if i reach out and touch it it feels real well you're assuming the very thing that i'm asking you to call into question which is you're assuming the truth of the thing that i'm asking you to get you to the to the end game you're just going to remain halfway up the stony mountain you're going to remain mediocre as an atheist and that's not what i want for you what i want for you is to be a true bona fide atheist it's you're gonna have to go through her determinism you're gonna probably have a crisis of faith and end up at provided its authentic and sincere quest for truth provided that you really want to follow the truth no matter where it is if you're an atheist that loves the truth you're going to have to suffer you're going to have to suffer through it now there are many other ways that you can come to conversion you can sit just sit there and be complacent and smug and think that you trust the science and that everything's empirical and that if something isn't proven with empirical evidence then you're not going to believe it you can tell yourself that until you're green in the face and you sit there stuffing your face with food and with television or whatever it is that you do in your complacent mediocre atheist lifestyle and in that sad pathetic state chained to the cave the wall of the cave watching the shadows and being entertained eating your popcorn and your junk food in plato's cave staring at the the shadows that dance on the wall in front of you it is true that you could just sit there like a slob enjoying yourself and then have the grace from god to convert by a million different means the beauty of the world a relationship a tragedy death in the family whatever it is your own confrontation with your mortality there are a million ways god but if you want to be proactive if you're an atheist and you want to be proactive and you want to seek the truth you're going to have to abandon your cherished assumptions and they are i can guarantee you they are unexamined you're not aware of what your assumptions are so what you're gonna have to do is you're just gonna have to systematically doubt everything that can be doubted and there's only one truth you cannot deny and that is i am don't be complacent if you're an atheist don't be complacent don't be mediocre because it's a dangerous game you're playing the clock is ticking time is running out you have to prepare yourself to die you will die soon i don't say sooner or later because even later even if it's a hundred years a hundred years is nothing you can waste time you could quickly waste if you're not willing to suffer for the truth now in your quest for the truth now then do you really think that you're going to be willing or even able more importantly to strive for the truth in a sincere way that is that requires energy it requires focus it requires determination tenacity long suffering it's not easy if you're young and you're an atheist put in the work now you'll thank me later you'll thank me later seek the truth and you will find it but if you don't seek it if you're just calling theists liars and deranged and deluded it may be entertaining but it's not advancing your cause it's not bringing you closer to discovery of the ultimate truth so i encourage you to strive for the truth and i want to say one thing about the insults that i on this video because i made a conscious decision a while ago when the opportunity presents itself to insult these people as a way of provoking them so that they would have either a moral outrage which is usually the case the how dare you and this obviously brings to mind the eternal and objective unchanging standard of truth perfect truth by which they judge aka god so it's to provoke that it's also to stir up their pride which is what's preventing them from seeing the truth because their problem is intellectual yes it is intellectual they have a grave problem intellectually seeing the truth they're blinded intellectually but that problem stems primarily not from their diet or exercise or from their genetics it stems from ill will it's it's a volitional problem primarily that spills over and colors the intellect and disables the intellect so i want to insult them because it truly is foolish to deny the existence of god it says that god himself says that in the bible in several places but it's not so much that i want to point out the obvious that you're a fool if you deny god it's that i want to stir up your pride because that's at the heart of your volitional problem you need to be humble and if you start defending your own intelligence over against my intelligence then you're well on your way to discovering that atheism is false and that there is which enables you to make the choices that you make freely in the reasoning that you engage in because reasoning that's not free is not reasoning and there is absolutely no possibility of meriting either praise or blame if you deny free will and as i emphasize time and time again in if the psr is universal and if naturalism is true there can be no free will just hard determinism so i want to stir up their pride with the insults and it's usually the same insult and any insult that i i'm in the same boat so i usually say they're dim of wit and weak of will because these are the two areas that we need to work on all of us especially the religious we need to work on uh getting back the intellectual clarity and the strength of will that we lost when our first parents fell from grace about seven eight thousand years ago or whatever it was that's my firm belief that did come up in the comments too but no one really made a big deal about it a couple people talked about the bible and how horrible the old testament god is and uh i just said don't worship any god that you're superior to in any way but the again this idea that you could be superior to another person in any way intellectually evolutionary or whatever is impossible for the atheist because one configuration of matter energy cannot be superior to another according to their own worldview if they're self-consistent so we'll leave it there for today thanks for stopping by i see here we have a couple of comments in the live chat nicola nice to see you love you my brother god bless you same to you right back at you and uh thanks for the comments i see i don't know i'm going to mess up the pronunciation whatever can be destroyed by the truth should be destroyed by the truth i feel some niche vibes coming through here i like to say you know whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger weaker neither or some combination of both that's my twist on nietzsche that's my favorite paraphrase of nichi because it's if anything's obvious it's that whatever doesn't kill you doesn't necessarily always so that's it for today thanks for joining me and uh joining me and uh god bless take care of yourself

transcript2
These ReWatch transcripts are also generated automatically and are therefore sometimes improperly unformatted and replete with errors.