Speaker 1: We have entered the holiday season where we get to
Speaker 1: see the damage that religion does to families. For many,
Speaker 1: this is an incredibly hard time when those who are
Speaker 1: meant to love people most, even unconditionally, places set of
Speaker 1: ancient beliefs and rituals before their own family members. This
Speaker 1: is a season of giving, but it's also a season
Speaker 1: of sorrow. If you're someone who has been alienated from
Speaker 1: your family because of differing values in politics, remember to
Speaker 1: stay connected to your community, and we hope that we
Speaker 1: can be a part of that. If you're one of
Speaker 1: those who thinks it's totally fine that religion is placed
Speaker 1: above those who we are supposed to love, then give
Speaker 1: us a call because the show is starting now.
Speaker 2: Hello everybody, and welcome. It is December one, twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2: I am your host Objectively Dan and joining me today
Speaker 2: on Talkievan is the wonderful Sophia Spinna and Jimmy Junior. Folks. Welcome,
Speaker 2: Welcome back to another great week. Everybody snaps in the chat,
Speaker 2: give those snap emojis out for Sophia's intro. There coming
Speaker 2: in Hot. It's December, but she's coming in the hot, folks,
Speaker 2: so get ready for that How do you guys do it?
Speaker 2: How was your Thanksgiving?
Speaker 1: It's good watch. Watched the new Netflix Hallmark style movie
Speaker 1: Hot Frosty, which is not just a dirty term, even
Speaker 1: though it.
Speaker 2: Sounds like it is that at Wendy's What the heck
Speaker 2: is that does sound like it?
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like a woman magically makes a hot snowman
Speaker 1: come to life, and then all the women in the
Speaker 1: town are really into him and then he almost melts,
Speaker 1: you know, classic classic quality.
Speaker 2: He doesn't have flame powers. He's just a very attractive
Speaker 2: He's a sexually attractive snowman.
Speaker 1: Which is weird because he just came into consciousness like yesterday.
Speaker 1: So you know, that's a very it's a moral dilemma.
Speaker 1: Nobody deals with somebody with a frosty.
Speaker 2: The snowman fetish got into the industry and was like,
Speaker 2: it's time we got to make the dream reality. And
Speaker 2: then this movie.
Speaker 3: I love how the women don't even give the guy
Speaker 3: a chance to like learn, they're just ready to jump
Speaker 3: his bones.
Speaker 2: This to me too, Am I just missing out? Is
Speaker 2: this the latest trend? What's what's it's?
Speaker 4: Now?
Speaker 3: The guy gains consciousness and he's thrust into this uh
Speaker 3: den of horny women.
Speaker 2: That sounds really what happens to me every day.
Speaker 1: I mean, you just gained consciousness.
Speaker 2: Well, it's kind of like I get rebooted every day.
Speaker 2: I since it's like a matrix stuff. I don't know
Speaker 2: what I'm saying. I'm just I'm just talking out my ass.
Speaker 2: But anyway, Uh, this is talk Ethan, which is a
Speaker 2: product in the atheist community of US today five O
Speaker 2: one c nonprofit organization dedicated to the promotion of atheism,
Speaker 2: critical thinking, secular humanism, and the separation of religion and government.
Speaker 2: And this is a live call in show and we do,
Speaker 2: in fact have open lines, so if you'd like to
Speaker 2: call us, you can certainly do that now. It's at
Speaker 2: five one two Fortune or call to your computer at
Speaker 2: tiny dot c c slash call th H. And we're
Speaker 2: just we're yucking at up here. But we do have
Speaker 2: some fun stuff that you talk about because every week
Speaker 2: we're asking you guys a question or prompt. It is
Speaker 2: the talk Heathen segment to me, a talk Talk Heathen segment,
Speaker 2: to me talk even to me segment. My goodness, I
Speaker 2: got distracted by the one just.
Speaker 1: Get gain consciousness just right now.
Speaker 2: Outside of the show, I have no consciousness. I only
Speaker 2: come around. It's kind of like that episode of Black Mirror,
Speaker 2: you know, where they have the little consciousness slaves. I
Speaker 2: just wake up every time a show happens. So that's
Speaker 2: that's my whole backstory. But we do have our talk.
Speaker 2: Heathen to me say, well, this is where we ask
Speaker 2: you guys a question or a prompt every week, and
Speaker 2: we had our top three answers last week. We asked
Speaker 2: you guys, what do you think Jesus would say upon returning?
Speaker 2: And here are our top three answers for that. Number
Speaker 2: three comes from Miranda Rensberger, who says, when we finally
Speaker 2: noticed that Jesus came back, he'll say, yeah, I've been
Speaker 2: here for a while. Guys, why were you looking for
Speaker 2: a blonde guy?
Speaker 3: I really like that one. You know, we wouldn't even
Speaker 3: know where to look. Most of the people who are
Speaker 3: believers have no idea who it is they worship. That's
Speaker 3: that's what that says.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I've always I mean even when I was a Christian,
Speaker 2: like you have to know, like, yeah, he wasn't like
Speaker 2: Jesus was from like Europe, guys, like he was the least.
Speaker 2: I don't know what to tell you. But yeah, very
Speaker 2: strange that people have this idea of Jesus as being
Speaker 2: something else than what he would be. But number two
Speaker 2: comes from Monkey at typewriter who says, Jesus will say
Speaker 2: after the second Coming, was it good for you? And
Speaker 2: we're just we're starting off to we're five minutes in
Speaker 2: and we are horny today. Guys, he's crazy. I don't
Speaker 2: know what's going on.
Speaker 3: A Snowman movie.
Speaker 1: Jesus is the real hot frosty.
Speaker 2: Jesus is the reason for the season. Baby, let me
Speaker 2: tell you. That's uh, that's interesting, but very good answer
Speaker 2: Monkey type right. And number one one comes from James
Speaker 2: James l. Aarramer or James Larimer. I think it's James
Speaker 2: Larimer who says, what would Jesus say upon returning Jesus Christ?
Speaker 2: People take a guy's pulse before you seal him into
Speaker 2: a fucking DOOMBI pretty good, Pretty good. And with those
Speaker 2: answers out of the way, I want to thank you
Speaker 2: guys for submitting your answers last week to our awesome prompt.
Speaker 2: And this week's prompt is going to be what's the
Speaker 2: difference between Jesus the Tooth Fairy and Sasquatch. So leave
Speaker 2: your best answer below and we'll read the top three
Speaker 2: for next week. But before we move on, I have
Speaker 2: to ask you, guys, Sophia, Jimmy, what's the difference between
Speaker 2: Jesus the tooth Fairy and Sasquatch. Anything.
Speaker 1: There's some evidence for sasquatch.
Speaker 2: Ooh.
Speaker 1: I'm from the Northwest originally, so I feel like it
Speaker 1: is a little bit of a thing.
Speaker 2: You're like, Yeah, saline snapping mood today. I don't know
Speaker 2: what's up with that, but yeah, no, I that's true.
Speaker 2: We got more video evidence of Sasquatch that we do Jesus.
Speaker 3: Yea, still still Sasquatch. Largely mythological evidence is subjective, no proof.
Speaker 3: And here's my thing about these three, right, yeah, all
Speaker 3: three largely mythological, right, But if you go down from
Speaker 3: Jesus to Sasquatch, you get less extreme, right. So I
Speaker 3: want to start in reverse. I want to go Sasquatch
Speaker 3: really doesn't want much from people, wants to be left alone.
Speaker 3: Tooth Fairy willing to interact if there's money involved, there's
Speaker 3: a transaction. Jesus, drink my blood and keep my flesh.
Speaker 3: What just happened? What just happened.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a big jump from teeth to like blood, right,
Speaker 1: they're really requesting bodily you know, accoutrema.
Speaker 2: But yeah, yeah, Now here's what I want to know.
Speaker 2: Is there a community, because obviously there's a Sasquatch community, right,
Speaker 2: Is there a community that does try to find video
Speaker 2: evidence of the tooth Fairy that I am not aware
Speaker 2: of that just exists south there, because that would be awesome.
Speaker 2: I would love to see really renders or people coming
Speaker 2: up with for that.
Speaker 1: There's no tooth fairy. Where did all of these teeth
Speaker 1: I found from?
Speaker 2: Huh? This is why the government is trying to hide. Okay,
Speaker 2: they don't want you to know. I have to mention money.
Speaker 3: Completely serendipitous, not coordinated at all. But I was with
Speaker 3: my parents for Thanksgiving a few days ago, of course,
Speaker 3: and my mom gave me a note that I wrote
Speaker 3: to the tooth Fairy when I was really little, and
Speaker 3: it's because, uh, my mom forgot to leave money under
Speaker 3: my pillow. So I wrote this note to the tooth
Speaker 3: Fairy saying, dear tooth Fairy, you forgot to give me money,
Speaker 3: So tonight I really would like it if you could
Speaker 3: leave me money for my tooth your friend Jimmy. Uh
Speaker 3: and so she gave that to me the other day.
Speaker 3: I thought it was hilarious. Yeah you should.
Speaker 2: You should listen. You owed double now you owe interest.
Speaker 1: I was expecting an indignant note, but that was night.
Speaker 2: This wholesome. What happened to that, Jimmy, you know, with
Speaker 2: the wholesome Jimmy write in ours through the tooth Fairy.
Speaker 2: I don't know what changed.
Speaker 3: You know, I realized Jesus was not real and I
Speaker 3: lost it. I just lost it. Now, if I had
Speaker 3: to write a letter to the tooth Fairy, you would
Speaker 3: not want to read it.
Speaker 5: Man.
Speaker 2: I'd write a very indignant letter to this creature. Yeah no,
Speaker 2: that's great. Leave your comments below, guys on what you
Speaker 2: think the difference is between Jesus, tooth Fair, and Sasquatch.
Speaker 2: And we'll read those top three answers next week. And
Speaker 2: before we take our first call, I have to thank
Speaker 2: the wonderful, awesome people that help make this show happen
Speaker 2: every single week. It's not just us three, It is
Speaker 2: actually a bunch more people. It is the crew that
Speaker 2: helped make the show happen. There's our crew camp, a
Speaker 2: bunch of people on today, on this day of days.
Speaker 2: So thank you all for making it happen. And thank
Speaker 2: you to the viewers at home who watch and support
Speaker 2: the show through liking and subscribing and commenting, because that
Speaker 2: helps the youlgorithm. It makes people want to watch more
Speaker 2: of our stuff. So you guys are awesome for that.
Speaker 2: We have a couple calls in the queue. If I
Speaker 2: don't hear, if there are no objections, speak now or
Speaker 2: forever holds your piece. We'll go ahead and get started
Speaker 2: with our first call. Ready to go, Yes, all right,
Speaker 2: let's do it. We got a couple of folks here.
Speaker 2: I want to see this one because this one I
Speaker 2: want to know where this one's going. I want to
Speaker 2: talk to Michael, who's calling in from California. Michael, Oh, dang,
Speaker 2: right into it. Holy grab Michael, you are live on talkie?
Speaker 2: Then how are you doing this morning?
Speaker 6: Fabulous? Thank you. You know, as a child, I could
Speaker 6: not understand the story. It never made sense even then,
Speaker 6: so I just let it go. Of course, I went
Speaker 6: to Truth and Sunday School. But Sunday School. Now, when
Speaker 6: I was about eight, they told me I couldn't come
Speaker 6: to Sunday School anymore because I asked too many questions.
Speaker 6: You know, my hand was always up, and so they said,
Speaker 6: go to church. You can't come to Sunday school. So
Speaker 6: that's what I did, but not regularly. I just didn't
Speaker 6: believe this story. So but my real question is, you know,
Speaker 6: God spoke a lot and talked. However, when it came
Speaker 6: to Jesus, the only thing I ever heard him say was,
Speaker 6: this is my son of who I am very pleased.
Speaker 6: Where does God give Jesus the authority that Jesus has taken?
Speaker 6: Like he said, you only get to the Father through me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I guess that's an interesting question. The
Speaker 2: whole premise is kind of shot when you realize, you know,
Speaker 2: any parts of the story could be you know, kind
Speaker 2: of made up at any time, right, So, like, I
Speaker 2: don't know, the particular details to me kind of don't matter,
Speaker 2: especially as you get later on to the gospel narratives.
Speaker 2: There's an interesting chronology that happens when you find that,
Speaker 2: you know, the first Part's Mark being the earliest that
Speaker 2: most scholars consider the Gospels to be, and then Matthew
Speaker 2: and Luke sort of written around the same time, and
Speaker 2: then John. You sort of see this progression in like
Speaker 2: the tall tales that are being told about Jesus. By
Speaker 2: the time John hits he's basically a superhero. Like that's
Speaker 2: where you hear about a lot of the extra stories
Speaker 2: that happened with Jesus, whereas at least Mark is a
Speaker 2: little bit more tame about stuff. So there's definitely a
Speaker 2: mythology that's being built about Jesus after his death and
Speaker 2: what he can do. As far as this story that
Speaker 2: you're talking about where God talks to him that happens
Speaker 2: during the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist, which
Speaker 2: is an earlier story that is found in March. So
Speaker 2: as far as like when God directly speaks to Jesus
Speaker 2: like in the Gospel accounts, I can't think of any
Speaker 2: off the top of my head, but yeah, that is
Speaker 2: kind of interesting that you point that out. I don't
Speaker 2: know what do you guys think.
Speaker 3: I'm no biblical scholar. I couldn't tell you one way
Speaker 3: or the other. I just always thought that Jesus's power
Speaker 3: was implied just by being the son of God.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I think.
Speaker 1: When I was a Christian, I think that's what I
Speaker 1: thought too. Had all of that kind of the rehearse
Speaker 1: evidence of well he fulfills biblical prophecy, which of course
Speaker 1: is bizarre when you really look at it. It's a
Speaker 1: very forced reading of prophecies to decide that they must
Speaker 1: apply to Jesus. But that was something I know that
Speaker 1: was part of my construct of belief at the time,
Speaker 1: and I think so much of it too came from
Speaker 1: the church, right, Like when you think about stories of
Speaker 1: people who have any kind of miracle in the past
Speaker 1: two thousand years, it always feels very Jesus focused. And
Speaker 1: so when I was a person who wanted to believe,
Speaker 1: that was something that I would turn to. So it's interesting,
Speaker 1: because you're totally right that there is not a point
Speaker 1: that I can think of either that is actually God
Speaker 1: saying hey, this is the dude, right. But it's interesting
Speaker 1: to look back and be like, oh, yeah, I just
Speaker 1: took it as a given and had all of these
Speaker 1: arguments for why other people should too.
Speaker 6: You know, Well, good thing is a lot of people
Speaker 6: don't know during that time Jesus is the son of God.
Speaker 6: That's very interesting to me. It doesn't appear everybody asks
Speaker 6: him who he is, and it's like only Jesus knows
Speaker 6: this and his mother. I mean, what goes on there.
Speaker 2: Well, that's not that's not specifically true, right, because well,
Speaker 2: at least within that what's told in the narrative, because
Speaker 2: the actual baptism occurs because legend bum the narrative perspective,
Speaker 2: John the Baptist does say, Hey, Jesus, this is the guy.
Speaker 2: He is the one that was prophesied about, right, and
Speaker 2: so that baptism occurs and occurs with other people seeing it, right,
Speaker 2: you know, because Jesus is the son of God. So
Speaker 2: it is like implied, at least in at that point
Speaker 2: that he is something beyond. But like, I don't know,
Speaker 2: like it's it's it's it's not something that everybody universally
Speaker 2: would agree upon.
Speaker 6: Right.
Speaker 2: If we had a prophet that came today and said, hey,
Speaker 2: I'm the next coming of Jesus, we would all also
Speaker 2: have some some doubts. Right. The Jewish people at the
Speaker 2: time obviously had doubts that this Jesus guy was this
Speaker 2: guy that was being fulfilled prophecy right in text. You know,
Speaker 2: there's a reason why Jewish people are still around today.
Speaker 2: It's because they don't think Jesus is that guy. So
Speaker 2: it was always controversial at least his appearance there. It
Speaker 2: was never widely accepted. I think even Christian scholars would
Speaker 2: recognize that, but yeah, it is. It is kind of
Speaker 2: interesting because it's like, Okay, you're the guy. How do
Speaker 2: you convince people you're the guy? I guess you do miracles?
Speaker 2: But outside of that, it's not like he like sent
Speaker 2: a message to everybody in the world, Like he didn't
Speaker 2: tell that the native people's and other praises. He just
Speaker 2: kind of went around, you know, the Middle East a
Speaker 2: little bit and told everybody there. You'd think if he
Speaker 2: was the guy, he would want to bring that to everybody,
Speaker 2: but that's not how that worked out.
Speaker 6: However, after Jesus died and was resurrections, then the apostles
Speaker 6: len around creating miracles too, So that doesn't make Jesus
Speaker 6: really spectful because they were making miracles, they raised people
Speaker 6: from them again, they give things.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but they I guess they. I guess a Christian
Speaker 2: might say they weren't without sin, though you know, I
Speaker 2: don't know. I'm not a Christian. It all doesn't matter
Speaker 2: to me.
Speaker 1: And it's kind of one of those like here we
Speaker 1: are going for it right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm playing both sides here, Michael, that's how I win.
Speaker 6: Where authority come from?
Speaker 2: Where is Jesus already come from? You had to ask Christian, Yeah,
Speaker 2: Jesus has your authority over my life right now. I
Speaker 2: could care less about the opinions of Jesus and his followers. Yeah.
Speaker 3: And Michael, I'm getting I'm getting like a little confused
Speaker 3: about are you asking in the context of just like
Speaker 3: playing devil's advocate, or are you asking because you are
Speaker 3: honestly trying to figure out the answer, or like, is
Speaker 3: this something you believe.
Speaker 7: I'm not.
Speaker 3: I'm not kind of clear on what your what point
Speaker 3: you're coming from.
Speaker 6: Okay, I do not believe he was the son of God.
Speaker 6: I don't believe in God. However, as a person that
Speaker 6: doesn't believe, I think that we probably know the Bible
Speaker 6: better than the everyday.
Speaker 3: Christian and I am that's what they say for this.
Speaker 6: Answer, and I can't find I've asked Christians and they
Speaker 6: walk around and it's like nobody has the answer.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so as far as I know, like Jesus talks
Speaker 3: about being the son of God in the Gospels, right,
Speaker 3: So there's like the literal text and then there's historically
Speaker 3: what we can talk about and are you asking you
Speaker 3: know or are you are you differentiating between what the
Speaker 3: Bible says versus what we think happened in reality, because
Speaker 3: you're saying, well, it wasn't Jesus doing these things, it
Speaker 3: was the apostles doing these things, and the apostles made
Speaker 3: up all these things. But in the Bible, in the text,
Speaker 3: if we take it at face value, Jesus is the
Speaker 3: one doing these things too. And yeah, I would say
Speaker 3: that me being a former Christian, the implication was always
Speaker 3: that Jesus is the fulfillment of the prophecies of the
Speaker 3: Book of Isaiah right in the Old Testament, and now
Speaker 3: because he is God's son has powers of God, which
Speaker 3: of course Jewish people would contest and to dance point,
Speaker 3: that's why they're still Jewish. But what I think the
Speaker 3: answer is there, you're looking for something a little bit
Speaker 3: more obvious.
Speaker 8: Huh.
Speaker 6: Yeah, because God said that shall have me. No other
Speaker 6: God's performing, and yet everybody's pretty e gugeous as though
Speaker 6: he were God.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think that's why the Trinity was constructed to some degree,
Speaker 1: is that it enabled people to worship Jesus and not
Speaker 1: feel like they're placing someone before God. And there are
Speaker 1: Christian offshoots like the Remnant Fellowship I know in Tennessee
Speaker 1: where they talk about how like they don't believe that,
Speaker 1: and that's a big deal because other Christians would point
Speaker 1: out that essentially, if Jesus isn't God's son, then his
Speaker 1: sacrifice didn't really count. So a lot really depends on
Speaker 1: this idea that Jesus is God. And so I guess
Speaker 1: if you were looking for a source of authority, it
Speaker 1: would have to partially be that that Jesus must be
Speaker 1: God so we can worship him. And so his sacrifice
Speaker 1: was big enough I guess to cover all people from sin.
Speaker 1: But I think also most simply, you know, where does
Speaker 1: Jesus get his authority? He doesn't. I think that's kind
Speaker 1: of what you end up with a good point.
Speaker 2: I mean, Sophia brings up an excellent point about the
Speaker 2: trinity and it's construct later. But yeah, what you just
Speaker 2: point out as well, Michael, is a criticism that Jews
Speaker 2: have laid upon Jesus because there is no actual text
Speaker 2: that indicates that the Messiah figure as described in Isaiah
Speaker 2: is supposed to be the son of God. That's something
Speaker 2: that Jewish people bring up in their arguments and saying
Speaker 2: that Jesus isn't it. It's like, that's not a thing.
Speaker 2: That's a Christian idea, right, that's not a Jewish idea
Speaker 2: that the Messiah would be the literal son of God.
Speaker 2: You know, there's there's Christians have obviously interpreted the text
Speaker 2: that way, but Jewish scripture is notorious for having many
Speaker 2: different interpretations by many groups of people that made different times.
Speaker 2: So you know, your results may vary on that.
Speaker 6: Well, it's just the whole story. It's just ba when
Speaker 6: when there were the three of them were on across,
Speaker 6: which should have been a state, not across anyway, Jesus
Speaker 6: turns to the one and says, on this day you
Speaker 6: will be with me in paradize. But Jesus didn't go
Speaker 6: to paradize that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I'll be honest with you, Michael. I
Speaker 2: could talk about Bible contradictions with you all day, but
Speaker 2: you're apreacher to the choir here. You know, you're like,
Speaker 2: you're not going to convince us anymore that God that
Speaker 2: Jesus ain't the one, you know, So I don't know
Speaker 2: where else you want to take this call, Michael. But
Speaker 2: like if you just want to say, like, hey, I
Speaker 2: don't think Jesus is on God, Like, yeah, I agree
Speaker 2: with you. I don't. I don't see that to be
Speaker 2: necessarily the case.
Speaker 6: You know, I wonder if anybody knew where he got
Speaker 6: his authorities, because I don't find it anywhere that he
Speaker 6: has the authority to say I am the son of
Speaker 6: God and of I have the power to bring you
Speaker 6: to God over.
Speaker 2: I mean, it is John the Baptist. The answer is
Speaker 2: John the Baptist. That is the answer that people would
Speaker 2: would argue for. I think if I was a Christropologist,
Speaker 2: because John the Baptist is supposed to be a good guy,
Speaker 2: and then we're supposed to rely on his words allegedly
Speaker 2: because he was also kind of doing some stuff. So yeah,
Speaker 2: I think that's what a Christian would say.
Speaker 1: I'd say, if you're a Christian watching call in, and
Speaker 1: if you have an explanation for this, then great. I
Speaker 1: think we're also in that space where it's very unsatisfying
Speaker 1: to be looking for an answer to question like this,
Speaker 1: because millions of people believe in these things, and so
Speaker 1: when you actually ask, like where does this come from,
Speaker 1: it's tempting to just keep going until you can find
Speaker 1: a reasonable explanation because so many people can't possibly believe
Speaker 1: something that has no real even claim that it's true.
Speaker 1: And yeah, it's really unsatisfying. But I think that I
Speaker 1: think you've you're doing a search that I am very
Speaker 1: familiar with, which is to look for a reasonable explanation
Speaker 1: for why people buy into this when I don't know
Speaker 1: that there always is one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Michael, I think we are going to go ahead
Speaker 2: and let you go because we do have a ton
Speaker 2: of other folks that want to speak to us. But
Speaker 2: I do appreciate you calling in and giving your perspective.
Speaker 2: And yeah, it is kind of an interesting question, like
Speaker 2: what is where does this authority come from? How did
Speaker 2: they come to this idea that he was the son
Speaker 2: of God? Because obviously the Gospels had to be written
Speaker 2: by people who believe that right, or at least had
Speaker 2: come to that narrative at some point, right, So where
Speaker 2: does that origin come from? I think that's more akin
Speaker 2: to biblical scholars that could probably give better answers than
Speaker 2: even we could. I will say this. You did make
Speaker 2: the comment that, oh, non believers tend to know more
Speaker 2: about the Bible, and I think that's true. In America
Speaker 2: maybe globally. I don't know if that's the case. I've
Speaker 2: had some ignorant conversations with the atheists just as much
Speaker 2: as I've had with Christians. It doesn't happen as often,
Speaker 2: I'll give you that, but it definitely does happen from
Speaker 2: folks who think they know it all when they get
Speaker 2: all their talking points from YouTube videos and not from
Speaker 2: like people who like I don't know, write books. So
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 1: So you're saying don't get all their talking points from us,
Speaker 1: is that?
Speaker 2: No, definitely don't.
Speaker 7: But I mean, you know, I think that's that's such
Speaker 7: an inflated, uh interpretation, because I think a lot of
Speaker 7: a lot of people who were once believers find their
Speaker 7: way into atheism by reading the Bible.
Speaker 3: But that in no way makes them an expert on
Speaker 3: the Bible. Like I can attest to that, like I
Speaker 3: read the Bible. I've read it front to back, I've
Speaker 3: studied the Bible. I forgot more than I've probably covered,
Speaker 3: you know, in my years. So I I you know,
Speaker 3: I'm no, I'm no expert in I couldn't say I
Speaker 3: know it better than a clergy member. So I don't know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, true, that true? That we have a bunch
Speaker 2: of folks who want to talk to us today. I'm
Speaker 2: so excited to talk to all of you guys. But
Speaker 2: real quickly, before we move on to our next call,
Speaker 2: I have to tell you guys about our brick frund raiser.
Speaker 2: You've probably heard about this. We've been doing a fundraiser
Speaker 2: to help literally rebuild parts of the ACA building and
Speaker 2: we want to highlight some of the bricks that come
Speaker 2: from donations from viewers like you. Our brick that's featured
Speaker 2: today comes from Casey, who says future atheists, you freed
Speaker 2: us all humanity lou Dynasty foundations, So thank you for
Speaker 2: your purchase, Casey, And if you'd like to get your
Speaker 2: own brick, you can do that. It's a tiny down
Speaker 2: CC slash ACA bricks to help literally rebuild the building.
Speaker 2: Another way to support us is by sending in super chats.
Speaker 2: And I know we've got a couple of super chats
Speaker 2: that we need to read out and we'll do that
Speaker 2: in just a second. If we get ten super chats
Speaker 2: for five dollars today, folks, this is the challenge. Ten
Speaker 2: super chats with five dollars, we will show you never
Speaker 2: before seeing photos of us, Me, Sophia and Jimmy when
Speaker 2: we were children. And this is going to be happening,
Speaker 2: I think across all of the other shows we'll see,
Speaker 2: but for now, you get that today. If you want
Speaker 2: to see us in particular, we need to get those
Speaker 2: donations in otherwise they're not happening. We're putting them back
Speaker 2: in the vault, the same vault where they lock up
Speaker 2: all the Disney movies and they release them after a
Speaker 2: couple of years. That's what we're putting our pictures. So
Speaker 2: you're never going to find them unless Disney Disney.
Speaker 1: I think American Girl Doll do that now too. They're
Speaker 1: going to be sitting there, Samantha.
Speaker 3: You want to see my photo? You want to see me?
Speaker 5: Really?
Speaker 3: Do you really want to see it?
Speaker 2: I would say both of your photos are very strong,
Speaker 2: very strong pitch. Yeah, so yeah, please please consider it
Speaker 2: donating for that, and I'll do these other announcements in
Speaker 2: second I will do these super chats right now that
Speaker 2: we have a super chat A five dollars from Katub
Speaker 2: who says, woke up atheist again. Braisee Cod, so thank
Speaker 2: you so much.
Speaker 1: I'm partner.
Speaker 3: You have some cod you know, creative.
Speaker 2: Another one from Nero who gave five dollars and said,
Speaker 2: I want to see Junior, Jimmy Junior and finally know
Speaker 2: what his hair color is from a chaos screblin in
Speaker 2: the Bible. Belt damn. And then another one from ten
Speaker 2: dollars from Miranda Ronsberger. I said, damn because of this
Speaker 2: one too. He says, what color is Jimmy's hair? If
Speaker 2: atheism is a religion, bald as a hair color. Yeah,
Speaker 2: everybody's talking about Jimmy's head today. Yo.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Let me tell you something. Five times, five times I
Speaker 3: have picked my son up from daycare and other kids
Speaker 3: have pointed at me and said, look, no hair that
Speaker 3: is true. That is true.
Speaker 6: You know.
Speaker 3: I get this. I get this everywhere I go. And
Speaker 3: I can understand why there's a story in the Bible
Speaker 3: with God, with God sending bears water for making fun
Speaker 3: of the balls now and you know what, Miranda, you
Speaker 3: better watch out for bears now. I'm just kidding. We
Speaker 3: love you, Miranda, We love you.
Speaker 2: Oh my god, wow, wow, amazing. Thank you guys so
Speaker 2: much for the donation so far, and again specifically, we're
Speaker 2: working for those five dollars donations. Five dollars if we
Speaker 2: get ten five dollars donations. Today we will release the
Speaker 2: vault and show you the true color of Jimmy's hair.
Speaker 2: So look forward to that. And man, that's so awesome.
Speaker 2: That's really awesome. I'll do the rest of these announcement
Speaker 2: later because you know, we got so many of them.
Speaker 2: Let's just go ahead and go to our next call.
Speaker 2: I think, gosh, we got a couple of different ones.
Speaker 2: Do you guys have a pick? I know you guys
Speaker 2: have them. I like you like to. Okay, you gotta vote, Sophie,
Speaker 2: you want to to.
Speaker 1: I like surprises, so okay, all right.
Speaker 2: Well then this won't be a surprise, I guess because
Speaker 2: I will pick number two. We have Steven calling in
Speaker 2: from New York. Steven, you are live on Talk Heathen.
Speaker 2: What's going on?
Speaker 8: Hey? I believe magic exists because a lot of things
Speaker 8: in nature are too well organized, like, for example, a flower,
Speaker 8: like a rose, for example, grows the stem grows out
Speaker 8: of soil, and it's form, and a bud forms, and
Speaker 8: then it blossoms, and when it blooms, the pedals have
Speaker 8: a symmetrical placement, and and and it's too it's too
Speaker 8: elaborate to be natural. Why because the things are natural,
Speaker 8: they shouldn't be.
Speaker 2: They can be elaborate. Natural things can't be elaborate. Is
Speaker 2: that what you're saying?
Speaker 8: Yeah, it should if it's natural, it should just be
Speaker 8: dirt and soil.
Speaker 1: I mean.
Speaker 8: Besides it being inexplicable, Like I have.
Speaker 2: A question, Hold on, it is explicable, right, Like? Why
Speaker 2: why are you saying it's inexplicable?
Speaker 8: I mean I've never seen it explained.
Speaker 1: Okay, Okay, that doesn't make it inexplicable.
Speaker 2: Why you've never seen why the why flowers are radial?
Speaker 2: Have you ever looked it up? Have you ever consulted
Speaker 2: any resources on it?
Speaker 8: Not for that specifically, but I did look up some
Speaker 8: stuff about I guess physics.
Speaker 3: You guess physics. I mean that doesn't sound like in
Speaker 3: depth research. You owe yourself a little bit more.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Like, if we're gonna go around and Steven, if
Speaker 2: we're gonna go around and say everything is built on magic,
Speaker 2: I think we at least need to look into that
Speaker 2: a little bit, right, Like we should probably look into
Speaker 2: what other people have said about how flowers came to be,
Speaker 2: because I feel like that's a pretty big deal, right If,
Speaker 2: like the whole world runs on magic that might change
Speaker 2: how I do things a little bit.
Speaker 8: What is the incentivizing future of nature that that.
Speaker 1: It's not about to Uh, that's not okay, Oh, Sophia,
Speaker 1: go go okay. So it's not about incentives. I think
Speaker 1: that sometimes when we talk about how things have come
Speaker 1: to be, we overinflate this idea that, like, you know,
Speaker 1: a flower wanted to become symmetrical, Like, there's not that
Speaker 1: desire when it comes to natural selection or how things
Speaker 1: have come to evolve. When you look at something like
Speaker 1: a flower, you're looking at something that has it survived
Speaker 1: to this day? Right, it's it's fairly. It must have
Speaker 1: been efficient, it must have outcompeted other things. And if
Speaker 1: doing things in a symmetrical manner for a flower that
Speaker 1: was the most efficient, then that's the flower that survived.
Speaker 1: So we look at things in nature that are chaotic
Speaker 1: or disorganized and say that that I don't know, say
Speaker 1: that maybe that's it gone wrong. There are things in
Speaker 1: nature that are disorganized. I think of how much inefficiency
Speaker 1: is in nature. I think about I feel like I'm
Speaker 1: becoming known for talking about pregnancy, like how often miscarriages
Speaker 1: happened because the fetuses is not viable, and that's spontaneous,
Speaker 1: and it happens so much more than people realize. That's
Speaker 1: that's disorganized, that's chaotic. There's quite a bit of chaos here.
Speaker 1: So when we're looking at something that is successful, like
Speaker 1: a flower, like a baby, like you know, choose anything
Speaker 1: in nature, we're looking at something that's organized because that
Speaker 1: was the way that it did survive. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: if I'm being as clear as I would like to be,
Speaker 1: but we can look at things and say, wow, that's incredible,
Speaker 1: but it's billions of years to become that incredible. It's
Speaker 1: not like pop up flower done that would feel like magic.
Speaker 1: But we have reasons to believe that it didn't occur
Speaker 1: that way.
Speaker 8: But like, how can you prove that that the world,
Speaker 8: just the earth, just the things in the earth just
Speaker 8: came about through nature. I think that's an assumption as well.
Speaker 2: We've got a couple of different things here. There's the
Speaker 2: idea that there's a concept that Young Earth creationists talk about,
Speaker 2: which is well in Young Earth creation is I don't
Speaker 2: think Young Earth creation is bringing this up. It's called
Speaker 2: Last thursdayism, and it's this idea you can't prove that
Speaker 2: the Earth wasn't creative the last Thursday, right, And people
Speaker 2: will be like, well, what about all this evidence that's
Speaker 2: a dinosaur bones stuff like that, And people say, well,
Speaker 2: that was just crazy to look like it was old, right,
Speaker 2: And so yeah, I can't prove to you that things
Speaker 2: on this Earth weren't looked like to grid that they
Speaker 2: were old, or that there weren't patterns or a history.
Speaker 2: But I can show that there at least has the
Speaker 2: appearance of things having a history. And we can do
Speaker 2: that with plants and animals. Right, we have an entire
Speaker 2: evolutionary history that occurs, and we can at least observe
Speaker 2: some of the mechanics that do happen in nature that
Speaker 2: help us form the things that we see. Cells don't
Speaker 2: just change. Sometimes they change seemingly randomly, but sometimes they
Speaker 2: change because of specific environmental factors, and sometimes they change
Speaker 2: because of pressures other than their environment that that that
Speaker 2: occur in these things. And and and the same rules
Speaker 2: apply to cells like they do to people, like they
Speaker 2: do to everything living on Earth. We have a history.
Speaker 2: There is an entire field of paleontology that just looks
Speaker 2: at how flowers evolve on this earth. And and you
Speaker 2: can find some really interesting things by people way more
Speaker 2: knowledgeable than us on us And I'd rather hear what
Speaker 2: they have to say and hear what their conclusions come
Speaker 2: to than just kind of throw it all up in
Speaker 2: the air and says, well, I don't know, so it
Speaker 2: must be magic, right, because that's kind of like what
Speaker 2: this sounds like. We're just kind of saying, oh, well,
Speaker 2: this is kind of weird. I don't know how this works.
Speaker 2: Magic must be the miss explanation.
Speaker 8: When I looked it up, it.
Speaker 1: Said the.
Speaker 8: Kinetic energy moves atoms, But like what makes the energy?
Speaker 1: Uh?
Speaker 8: What causes it of motion?
Speaker 3: That?
Speaker 1: I mean, that doesn't yeah.
Speaker 3: But what why? So here's the here's the problem I
Speaker 3: have with that. Let's say you don't understand right, or
Speaker 3: you don't know the answer to that question that you're asking,
Speaker 3: why is it magic? The answer? Why? And I'm going
Speaker 3: to equate that to God? Why is God the answer?
Speaker 3: And I like that you used plants, So I mean,
Speaker 3: let's just look at plants. Okay, five hundred years ago,
Speaker 3: we had no idea, We maybe had somewhat of an
Speaker 3: idea that you could probably put plants together or drop
Speaker 3: seeds and they would come up, but we really had
Speaker 3: no idea about how that worked, and people attributed God
Speaker 3: to that. Right, and then we took some scientific methods
Speaker 3: to explain better explain the cycle of a plant's life. Right,
Speaker 3: we figured out that a plant can be broken down
Speaker 3: into cells, and it has excuse me, it could make
Speaker 3: its own its own food, It uses light, it has
Speaker 3: photos synthesis. And then we didn't really know much more
Speaker 3: beyond that, and we went, well, that's what God wanted.
Speaker 3: And then you know, we broke it down further. Okay,
Speaker 3: it's got cells. Then inside the cells it's got molecules,
Speaker 3: and the molecules are formed by atoms, and the atoms
Speaker 3: have sub atomic particles, and we don't get any further
Speaker 3: than that, and then we go, ah, because God wanted
Speaker 3: it that way. You know, this is the the argument
Speaker 3: from from ignorance. Really, you don't you can't answer. You
Speaker 3: have to stop at some point, so you just tack
Speaker 3: God at the end, no matter what it is, you
Speaker 3: just tack God on at the end, and you really
Speaker 3: don't get any closer to explaining what you're talking about.
Speaker 3: And so you have come to a point where you
Speaker 3: can't get beyond that point. I think I have come
Speaker 3: to a point in the example I gave I can't
Speaker 3: get beyond it, but I don't insert God. So I
Speaker 3: guess my question to you after all that, why do
Speaker 3: you insert God there?
Speaker 8: Well, I mean, it doesn't it can't be like it
Speaker 8: can't things can't come together and form these types of
Speaker 8: things can have a composition like they do.
Speaker 3: And how do you know that?
Speaker 8: How do you know that?
Speaker 3: I think Sophia just gave you a really good explanation
Speaker 3: about all of the imperfections that exist out there that
Speaker 3: seem to lack organization. So how do you how do
Speaker 3: you negotiate between those two points? You're saying that things
Speaker 3: are so organized they must have a creator. Well, A,
Speaker 3: we don't know that organization leads to magic or a creator,
Speaker 3: and B there are so many things that are unorganized
Speaker 3: or disorganized that they don't you know, that would render
Speaker 3: your argument incomplete or incorrect. How do you how do
Speaker 3: you justify.
Speaker 8: That maybe the consciousness is faint, maybe it's a weak consciousness.
Speaker 8: Maybe you know, maybe it's it doesn't know how to
Speaker 8: make it perfect.
Speaker 1: I mean, at that point, we're just kind of in
Speaker 1: fantasy storybook territory, you know, where it's just like, oh,
Speaker 1: it's a there's a being that's trying to operate the
Speaker 1: best interest of the world, but chaos is tearing it
Speaker 1: apart instead, And I'm like, okay, like why not have
Speaker 1: it be zeus? Like I think that there's kind of
Speaker 1: it's sort of an unseerious conversation at that point. It
Speaker 1: sounds like you have a good premise to a fantasy novel.
Speaker 1: But it also sounds like there's a lot of your
Speaker 1: questions that you could google. If you're wondering about how
Speaker 1: plants evolve, there's a ton of information out there that's
Speaker 1: really interesting. There's a ton of great scientific educators out
Speaker 1: there who can tell.
Speaker 2: You about it.
Speaker 1: I think that the more you try to bring up
Speaker 1: specific things, it's kind of like you're sort of missing
Speaker 1: our basic point, which is that assuming God because you
Speaker 1: personally do not know is pretty faulty logic.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 8: The reason, I mean I called it magic because I
Speaker 8: don't really anthropomorphize it, like I saw God was like
Speaker 8: more personified. But but yeah, you might be right. Yeah,
Speaker 8: I mean I looked up a few things on Google,
Speaker 8: and I don't know, I wasn't satisfied with the answers.
Speaker 2: Well, there is a I guarantee you right now, there
Speaker 2: is a there's one paleobotanist that watched this show that
Speaker 2: is screaming their goddamn head off right now saying, hey,
Speaker 2: look in, look into the field of work that I
Speaker 2: do every single day for a living, right, I guarante, like,
Speaker 2: give science a chance. Okay, give it a little bit
Speaker 2: more thought, right, look into some more stuff. I promise
Speaker 2: you you're gonna find some more explanations to stuff that
Speaker 2: you thought maybe didn't have explanations, but but maybe do.
Speaker 2: And maybe you won't have all the answers. Maybe you'll
Speaker 2: still have some questions. That's fine. But in terms of
Speaker 2: like plant evolution, come on, man, you gotta you got
Speaker 2: you gotta put some more effort into that before we
Speaker 2: jump to the magic train. Right at least that's my opinion, Steven. So,
Speaker 2: I don't know any other thoughts you had for us
Speaker 2: before we let you go today?
Speaker 8: Uh not really?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 2: Okay, Well, thanks for calling, and you know we're not
Speaker 2: trying to talk on you too hard, Stephen. But when
Speaker 2: you're talking about literal magic, right, like, you can't use
Speaker 2: the observations of science and be like, oh, this has
Speaker 2: to be impossible because of science, Like, no, there's other
Speaker 2: things to science that can tell us all kinds of
Speaker 2: things too, right, Like, it's just very interesting that you
Speaker 2: do at least have some principles of science, like you
Speaker 2: do think, Okay, this seems to be impossible based on
Speaker 2: some kinds of observation. So there must be some sort
Speaker 2: of method by which you've come to your conclusion.
Speaker 9: And I and I.
Speaker 2: Guarantee you there's people who have been doing a lot
Speaker 2: of work every day on stuff that you wouldn't even
Speaker 2: begin to think about. I wouldn't begin to think about
Speaker 2: that have answered a lot of questions that are, you know,
Speaker 2: maybe not applicable to our daily lives, but are important
Speaker 2: for grander sort of knowledge. Schema that would love to
Speaker 2: tell you about the evolution of flowers. So on that note,
Speaker 2: let's let's keep it moving. I do have some super
Speaker 2: chance for us. Another one from Miranda Rensberger, who gave
Speaker 2: five dollars and said, on the upside, Jimmy, at least
Speaker 2: your head is a nice shape. Miranda is starting Wars today.
Speaker 1: I think that's nice.
Speaker 3: Yeah, she feels bad, she feels bad that she insulted
Speaker 3: my baldness and she.
Speaker 1: Doesn't want to get attacked by bears.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, right, so she's given me something nice. I
Speaker 3: can work with that. Thank you, Miranda.
Speaker 2: Have you been a piece, Jimmy? Have you been a piece?
Speaker 2: You think so?
Speaker 3: I think I'll pull off God's bears?
Speaker 4: Okay, all right, but.
Speaker 2: You still have that ability, so just FYI don't miss
Speaker 2: jim seeking he's got that power. Number. I don't want
Speaker 2: to say number. We have another one from Jim Costs
Speaker 2: who gave nine to ninety nine. Thank you so much
Speaker 2: for that and says how much to not see pictures?
Speaker 3: We'll find out. Yeah, yeah, it was.
Speaker 2: One thousand dollars and we won't show pictures. That's fine,
Speaker 2: or have it or one hundred one hundred and wait
Speaker 2: we get we're doing ten five dollars donations, right, so
Speaker 2: that's what fifty So if you give us fifty five dollars,
Speaker 2: then we won't do it. How does that sound rightly?
Speaker 1: I liked the goal of a thousand? Why not keep it?
Speaker 9: Eye?
Speaker 6: Why not?
Speaker 2: I don't know who's just giving out one thousand dollars
Speaker 2: on a Sunday afternoon, But hey, if you got it,
Speaker 2: why not?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 6: You know?
Speaker 2: But anyway, good to point out that we are volunteers
Speaker 2: for the Atheist Community of Boston as a nonprofit. We
Speaker 2: do not personally receive any of that money, but we
Speaker 2: donate our pictures anyway because we were about it. You know,
Speaker 2: activism is about two things, call in shows and get
Speaker 2: pictures of yourself for donation, rallies or whatever, and that's it.
Speaker 2: There's no other forms in which you can partake and
Speaker 2: real quickly, I do have some other announcements that I
Speaker 2: should probably get through. We have a channel that houses
Speaker 2: all of the shows of the ACA in audio podcast form.
Speaker 2: If you want to check it out. It's a tiny
Speaker 2: dot cc slash an podcast baby. There you can listen
Speaker 2: to all of the latest shows from the Atheists Experienced,
Speaker 2: talk Ethan, Truth Wanted, the nonprofits, and anything else we
Speaker 2: got on that one channel. So listen to that if
Speaker 2: you just like listening to us and not looking at
Speaker 2: our faces. But of course, the ACA also wants to
Speaker 2: know what is going on once unit of what's going
Speaker 2: on in our community, and for that we've got an
Speaker 2: updated website for that. You can go to an Atheist
Speaker 2: Hyphencommunity dot org where you can learn about the organization itself.
Speaker 2: It's Paul, and how you can get involved in maybe
Speaker 2: donating your baby pictures to be shown. Just kidding. We'll
Speaker 2: probably do that probably more like you know, call screening
Speaker 2: and video editing, all kinds of stuff that needs help
Speaker 2: around here, and we appreciate all the help that we
Speaker 2: can get. So thank you guys for considering. I think
Speaker 2: that's all the announcements I got. I any personal announcements, guys,
Speaker 2: it's true. Any other stuff you want to announce before
Speaker 2: we move on another caller? Anything?
Speaker 1: No, I'm trying to think of anything really exciting.
Speaker 3: Okay, jump at the calls.
Speaker 2: All right, Okay, never mind. That was a bad idea
Speaker 2: and I acknowledge it. I'm just gonna move on.
Speaker 1: It could have been great.
Speaker 2: It could have been great. It was not great, but
Speaker 2: we will move on. We have Jackie who wants to
Speaker 2: talk to us from the great state of Mississippi. Jackie,
Speaker 2: you are live on Talk Heythan. What's going on much?
Speaker 4: How about for you guys.
Speaker 2: I'm just just just hosting Talk Keithen live live callin
Speaker 2: show that happens every Sunday.
Speaker 10: I had a pretty good Thanksgiving I didn't you know. No,
Speaker 10: Unfortunately I only had like there were well, I had one.
Speaker 5: Slus a pie but it wasn't the best.
Speaker 10: But yeah, so anyway, I just called them to discuss
Speaker 10: was that?
Speaker 1: Oh I just said, I just went off because like,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry that your pie wasn't good. But yeah, Jackie.
Speaker 2: I would say you deserve more pie, but then you're
Speaker 2: about to give us your your take, and maybe after
Speaker 2: your take, I'm not going to think that you do
Speaker 2: deserve more pie. So we'll we'll, we'll find out, Jakie,
Speaker 2: what'd you want to call us about today?
Speaker 10: So I just wanted to call in to talk about
Speaker 10: de Kart's trademark argument for God's system. So so I
Speaker 10: have to go over for the premises for you guys
Speaker 10: or are you eiser of you guys?
Speaker 1: Are? Oh?
Speaker 2: Yes? I mean even if we all knew, it's great
Speaker 2: for the audience to know as well, you know what
Speaker 2: premises you're working off of. Plus you may have a
Speaker 2: different understanding than what we d understand of it. So yeah,
Speaker 2: go ahead, give it, give it out to us, lay
Speaker 2: it all out.
Speaker 10: Okay, So Premise one, Decart argues, and I don't think
Speaker 10: this will be comfortable with anybody here, that there's an
Speaker 10: idea of God as a perfect being or God is
Speaker 10: an infinite being. I think we can all accept that
Speaker 10: as a legitimate promise.
Speaker 3: That's no, But I can't go I can't. I have
Speaker 3: to stop right there, because you said God is perfect
Speaker 3: or God is infinite, and those two things are not
Speaker 3: the same thing. So which one is it? And which
Speaker 3: one are you going with?
Speaker 10: Well, we can just say God is well, we can
Speaker 10: take God is instance for this purpose. Or God is
Speaker 10: the most powerful being.
Speaker 3: Okay, so God is perfect or God is infinite, or
Speaker 3: God is the most powerful. So I just have an
Speaker 3: issue because what I don't want to happen later is
Speaker 3: that you start intertwining and using these, uh, these three
Speaker 3: definitions interchangeably, right. I don't want you to be using
Speaker 3: perfect and infinite and all powerful later in the conversation.
Speaker 2: For I will, i'll, I will chime injo for Descartes
Speaker 2: argument that kind of that's kind of the argument a
Speaker 2: little bit. There is this kind of thing here. I
Speaker 2: think traditionally it's it's said that God is a supremely
Speaker 2: perfect be I think is the.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 3: I'm going to cross these out and I'm putting supremely perfect.
Speaker 2: Yes, well, because existence is part of the thing. We'll
Speaker 2: get to that anyway. Premise to we'll move on, Jackie
Speaker 2: premise to.
Speaker 10: The premise to is essentially that things that are caused
Speaker 10: like a lesser thing can't cause a greater thing, or
Speaker 10: something which is less perfect can't conse some which is
Speaker 10: more perfect.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's not my understanding of Dascards argument, but that's fine,
Speaker 2: we can work with that.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 10: Well, here here's as perhaps a better way to phrase it,
Speaker 10: so to minus in Descartes, the second premise of Dascards
Speaker 10: argument is that you have a god as conceived as
Speaker 10: a more as an infinite all perfect being or supremely
Speaker 10: perfect beings. Is the exact phrasing can't be caused by
Speaker 10: a finite substance called second prim.
Speaker 2: So so so Descardes argument is the ontological argument, right
Speaker 2: and so not. I'm not trying to hijiackt the conversation,
Speaker 2: but just like maybe maybe just to speed things along here, right,
Speaker 2: this is descardess whole idea is this. His idea is like, Okay,
Speaker 2: we have a supremely perfect being, and a supremely perfect
Speaker 2: being has to exist because like that's what it means
Speaker 2: to be perfect. A supreme perfect being has to exist
Speaker 2: in a perfect in reality, because that's how we can
Speaker 2: conceive of a perfect being. And therefore God exists because
Speaker 2: he's a supremely perfect being. Now like for an atheist,
Speaker 2: the problem becomes kind of self evident because we're just
Speaker 2: kind of defining things into existence, right, We're kind of
Speaker 2: giving these qualities, these attributes that may or may not
Speaker 2: be real and aren't really based on anything observable. I've
Speaker 2: never observed a perfect thing. I don't know what a
Speaker 2: perfect thing is. I don't know what it can or
Speaker 2: can't do. And so this is why kind of this
Speaker 2: this argument kind of does it work in Descartes world. Descartes,
Speaker 2: you know, obviously brilliant mathematician, right, Like, he has this
Speaker 2: whole idea of math being outside of ourselves and stuff,
Speaker 2: and so I think in his world God being part
Speaker 2: of like kind of mathematics in a way kind of
Speaker 2: makes sense. We have these sort of abstract ideas that
Speaker 2: seem to conform to reality, right, and so God must
Speaker 2: be kind of like one of these ideas, right. He
Speaker 2: has to be existent because we see math in our
Speaker 2: everyday life. Of course, philosophers have talked about the existence
Speaker 2: of math and the implications of what it says about reality. Right,
Speaker 2: But for most of us we don't find that convincing
Speaker 2: because again we're just kind of defining stuff without like
Speaker 2: really knowing why. Again, I don't know what a perfect
Speaker 2: being is. I don't know what it entails. I don't
Speaker 2: know why I think it should exist in reality versus
Speaker 2: non existent reality. Does that make sense?
Speaker 10: No, you didn't accurately represent they cost argument correction, because
Speaker 10: the reason is because descant argument is that the cause
Speaker 10: of an effect is as real as a cause. So
Speaker 10: the cause of the effect of a supremely perfect being
Speaker 10: has to be as real as So we have this
Speaker 10: idea of the supremely perfect being, which is a cause
Speaker 10: the cause, No, the effect, sorry, the effect is the idea.
Speaker 10: The cause has to be super the perfect being. The
Speaker 10: idea of the supremely perfect being can only be caused
Speaker 10: by a supremely perfect being. Therefore supremely perfect being has
Speaker 10: to exist. So like it's not so well, we have
Speaker 10: this idea of a perfect being. And you know Manipap's world,
Speaker 10: I think you're concerning with anthems of version of the
Speaker 10: anthological organ the commerson of the anthological argument is just
Speaker 10: the idea of the supremely perfect being has to be
Speaker 10: caused by a supremely perfect being.
Speaker 4: It's the effect with the cause.
Speaker 1: Just as an aside. That's not what I've been finding.
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure that that Dan's representation was accurate, at
Speaker 1: least to what I've been finding anywhere just now. But
Speaker 1: this idea that only an idea of a perfect God
Speaker 1: could come from the existence of a perfect God, is
Speaker 1: that in summary? Kind of what?
Speaker 6: Right?
Speaker 2: And here's the confusion. I think we're talking about Daycard's
Speaker 2: ontological argument and Daycard's cosmological argument. Right, you're talking about
Speaker 2: the cosmological one is for causes. You're talking about his
Speaker 2: cause argument, because that's different.
Speaker 10: I'm talking about history. I think it's called the trademark perkument.
Speaker 2: I'm not from I it could be called the trademark argument.
Speaker 2: I'm not formally trained in philosophy. I don't know if
Speaker 2: that's that's what it's caused, but that that's a I'm
Speaker 2: I'm I'm trying to make sure I'm not missed for
Speaker 2: American here, But yes, it may be talking about his
Speaker 2: cosmological argument, which is the idea that everything has a cause,
Speaker 2: and therefore this idea of God has a cause, right,
Speaker 2: and so if God is infinite in everything else, then
Speaker 2: he has to be contained in sort of that idea.
Speaker 2: And therefore, Yeah, so that's that's a little bit of
Speaker 2: a different thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, a question, man, man, I just asked you, like Jackie,
Speaker 3: why are you bringing this up if you don't even
Speaker 3: really know what the argument is?
Speaker 2: No, I know, I don't think that's right because because
Speaker 2: we might be misspeaking here, I don't know if because
Speaker 2: we I might I might be the one that's misunderstanding Jackie.
Speaker 2: I want to give Jackie the but no, but I'm not.
Speaker 3: Saying that that your that your idea is conflicting with his.
Speaker 3: I'm saying that the Jackie is saying, well, I think
Speaker 3: it's this, and I think it's that, and and honestly,
Speaker 3: I'm getting lost in kind of why it's important. Why
Speaker 3: does a Jackie just tell us what Jackie thinks? Because I'm,
Speaker 3: you know, Descartes not here to argue with us.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's fair, that's fair. Yeah, So maybe we rephrase
Speaker 2: it as whatever Jackie thinks is true, right, because the
Speaker 2: argument should be true regardless of whatever daycard defines it
Speaker 2: as right. That's fair. Yeah, maybe let's start over here.
Speaker 2: Let's let's try to do one, two and three again.
Speaker 2: And instead of me interrupting you and asking you if
Speaker 2: I think it's right or not for each premise, why
Speaker 2: don't you go through those premises again. Let's let's try
Speaker 2: it again. How does that sound, Jackie, We're.
Speaker 10: Wasting a lot of time. I told you this is
Speaker 10: a trademark argument. You can say the version of homological argument.
Speaker 10: I did not mean the anthological argument. And I've already
Speaker 10: gone through the premise. A there's an idea of a
Speaker 10: perfect being be the effect has to be as real
Speaker 10: as a cause to the cause has to be as
Speaker 10: real as a fact. So the cause of the idea
Speaker 10: of the supreme perfect being must be a supremely perfect being. See,
Speaker 10: we have this idea of the supreme and perfect being
Speaker 10: in some people's minds. Therefore that it has to actually have.
Speaker 4: A cause, and that cause is God.
Speaker 1: So okay, So if this is true, then it would
Speaker 1: be It's just like, let's just take that idea of
Speaker 1: there wouldn't be an idea of a supremely perfect being
Speaker 1: without a supremely perfect being. If we just take that,
Speaker 1: then if having any explanation for this idea that is
Speaker 1: not a supremely perfect being, that would dismantle their argument correct.
Speaker 10: Well, would do you disagree with the promise that.
Speaker 1: There must be that every cause must be greater than
Speaker 1: its effects?
Speaker 6: Yeah?
Speaker 10: Do you disagree with that?
Speaker 9: Well?
Speaker 1: Of course, of course I disagree with that. Have you
Speaker 1: ever played dominoes like there's you know, you can end
Speaker 1: up with a much wider ranging effect. And I think
Speaker 1: if we're looking for a reason why we have this
Speaker 1: idea of a supremely perfect being, there are lots of
Speaker 1: explanations for that that do not require a supremely perfect being.
Speaker 1: And I absolutely don't agree that the cause that the
Speaker 1: cause must be greater than the effect. I think that
Speaker 1: that sounds sort of like nonsense to me. That sounds
Speaker 1: like something that sounds like true when you assert it,
Speaker 1: and it fills offical argument. But I can think of,
Speaker 1: you know, there's other phrases that contradict it. If we're
Speaker 1: just going to argue through sayings like the wings of
Speaker 1: a butterfly in China cause hurricanes and wherever the end
Speaker 1: of that phrase goes. So I don't agree with the premise,
Speaker 1: but I also feel like if we're trying to get
Speaker 1: to the conclusion that God is real, then just saying, hey,
Speaker 1: we believe in a perfect God because it's nice for
Speaker 1: us to imagine that there is control, that there's perfection,
Speaker 1: that we're a social species and we're able to take
Speaker 1: perspective by being a social species. That is a survival
Speaker 1: advantage which requires imagination, which leads us to imagine things
Speaker 1: that may or may not even exist. So I guess
Speaker 1: I have a problem with pretty much every part of this,
Speaker 1: and I don't find it particularly compelling.
Speaker 10: Okay, so if you just disagree with the premise that
Speaker 10: to cause opacity as great or greater in the effects,
Speaker 10: and I suppose that's just something which would disqualify it
Speaker 10: from the beginning because much. Yeah, So, if that's the case,
Speaker 10: I guess that is like a a subum metaphysical question
Speaker 10: which I don't know if it's pulsifiable definitely.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 3: So I'm I'm a little lost on why we have
Speaker 3: to have like, we can't have this idea of a
Speaker 3: perfect being without the perfect being first existing. I don't
Speaker 3: know how that how do we know that that is true?
Speaker 2: Descartes the thing was like like it had the idea
Speaker 2: has to originate outside of yourself, you know, because we're
Speaker 2: not perfect beings. I guess I don't know. I never
Speaker 2: really understand it either, But that's that's kind of thinking.
Speaker 2: I don't know if that's Jackie snaking on the subject though.
Speaker 10: I mean, I think it's a fine argument. But if
Speaker 10: you would just disagree with the premise that like things
Speaker 10: which are less great than something can't cause a greater
Speaker 10: thing to exist, perhaps I'm not a physical question which
Speaker 10: I would have to look more into the arguments of guns.
Speaker 3: For me, the definition of great is subjective, and I
Speaker 3: would have to ask how are you how are you
Speaker 3: defining great? And and then we have to go from there.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I would again, I would also disagree great necessarily subjective.
Speaker 10: I think we can probably say some things are better
Speaker 10: than other.
Speaker 2: No, I mean, but that's a topic for a different time, Jackie.
Speaker 2: I you know, that's that's something that definitely falls within
Speaker 2: the purview of this show. And if you want to
Speaker 2: talk to us about it, absolutely we'd love to do that.
Speaker 2: But I do think that we have some other callers
Speaker 2: that want to talk to us. So is there any
Speaker 2: other comments you want to make before we let you go.
Speaker 10: No, I suppose I would just have to look more
Speaker 10: into the arguments about the problems with claiming you know,
Speaker 10: effect and cause and greatness in relation to that.
Speaker 3: But I really want to hear what you like, dude,
Speaker 3: love your love your calls, and I really liked today's call.
Speaker 3: But specifically I want to hear what you have to say,
Speaker 3: because you're always coming on and talking about some philosopher
Speaker 3: and you're clearly doing the work to understand these concepts,
Speaker 3: uh and and form your own opinions. I really want
Speaker 3: to get to know what Jackie uh, you know, what
Speaker 3: Jackie's perspective is. So maybe next time.
Speaker 2: Okay, good toning guys, Thank you Jackie. Yeah, I appreciate
Speaker 2: you giving given props to Jackie because I don't I agree.
Speaker 2: I don't want to waste time with us being confused
Speaker 2: on who we're citing what. You make a great point.
Speaker 2: If the arguments sound, we should just be able to
Speaker 2: present the argument as it is. We don't need to
Speaker 2: cite people. For it's important to cite people if we're
Speaker 2: talking about people's specific versions of arguments. But if this
Speaker 2: is part of your argument for what you might find
Speaker 2: convincing for yourself, then you should be able to put
Speaker 2: in your own words, right, So.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think I also it's interesting to me when
Speaker 1: folks are looking for truth entirely through argument, like if
Speaker 1: you can just argue well enough, you can arrive at reality.
Speaker 1: When I think that actually addressing reality working within the
Speaker 1: concepts of science, the things that we know now that
Speaker 1: matters too. Expertise in areas that are not philosophy also
Speaker 1: matter and are worth exploration, And so I think that
Speaker 1: it can be really tempting to just go back to
Speaker 1: who we think of as these special and renowned philosophers.
Speaker 1: But that's not the only way to know things, and
Speaker 1: it might not even be the best way to know things,
Speaker 1: so or to come to know things or study reality.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, and again like just trying to give context
Speaker 2: for like why Descartes thinks the way he does is
Speaker 2: because if you understand math, you gain new understandings in
Speaker 2: math through defining axioms, right, Like it doesn't come from
Speaker 2: necessarily the observable world. It does come through finding axioms
Speaker 2: and working within those axioms. And I think that was
Speaker 2: Descartes's kind of idea with God. It was like if
Speaker 2: we can figure out some of these axioms. Same thing
Speaker 2: with how we know thisself. I think therefore, I am
Speaker 2: he's trying to find like the bare minimum thing to
Speaker 2: work with, so we can figure out other things based
Speaker 2: on that, and so like in that context, it makes
Speaker 2: sense if you look at it from a modern day perspective,
Speaker 2: where we rely so much on the observable sciences, right come,
Speaker 2: we don't go to our understanding through math most of
Speaker 2: the time. For most things, we figured it out because
Speaker 2: somebody did a study somewhere on something and we learned
Speaker 2: something about it. It seems kind of strange to talk
Speaker 2: about God in that way. We would want to say, Okay, well,
Speaker 2: what are the observable things about God? But I don't
Speaker 2: think that's what like Dycartes trying to do there. Whether
Speaker 2: you find that convincing your eyes up to you personally,
Speaker 2: I don't. I don't think you can just define perfectness
Speaker 2: and greaterness, you know, all that stuff. That's pretty subjective,
Speaker 2: right but we Yeah, I don't know, I'm going on
Speaker 2: a rant here. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, I also think they handwaving away hundreds of years
Speaker 1: of scientific progress, like not saying that's a year. Yeah,
Speaker 1: But I think that sometimes jumping back to philosophers who
Speaker 1: were absolutely brilliant, but we're in a really different context.
Speaker 1: We have no idea if they would say the same
Speaker 1: things today.
Speaker 2: That's true. I wonder if Jay Kartes would still hold that.
Speaker 2: Maybe he'd be like, nah, actually that was my early stuff,
Speaker 2: you know, the second album. The second album would have
Speaker 2: hit better.
Speaker 1: Totally different sound, Yeah.
Speaker 2: Totally different sound. We were working on a new thing anyway.
Speaker 2: I don't know, I don't know. All right, all right,
Speaker 2: good stuff, good stuff all around. Let's talk to some
Speaker 2: more people. Okay, this is an interesting call that I
Speaker 2: don't know. Uh well, we got two really good ones. Oh,
Speaker 2: we'll get everybody. I don't know what am I saying.
Speaker 2: Let's just let's just dive right there. We got Eduardo
Speaker 2: Edwardo coming in from Brazil. Shout out to Brazil, Eduardo,
Speaker 2: what's up as you?
Speaker 4: Actually? But that's cool, that's pretty cool. Uh well, I
Speaker 4: had actually I called because I'm sort of confused about
Speaker 4: uh your not yours, because it's there's no ass moral
Speaker 4: to be I mean, how you guys deal with that?
Speaker 4: Because I was watching uh your your your broadcasting and
Speaker 4: I found something pretty interesting. One of you are almost
Speaker 4: closed to early early Christians and Judaism. Early christian is
Speaker 4: not not Christons Christianity as we understood today, but as
Speaker 4: we were supposed to have understood earlier, which is debatable.
Speaker 4: But what we have and others are not are almost tied,
Speaker 4: like almost you know, what's what's what's allowed, was allowed,
Speaker 4: what's forbidden forbidden? And I don't know if you guys
Speaker 4: have a midway point or pnfused. I'm turning from a
Speaker 4: place of bonancy here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I want to learn.
Speaker 4: Yeah, also I also if you want to discuss that later,
Speaker 4: I don't know that the to Mike's question, I mean
Speaker 4: the sort of most given.
Speaker 2: All right, well let's start with the first one. And
Speaker 2: I think this is a good round robin here. I'll
Speaker 2: start here, and I want to hear Jimmy and Sophia's
Speaker 2: take after. But like, like, so, Christians didn't invent morality, right,
Speaker 2: Jewish people didn't invent morality. I think they they lived
Speaker 2: in groups of people and they kind of figured out
Speaker 2: some stuff that was right or wrong and what was
Speaker 2: important to those people with that group of time. So
Speaker 2: we may share similarities to other groups of people because
Speaker 2: we're also people and we have to deal with the
Speaker 2: same sort of you know, problems that any group of
Speaker 2: people does. The problem is, do we have a systemic,
Speaker 2: systematic form of morality that to all atheists in all situations. No,
Speaker 2: all atheists come from different worlds. They come from different contexts, cultures,
Speaker 2: and backgrounds that are going to affect the way that
Speaker 2: they think about their own sense of morality, so that
Speaker 2: there really isn't a universal morality that we can come
Speaker 2: to in that regard. We may have some similarities, and
Speaker 2: we may have some broadly even agreeable, systematic things, but like,
Speaker 2: it's never going to be perfect. And the truth is
Speaker 2: it was never perfect for the Christians or the Jewish
Speaker 2: people either. They also have changed over time just as
Speaker 2: much as we have, if not more so. So it's
Speaker 2: easy to be confused because if you grow up in
Speaker 2: a religion that tells you this is the way, the
Speaker 2: truth and the light and nothing else makes sense, you
Speaker 2: might be confused why these other things kind of make
Speaker 2: sense and then kind of don't. It's because there's never
Speaker 2: been one true moral system that has been solved or
Speaker 2: has been worked out for all situations, and anybody that
Speaker 2: tells you otherwise is a liar in my opinion. So anyway,
Speaker 2: that's my take. Well, Sophia, how about you.
Speaker 1: So I think that there is no one answered or
Speaker 1: to where atheist morality would come from, because there is
Speaker 1: not some atheist group that just sits down and decides
Speaker 1: and publishes here's our moral beliefs. I think of that. Yes,
Speaker 1: I am, I guess not part of that gang. So
Speaker 1: so I would say that my beliefs about where morals
Speaker 1: come from is simply that we're capable of empathy with
Speaker 1: others because that is a positive survival trait for a
Speaker 1: social animal. Socializing helped us survive, so we're able to
Speaker 1: develop empathy. They kind of roll in together, progress together.
Speaker 1: As our social groups become more complex, discussions of morality
Speaker 1: also become a lot more complex. I think that for
Speaker 1: me personally, I became an atheist partially because I had
Speaker 1: started trying to work on my own moral reasoning and
Speaker 1: realize that so often Christianity, as I was, as it
Speaker 1: had been taught to me, as it was as I
Speaker 1: could participate in it around me, violated a lot of
Speaker 1: my personal moral tenants. That came more from a standpoint
Speaker 1: of just acknowledging human suffering and wanting to diminish human suffering,
Speaker 1: particularly for me personally that of children. I ended up
Speaker 1: being more and more expected to make compromises or to
Speaker 1: argue that somehow the Church or the Bible or God
Speaker 1: and defense of these institutions was more important than what
Speaker 1: I actually had come to believe was moral and true
Speaker 1: without God, which comes entirely from empathy. So I would
Speaker 1: say that that's for me personally more where it comes from.
Speaker 1: But I also think that there's the constant working out
Speaker 1: of morality is an advantage of atheism because you're constantly
Speaker 1: considering what am I doing? What is right? And you
Speaker 1: should be anyway, at least I am seeking out opinions
Speaker 1: across a wide variety of perspectives to help inform.
Speaker 2: That Yeah, Jimmy, your turn.
Speaker 3: Yes. So I don't really have much to add to
Speaker 3: those things. I certainly agree with what Sophia and Dan
Speaker 3: had to say. So I just want to kind of
Speaker 3: maybe spark a little bit of interest for Eduardo here.
Speaker 3: But you know, the idea that morality is somehow unique
Speaker 3: to religion, or to Christianity in my case, because I
Speaker 3: was a Christian. So I'm just going to talk about
Speaker 3: Christianity is just a product of people trying to create
Speaker 3: this kind of ancient system, trying to order society based
Speaker 3: on rules and laws and trying to find a way
Speaker 3: to basically govern and to create order. Right, But if
Speaker 3: you go down any street in America or elsewhere, you'll
Speaker 3: probably pass one to five different churches from different denominations,
Speaker 3: and they all have different viewpoints on how things should
Speaker 3: be done. And morality is this ongoing discussion, this ongoing
Speaker 3: argument about what should and what should not be. And theists,
Speaker 3: while they say that morality is kind of provided by God,
Speaker 3: they can't even agree on what should or should not be,
Speaker 3: which is why there are forty five thousand different sects
Speaker 3: of Christianity. So to say that, well, I'm not sure
Speaker 3: where atheists get their morality from, I could very easily
Speaker 3: turn and say the very same thing about Christianity. I
Speaker 3: am not sure where theists think they get their morality from.
Speaker 3: And I can actually point to an archaeological record of
Speaker 3: different religions that have popped up all over the Earth,
Speaker 3: that have used religion to create power structures ten thousand
Speaker 3: years ago or even now. And so something that I
Speaker 3: want you to think about there is why religion and
Speaker 3: morality are linked. That's what I have.
Speaker 2: Boom, all right, that's three people pontificating to you. Eduardo,
Speaker 2: what do you think about that?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 4: No, actually I agree with you the last one, or
Speaker 4: you know, I actually agree. Uh. What makes it sort
Speaker 4: of confused is, uh, I don't think that moral cunsule religion,
Speaker 4: but I think that uh, religion is and maybe it's
Speaker 4: starting out to be but starting not to be. But
Speaker 4: it's used to be a necessary way to since we
Speaker 4: didn't have much knowledge about the world, not that we
Speaker 4: have that watch now, but a way to kind of
Speaker 4: gather it is because it's it's a it's a religion
Speaker 4: or reasonally the words uh, you know, get it together.
Speaker 4: But yeah, they create our instructures. And I was never
Speaker 4: really religious. I was a feast, but I was never
Speaker 4: okay with with religion, especially because you know, I had
Speaker 4: a grandmother. I have a grandmother in a day that
Speaker 4: our Shoova witnesses, you know well, and I pretty much
Speaker 4: looking on the inside there and while there are most
Speaker 4: people there, they're honest, but well, you know, I let's
Speaker 4: say I had a close look at that, and I
Speaker 4: know that that churches do that, but we used to
Speaker 4: have those tales, those uh which folk or that got
Speaker 4: us together, and now I think we're at the end
Speaker 4: of our childhood as it is, and I think most,
Speaker 4: I think some of you are a feists, are going
Speaker 4: to be the ones that are going to lead that
Speaker 4: because you're going to have to think on where we
Speaker 4: find it, because it's almost instinctive look to look at
Speaker 4: religions to find that moral guidance. And that's why I'm
Speaker 4: interested because I'm not I'm a fast, but I'm I'm
Speaker 4: not fast from a relief that believes that most rituals
Speaker 4: are actually things that we used to have like boys
Speaker 4: for like a better analogy, and now we need to
Speaker 4: start to space with them because now we know more
Speaker 4: supposed to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I think it one. You have very
Speaker 2: kind things to say about us, but the truth is
Speaker 2: we're all activists for different reasons. I'm interested in talking
Speaker 2: about the power structures that religion gives. Right you're in Brazil,
Speaker 2: you know this. The Catholic Church is could technically be
Speaker 2: considered one of the largest criminal organizations in the world,
Speaker 2: and yet that doesn't stop somebody's grandma from going and
Speaker 2: donating every single Sunday, because of the comfort, because of
Speaker 2: the community, because of all the other things that provide.
Speaker 2: The religion can cause people to do terrible things for
Speaker 2: good reasons, right for terrible things, for benefits that that
Speaker 2: that you know that they don't necessarily implicitly mean to do.
Speaker 2: They don't mean to do wrong, they don't mean to
Speaker 2: do harm, but do anyway because of the power structure
Speaker 2: that exists. That's the reason why I'm an activist. There's
Speaker 2: a million different reasons why peop or activists and why
Speaker 2: they think this stuff is important. I don't know about
Speaker 2: us leading the charge on anything. You talk about any
Speaker 2: other opinions we have, and you find out why we're
Speaker 2: so infamous for being like a bag of cats. We
Speaker 2: don't always get along on a lot of things. The
Speaker 2: only united front that we tend to have is that, hey,
Speaker 2: maybe this whole religion thing we should kind of reconsider
Speaker 2: just a little bit. Maybe, So I don't know, I
Speaker 2: don't know, but you know it is worth at least
Speaker 2: pondering and at least figuring out, Hey, why am I here,
Speaker 2: Why am I going to this church? Why am I
Speaker 2: supporting this thing that exists? And is it actually harming people,
Speaker 2: is it always good? I think the answers to that
Speaker 2: may give you pause, but that's my take. I don't
Speaker 2: know you guys thoughts.
Speaker 1: I think that the future would be better whether if
Speaker 1: those in charge, whether theist or not, were consistent about
Speaker 1: trying to act as ethically morally as possible. I think
Speaker 1: that requires a certain amount of questioning of yourself and
Speaker 1: truly try to make the best decision that one can.
Speaker 1: I think that religion can get in the way of that.
Speaker 1: I think that what we see right now it's a
Speaker 1: bunch of theocrats who are really thinking that they are
Speaker 1: doing what's right. I would argue that they are not
Speaker 1: reasoning about it particularly hard, and they're more tempted by
Speaker 1: the power. But I think that honest exploration of what
Speaker 1: is considered right and good is a good thing for leaders,
Speaker 1: and I hope that we can do that and can
Speaker 1: challenge each other to do that. I don't think that
Speaker 1: gets you elected. I don't think that that leads you
Speaker 1: to being a leader, unfortunately. But I think that you know,
Speaker 1: we we reason almost as an act of hope, that
Speaker 1: it matters that we consider what is the right way
Speaker 1: to act.
Speaker 2: Yep, yep, yep.
Speaker 4: Sorry, I was having a bit of a delay here.
Speaker 4: Now I gotta tell something about president though, talk about
Speaker 4: the Catholic Church. Yeah, they are corrupt. I actually I
Speaker 4: had the not always say the pleasure, but the opportunity
Speaker 4: of looking at religious really close. And you know, but
Speaker 4: the thing is most conselics here they are either they
Speaker 4: have more and more religious actually, or there are something
Speaker 4: called non practicing conflicts, which is people that are Catholics
Speaker 4: but they don't don't do to mess.
Speaker 11: It's there's also a sort of syncretism religious syncretism here.
Speaker 11: But yeah, I think we have to think about that
Speaker 11: because I think now we are getting to a point
Speaker 11: in the world that we are getting divided, to a
Speaker 11: point that nobody gets stop to anybody else, and they
Speaker 11: have to be very careful about that.
Speaker 2: Yeah. The syncretism you're describing in Brazils is quite famous, right,
Speaker 2: because of its uniqueness. It has a there's a cultural
Speaker 2: identification that comes to the people of Brazil. Then you
Speaker 2: would not see that you would not see in other
Speaker 2: countries that are Catholic because of the Catholic Church's attempts
Speaker 2: to sort of capture the people there. Right, it has
Speaker 2: to kind of adapt in order to survive, and people
Speaker 2: kind of come up with their own interpretations in order
Speaker 2: for that to still survive and yet still give lip
Speaker 2: service to the church as a structure and as an institution.
Speaker 2: It's interesting how a religion like that can sort of
Speaker 2: adapt to its environment in order to retain its power there.
Speaker 2: And it's something that I think a lot of people
Speaker 2: still study and think about it workout. The same thing
Speaker 2: happened with in America too. By the way, everybody here says,
Speaker 2: you ask ten different Christians what Christianity is, you're gonna
Speaker 2: get twelve different answers. I mean, that's just how it is.
Speaker 2: That's just how it always is going to be. But
Speaker 2: there's a lot to that. Unfortunately, we do have some
Speaker 2: of the callers that I want to take, and I
Speaker 2: will go ahead and let you go now. But a Eduardo,
Speaker 2: I've enjoyed my previous conversation with you. I enjoyed this
Speaker 2: one too. I'm glad that you feel comfortable talking to
Speaker 2: us about this journey that you're going through, kind of
Speaker 2: thinking thinking about some stuff. Maybe you're not quiet on
Speaker 2: our side yet, maybe we're two I don't know something
Speaker 2: for you, but I'm glad that you're spending that time
Speaker 2: with us anyway, because it is very thoughtful, very thoughtful
Speaker 2: that you think that we're you know, worth talking to
Speaker 2: about anything. Really, But yeah, great call. Any thoughts on
Speaker 2: that call, Gang.
Speaker 3: I something stood out to me where he said, you know,
Speaker 3: it's it's just natural or it seems to be like
Speaker 3: the reflex to look toward morality or look toward religion
Speaker 3: for morality. Yeah. I mean that's part of the process.
Speaker 3: You know, that's the indoctrination. You're told your entire life,
Speaker 3: especially from a childhood, that that's where morality comes from.
Speaker 3: And that's how that power structure creates a lifetime client,
Speaker 3: a lifetime minion by getting you while you're young and
Speaker 3: infusing you with this idea that morality comes from God
Speaker 3: that is actually not true. And I appreciate him thinking
Speaker 3: that people you know, like us, I would say that
Speaker 3: that at least challenged the view of God will will
Speaker 3: help other people, because I hope that I'm helping other
Speaker 3: people by letting them or serving as an example as
Speaker 3: somebody who did challenge the indoctrination and who came out
Speaker 3: on the other end, you know, not more indoctrinated, but
Speaker 3: a little bit free of what I was told was
Speaker 3: the truth. So yeah, I think that that's what really stuck.
Speaker 3: That's the shocking thing, you know, the reflex, the default
Speaker 3: is to look toward religion. I hope that default changes.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I also wonder if that default would be quite
Speaker 1: as strongly ingrained if there wasn't. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: the threat of eternal damnation. You know, I think that
Speaker 1: hell really, I know for me as a little kid
Speaker 1: in particular, causes you to, you know, focus in on
Speaker 1: religion as the one thing that will save you from
Speaker 1: being tortured forever, right, which whatever that means to you
Speaker 1: in your five you know, is what it oftentimes will
Speaker 1: bank on forever. So yeah, I agree.
Speaker 2: In general, religion tells you two things, what happens after
Speaker 2: your die and who you're allowed to have sex with.
Speaker 2: That seems to be the kind of through line in
Speaker 2: all of them in my observations. But I think we
Speaker 2: have time for at least one more caller, if not more.
Speaker 3: We got to hit the top five patrons.
Speaker 2: Guy, Yeah, you're so right. I'm so behind. I'm not
Speaker 2: looking at the chat from the crew who's telling us
Speaker 2: that we need to get to the top five patients.
Speaker 2: Since you're so prepared and ready for that, Jim, would
Speaker 2: you like to read the top five patrons?
Speaker 3: Oh boy, I of course would love to so our
Speaker 3: top five patrons. Oops, all Singularity, that's number one, Number two,
Speaker 3: dingle Berry Jackson. I like what you did there, dingle Berry,
Speaker 3: going to number two. Three, k Levi Helvetti, four left
Speaker 3: in the leaves. Five, a name I've never read before,
Speaker 3: but I'm happy to see up on the on the list,
Speaker 3: Brian Zupke and then honorable mention Jonathan Hall. Thank you
Speaker 3: to everybody who donates to us on Patreon, and if
Speaker 3: you want to have your name read on the air,
Speaker 3: please consider supporting us at tiny dot c c forward
Speaker 3: slash Patrin and folks, don't forget we're taking super chats today.
Speaker 3: We got to get we got to get some more
Speaker 3: super chats in so that we can show very unflattering pictures.
Speaker 3: We've got three of us lovely people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we've got about ten minutes here, and we still
Speaker 2: need five more super chat donations, five five dollars donations.
Speaker 2: All else it's going back in the vault and you're
Speaker 2: not going to see it until Michaeliser decides to do
Speaker 2: another release. You know, still going with the Disney Vault metaphor.
Speaker 2: I don't know why, but we do have all the
Speaker 2: callers who wanted to talk to us until then. So
Speaker 2: now's the time for you to get your donations before Sophia.
Speaker 2: Do you want to pick the next call? Because you know,
Speaker 2: Jimmy kind of got one, and I feel like you
Speaker 2: should get one.
Speaker 1: I really do, Philly. I like surprises. I was even
Speaker 1: playing a game the other day and you get to
Speaker 1: choose which side you debated about very silly things.
Speaker 2: I choose. I wanted it. Yeah, I actually want a
Speaker 2: surprise for you is that you get to pick the
Speaker 2: next call. So go ahead, and you know, take your shot.
Speaker 1: I may or may not actually be signed in right
Speaker 1: now to be I that and be like, okay, I'm
Speaker 1: not going to explicitly state.
Speaker 2: That, but it's projective. I didn't think that message. She
Speaker 2: was doing such great subtle messaging to me, improvag no,
Speaker 2: don't let me pick, and I ignored it. I was
Speaker 2: like a steamboat just going Titanic straight into the iceberg.
Speaker 2: That's what just happened with.
Speaker 1: My keys, and I want people to hear that. It's
Speaker 1: the whole thing. Anyway, Now you all.
Speaker 2: Know, all right, Jimmy, you're signed in. What do you
Speaker 2: think you want? You want to pick the next one? Then?
Speaker 3: Yeah, we're going with Steve in Nebraska.
Speaker 2: I knew it. I knew we're gonna go Steve. All right?
Speaker 2: Is up?
Speaker 6: Hey?
Speaker 5: Hey, Jimmy, uh Dan and so get Thanks for taking
Speaker 5: my call. So I was calling about recent studies suggesting
Speaker 5: dark energies weakening over time, meaning that the universe is
Speaker 5: eternally cyclico rather than having been created. Are you familiar
Speaker 5: with this?
Speaker 1: No, by dark do you mean like dark matters or.
Speaker 5: Is it dark energy? So, according to dark energies meethroscopic
Speaker 5: instrument observations of red shifts, which is distant galaxy light
Speaker 5: and quaser light stretched out by the expansion of space.
Speaker 5: Messi precisely measures this expansion rate of space by using
Speaker 5: veryan acoustic oscillations sound rings, which are density fluctuations in
Speaker 5: the early universe were sound waves rippled through primordial plasma
Speaker 5: and printing a visible distribution of the galaxies today, acting
Speaker 5: as a standard ruler for measuring the universe's expansion and
Speaker 5: Desi's first year results find dark energy state of equation
Speaker 5: negative one, which is dark energy's pressure for dark energies
Speaker 5: energy density.
Speaker 2: Right, hold on, hold on, hold on, pressure is consisting, yes.
Speaker 3: Dave, hold on, hold on, listen, man, I'm no, I'm
Speaker 3: no brainyact and I know a thing or two about
Speaker 3: radar waves. And I know that measuring wavelengths and and
Speaker 3: and measuring you know, waves in general can give you
Speaker 3: an idea of you know, how things move and how
Speaker 3: far away they've come, so where they're going or how
Speaker 3: far away they've come from. So on that note right
Speaker 3: in the In an effort to not confuse me, let's
Speaker 3: say that we're able to measure the expansion of the
Speaker 3: universe by looking at changing wavelengths over time. Okay, how
Speaker 3: does that relate to dark energy? Because I do not
Speaker 3: know what dark energy is.
Speaker 5: Dark energy is what is expanding. It's a counteract to gravity.
Speaker 5: It's what's in the universe.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 5: When you take the deak Use observation of data, it's
Speaker 5: it's it's in line with the cosmological constant cold dark
Speaker 5: entergy matter model. But when you take the data with
Speaker 5: cosmic microwave background survey data and supernova survey data, the
Speaker 5: equation of state of dark energy is get less than
Speaker 5: negative one. Suggesting that dark energy is weakening over time.
Speaker 5: So what's the good means that the universe may be
Speaker 5: cyclical in nature rather than having been created.
Speaker 1: Okay, so the premise, it seems like dark energy and
Speaker 1: dark matter are sort of two halves of the same coin,
Speaker 1: where dark energy pushes the universe further out. This is
Speaker 1: according to the Harvard and Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. This
Speaker 1: is what I'm looking up right now, and that dark
Speaker 1: dark matter is a gravitational forest, dark energy is a
Speaker 1: repulsive force. Basically, it seems like, I mean, that's an
Speaker 1: interesting thought that like dark matter would be slowing I
Speaker 1: have not or sorry, dark energy I guess would be
Speaker 1: slowing to be honest, when you first called them, like,
Speaker 1: are we talking about witchcraft? So I am so not
Speaker 1: the expert on this, but it seems like, you know,
Speaker 1: it's interesting things to study at the far reaches of
Speaker 1: the galaxy. It also seems like there's a lot to
Speaker 1: be looked at. Like from my understanding, a lot of
Speaker 1: physicists don't even agree on how you should deal with
Speaker 1: dark matter self, and so the opposite of it, I
Speaker 1: imagine there's still quite a bit of ambiguity.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think I think for me, my question is,
Speaker 3: so what you know?
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 3: And I mean that, I mean that respectfully, Steve, Like, Okay,
Speaker 3: let's say we find out that the universe is cyclical,
Speaker 3: So I mean, what did we just accomplish there? I
Speaker 3: don't I don't know that.
Speaker 8: I don't know.
Speaker 4: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Iftive it may give us more AMMO to say that, hey,
Speaker 2: this universe thing actually is just a natural phenomenon and
Speaker 2: isn't the part of a divine creator. So there's something
Speaker 2: to that.
Speaker 3: Maybe maybe Yeah, I'm still saying that. I would say
Speaker 3: that either way though, So that's because I don't have
Speaker 3: I still don't have the God, the prime mover. I
Speaker 3: don't have the thing right from the beginning, from the
Speaker 3: beginning anyway, Like, I'm just not sure how the argument
Speaker 3: changed and what that does for humanity to be, Like,
Speaker 3: all right now it's now it's cyclical, it's no longer linear.
Speaker 3: What did we achieve? And you know what, I'm I'm
Speaker 3: genuinely approaching this as somebody who is like not familiar
Speaker 3: with this stuff. So forgive me if I sound like
Speaker 3: I'm unappreciative or whatever. I just I think I need
Speaker 3: more education and.
Speaker 5: Something the work. I mean, it's all initial It's I
Speaker 5: might be jumping the guns, but I think this takes
Speaker 5: the prime we were argument away from thedism. What do
Speaker 5: you guys think?
Speaker 1: I actually that's initially what I thought of been there. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And if it just goes around in circles itself. I
Speaker 1: do think that if someone believes in the prime mover argument,
Speaker 1: they are not going to buy this. I don't think
Speaker 1: that it will change the minds of people who because
Speaker 1: then they could also ask, well, what set the cycle
Speaker 1: in motion? Right like, I think that that would still
Speaker 1: be where they might come from also in what I'm
Speaker 1: looking at. So I just like this is just interesting.
Speaker 1: I actually, as more i'm reading about I'm probably going
Speaker 1: to nerd out about this today. I am not a
Speaker 1: super big brain science person, but I just think it's
Speaker 1: really fun. There is reason to believe it might be
Speaker 1: a variable that we actually there's all it will. All
Speaker 1: I'm finding is that there's reason to believe that the
Speaker 1: dark energy has been faster in the past, so not
Speaker 1: even that we can observe its swing down, but that
Speaker 1: it has been faster. And it's also possible that it
Speaker 1: could speed up again because we so misunderstand maybe or
Speaker 1: don't understand what it's really doing, which would change a
Speaker 1: lot of our models and ideas of physics. And so
Speaker 1: in that respect, I think it's kind of cool to
Speaker 1: see that we're still uncovering how the universe works. I
Speaker 1: think that, yeah, it probably doesn't have a lot of
Speaker 1: impact on my day to day, and I don't think
Speaker 1: it's really going to change a lot of the big
Speaker 1: arguments for against God, particularly if it turns out to
Speaker 1: be variable.
Speaker 2: The thing is, if you talk to Young Earth creations,
Speaker 2: half of them don't even believe in dark matter and
Speaker 2: dark energy anyway. A lot of them are just say, oh,
Speaker 2: these are made up by astronomers because they can't account
Speaker 2: for anomalies that we observe in the observable universe, right
Speaker 2: because like red shift and stuff, the stuff that we
Speaker 2: figure out is like, hey, this is how we know
Speaker 2: stuff is being a lot of Young Earth creationists don't
Speaker 2: even say that that those observations are real either. So
Speaker 2: you know, you kind of have to already be a
Speaker 2: believer in dark energy and dark matter for it to
Speaker 2: really convince you one way or the other. But Steve,
Speaker 2: I still think it's cool. I appreciate that you brought
Speaker 2: this up to the table. We do have some other
Speaker 2: callers here and we want to try to get at
Speaker 2: least one or maybe two more folks before we before
Speaker 2: we end today's show. So I'm gonna I'm gonna drop
Speaker 2: you out right now. But thank you for calling in
Speaker 2: and appreciate talking to you. That was a cool topic.
Speaker 2: I say, I don't know, I don't know. Maybe I'm
Speaker 2: not the most relevant to us, but I'm no. I'm
Speaker 2: no big city astronomer. I don't know the ins and
Speaker 2: outs of this whole stuff. My knowledge of astronomy. I
Speaker 2: took one astronomy course in college and I've watched some
Speaker 2: kurzkaz At videos. I think that's the extent of my education.
Speaker 2: Not Jay.
Speaker 1: Yeah, mine is that my husband watches PBS Spacetime and
Speaker 1: then tries to explain it to me. That's that's basically
Speaker 1: what I like.
Speaker 2: That guy, guy with the beard, That's like, yeah, I
Speaker 2: know that guy.
Speaker 1: It's really interesting. I mean, I like, just from a standpoint,
Speaker 1: part of how I stopped being a Christian and even
Speaker 1: a Young Earth kind of Christian is just wonder at
Speaker 1: the universe and what we can find out through science.
Speaker 1: So there's a part of me that it's just the
Speaker 1: excitement at discovery and at how science can explore things
Speaker 1: that actually led me down a path of just more
Speaker 1: reason in general. So I guess for me, I'm like,
Speaker 1: there's you know, there's virtue in spending time just being excited.
Speaker 2: You know, He's like, no, bring out the bears.
Speaker 3: Yeah, bears. Bears are always an option.
Speaker 2: Okay, I just wanted to Well.
Speaker 3: I'll tell you, I think Sophia nailed that one, because
Speaker 3: have you ever spoken to a theist. I mean, they'll yeah,
Speaker 3: of course, who set the cycle in motion? Right, that
Speaker 3: theists will wait for the scientific community to do all
Speaker 3: of the work over decades and centuries and go yeah,
Speaker 3: but god right, and so it really won't matter. And
Speaker 3: so that's kind of my frustration.
Speaker 1: Well, we ken Ham saying, were you there again.
Speaker 2: For our purposes? For our purposes as debate lords, it
Speaker 2: doesn't matter? I say, yeah, I think the I.
Speaker 1: Don't want to think of myself as a debate It's terrible,
Speaker 1: isn't it.
Speaker 2: Anyway, Okay, let's see if we can get at least
Speaker 2: one more, maybe another. Maybe we'll see, But I think
Speaker 2: I want to talk to Shaquille. Shaquille calling in from England,
Speaker 2: asking us why would God be okay with the concept
Speaker 2: of money. I want to hear your take on this, Shaquille.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, you are alive on talk Heathen. Shaquille, you
Speaker 2: are alive on talk Ethen. If you're there, speak now
Speaker 2: or forever. Holds your piece, because I will have to
Speaker 2: let you go otherwise. Sorry, Shaquille, I know you've been
Speaker 2: waiting for a long time. You probably went up to
Speaker 2: go to the bathroom or something, and now it's it's
Speaker 2: too late. I'm so sorry. But we do have another
Speaker 2: call here. We're going to talk to d who's calling
Speaker 2: in from Iowa. D is asking how can an imperfect
Speaker 2: being imagine a supremely perfect being? And how does that
Speaker 2: help improve a society in chaos? Interesting premise, du feel
Speaker 2: free to expound on that.
Speaker 9: Hi all, nice to talk to you again. Yeah, what
Speaker 9: was the philosopher? It wasn't I keep wanting to say, paths.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're so excited to tell you.
Speaker 2: You know, we were so busy googling things earlier and
Speaker 2: now you know totally.
Speaker 9: Oh my, but it's completely circular reasoning. I'm thinking of
Speaker 9: a god.
Speaker 10: Therefore, God exists, but God can only exist because I'm.
Speaker 9: Thinking of them.
Speaker 2: Yes, And.
Speaker 9: Really the whole premise falls apart because the being thinking
Speaker 9: about the God is imperfect, So how can imperfection imagine perfection?
Speaker 2: Well, there's a reason why Descartes isn't known as one
Speaker 2: of the great theologians of his time. Like, this argument
Speaker 2: that is presented to us today has been criticized before.
Speaker 2: We're certainly not the first people to break it apart,
Speaker 2: and it's not one of his better well formulated thoughts
Speaker 2: or ideas. There's reason why people think of Descartes as
Speaker 2: the think therefore I am guy and not the existence
Speaker 2: of God guy. A lot of people, the scholars included,
Speaker 2: don't find this super convincing, right, for reasons we've already
Speaker 2: talked about. But Descartes was like, nah, this is this
Speaker 2: is the key, This is it right here? So I
Speaker 2: don't know. Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me either.
Speaker 2: How can we even understand what a perfect being is?
Speaker 2: But that's kind of Descard's point, though, to his credit,
Speaker 2: his thing is, well, we can't understand it, but we
Speaker 2: have an idea of it. So where does that come from?
Speaker 2: It has to come from outside ourselves because we're not
Speaker 2: perfect beings. That's kind of his whole his whole stick
Speaker 2: there is I cannot convince ourselves.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I cannot define it, but I've got the vibes.
Speaker 1: So therefore it is really ironic to me also that
Speaker 1: a lot of folks who will use this argument that
Speaker 1: atheists just want to be their own God, well also
Speaker 1: essentially use arguments that just invent God because they thought
Speaker 1: of him. And I find that a little bit funny.
Speaker 2: Yeah, which is like, maybe we have some better Like
Speaker 2: maybe God just has to, like I don't know, write
Speaker 2: me a letter at least, or just like talk to me.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I just feel like that's gonna be
Speaker 2: way more convincing than just well, if I think about
Speaker 2: it real hard, I know that he's out there, so
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 9: My main point is that old philosophers are dead and
Speaker 9: they tweet they can't they can't help us. They can't
Speaker 9: help us right now. Okay, dey can't you know, pastoral,
Speaker 9: all of these guys, they can't help us right now.
Speaker 9: We're in a situation where, uh, you know, in a
Speaker 9: little over a month, we're going to see.
Speaker 2: Let me think about this though, de you. I mean,
Speaker 2: you say, maybe it's not helpful to us as American
Speaker 2: broad society, but like, how many of us has started
Speaker 2: our journey questioning things and figuring things out because they
Speaker 2: read Plato's Allegory of the Cave right, Like how many
Speaker 2: people have discovered an entire worldview that first started because somebody,
Speaker 2: a philosopher, asked them a question that people just hadn't
Speaker 2: considered before. I mean, yeah, is it you know, are
Speaker 2: the individual philosopher I'm trying to think of, Like, you know,
Speaker 2: is explorations of myriological nihilism going to help fishermen in Taiwan?
Speaker 9: Know?
Speaker 2: Like, it's not obviously useful for everything in our lives,
Speaker 2: but it is useful for at least considering things that
Speaker 2: maybe we hadn't considered before. And I do think there's
Speaker 2: value to that. No, I don't think Descartes going to
Speaker 2: solve all of our issues or Blaze, Pascal or anybody,
Speaker 2: but they are still valuable to us. And I think
Speaker 2: there is a reason why we should continue to look
Speaker 2: at these guys because they do say something about the
Speaker 2: human spirit, if anything, which is that if we think
Speaker 2: about stuff enough, maybe we can figure out the world
Speaker 2: that's kind of a radical premise in and of itself.
Speaker 2: In Christianity, we're taught that the world is set, that
Speaker 2: there is a God and there is a devil, and
Speaker 2: they're going to fight it out and it doesn't matter
Speaker 2: because it's all there for us. Whereas philosophy in general
Speaker 2: kind of says and works under this idea that, well,
Speaker 2: maybe we have to be the authors of our own
Speaker 2: destiny and figure things out and think things through and
Speaker 2: find our own solutions to problems that may or may
Speaker 2: not come from a god. So I don't know, maybe
Speaker 2: I push back on that. I think that there is
Speaker 2: some value to it, but that's just my take. I
Speaker 2: don't know what you guys think.
Speaker 1: I think that I very much sympathize with the idea
Speaker 1: of just being like, who cares what these guys thought?
Speaker 1: You know, there's a because I think so often folks
Speaker 1: are turned off by philosophy, particularly in online discourse, because
Speaker 1: it's brought up like, well, this old ancient person said this,
Speaker 1: therefore women belong in the home, or like some bizarre
Speaker 1: kind of justification, And I think that sure has more
Speaker 1: to do with the individual who's making these arguments than
Speaker 1: it does the actual idea and arguments. But I think
Speaker 1: I do understand the temptation to sometimes just be like okay,
Speaker 1: but like, why should I do that because some guy
Speaker 1: two thousand years ago said it, which I think sometimes
Speaker 1: people replace Jesus figures and religious figures with philosophers with
Speaker 1: looking for another source of authority, and they decide that
Speaker 1: that's going to be like these old smart men, which
Speaker 1: is cool and interesting to study. I definitely, though, sympathize
Speaker 1: with the point that you just made about, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of what it says about the human spirit and
Speaker 1: the experience of being human. The name I've selected Sophia Spina.
Speaker 1: Spina is Forced Spinoza, you know, the guy who was
Speaker 1: excommunicated from the to the Jewish community in Amsterdam in
Speaker 1: the sixteen hundreds because he started to advocate for secular government.
Speaker 1: His arguments are still incredibly relevant today. I clearly find
Speaker 1: him inspiring, and I think that matters. I think we
Speaker 1: can also actually very practically argue that. So I'm sort
Speaker 1: of working in the mental health field, and a lot
Speaker 1: of mental health theories are are really based on old philosophers.
Speaker 1: Existentialism is a counseling theory that has to do with
Speaker 1: how you you know, create how you find meaning and
Speaker 1: then you know, constructivism is also used in counseling and
Speaker 1: like how you actually create that and how it's built
Speaker 1: through society. So they are very there are very practical applications,
Speaker 1: and I very much gain a lot from this. But
Speaker 1: also I do I am sympathetic to being like fuck
Speaker 1: those guys, you know, on occasion you could say both, I.
Speaker 2: Feel like fuck these guys, but also they are kind
Speaker 2: of valuable sometimes I'm okay with that.
Speaker 1: Take what's good to the rest, right. Yeah, yeah, I
Speaker 1: don't think it's a contradiction. I just think it's sort
Speaker 1: of like a these things can coexist and definitely definitely do.
Speaker 9: Hell yeah, okay, yeah that makes sense. But I was
Speaker 9: actually really interested in Jimmy's comment that you know, he's
Speaker 9: he's interested in the power structures that religion has created,
Speaker 9: and THU of those power structures, I think maybe extension
Speaker 9: I could I could suppose possibly the GIV you could
Speaker 9: have gone on to say, you know that these power
Speaker 9: structures are reaching into places where they don't belong, you know,
Speaker 9: like a secular government, and.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, well they're these these ancient power structures. Yeah,
Speaker 3: so these ancient power structures over a period of centuries
Speaker 3: have increasingly been challenged by other power structures that have
Speaker 3: popped up, like secular governments. In our own time, we're
Speaker 3: seeing corporations, Uh, we are seeing transnational organizations, and we
Speaker 3: are seeing international organizations or non governmental organizations that are
Speaker 3: popping up and they're creating their own power and they're
Speaker 3: rendering the church more and more inefficient or necessary.
Speaker 9: Right.
Speaker 3: So, yeah, that that plays into why the church has
Speaker 3: to change so much. We've talked about it. I think
Speaker 3: Dan brought it up a little bit earlier. You know, Uh,
Speaker 3: in the case of Brazil, Brazil being a unique kind
Speaker 3: of mixing of cultures and just having to change along
Speaker 3: with those cultures because otherwise they lose their influence. You know,
Speaker 3: there was a time where religion was the sole form
Speaker 3: of government, the sole power structure that ordered society kept
Speaker 3: things going, and that has dissipated and kind of all
Speaker 3: but disintegrated with the rise of other power structures, and
Speaker 3: you know, they still try and gain their influence. We're
Speaker 3: seeing that in the United States now, we're seeing more
Speaker 3: right wing Christian organizations reach into the government offer their
Speaker 3: financial support in return for an upholding of their traditions
Speaker 3: and values, and unfortunately, we're seeing a large swath of
Speaker 3: elected officials giving into that power structure and helping to
Speaker 3: revive it when it was actually in decline. So yeah,
Speaker 3: I mean that's my take on it. I think when
Speaker 3: it comes to let's say, Catholicism, they've been fracturing for
Speaker 3: a really long time and they still continue to fracture,
Speaker 3: and they're not as effective as a power structure as
Speaker 3: they used to be.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yep. But if you want to explore power structures,
Speaker 2: philosophy is also a good way to do that too,
Speaker 2: just saying yeah, that's like the entirety of postmodern literature
Speaker 2: in the twentieth century, Like a lot of it is
Speaker 2: about power structures.
Speaker 3: You know, and d on on on your first comment,
Speaker 3: you know, I kind of sat back, you know, because
Speaker 3: there's three hosts today. You know, there's a lot of talking, right,
Speaker 3: we could we could mostly Dan it's you when there's
Speaker 3: two hosts. So yeah, Chris, so right, let's just let's
Speaker 3: just call it what it is now. But seriously, d
Speaker 3: you know, there, what good are the philosophies or the
Speaker 3: philosophers of the past. I mean, think of the people
Speaker 3: who stood up when nobody else stood up, right, think
Speaker 3: of the work that they did. I think Sophia, you know,
Speaker 3: talked about this a little bit, but uh, people that
Speaker 3: were burned at the stake, you know, or people that
Speaker 3: were threatened with those kinds of things because they had
Speaker 3: the gut to challenge it. I, for one, you know,
Speaker 3: feel like I'm standing on the shoulders of giants, you know,
Speaker 3: just because I feel like we're progressing in the right
Speaker 3: direction by challenging these power structures that tell us, hey,
Speaker 3: this is the way, and we could say nope, you know,
Speaker 3: you're not the way.
Speaker 2: Hell yeah, hell yeah. That's all the time that we got.
Speaker 2: Any last last remarks you want to make before we
Speaker 2: let you go.
Speaker 9: No, thank you for your views. It's definitely helping me
Speaker 9: take a longer view. And yeah, I think I'll spend
Speaker 9: some time doing some more reading. And thank you guys,
Speaker 9: it's been great talking to you.
Speaker 2: Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful, beautiful, Thank you, d thank you for
Speaker 2: your call.
Speaker 1: I mentioned something really quick before we end. I just
Speaker 1: want to acknowledge it. Today is World Aid's Day, and
Speaker 1: want to just remember that so many folks are not
Speaker 1: here with us today because of bigotry that led to
Speaker 1: a lack of public informa, a lack of research, and
Speaker 1: the fact that, for oftentimes very religious reasons, folks were
Speaker 1: okay with the death that were happening in the gay community.
Speaker 1: And so just putting that out there that today is
Speaker 1: you know, I started by talking about it being a
Speaker 1: bit of a day of sorrow, but I also think
Speaker 1: just remembering that there are people who will try to
Speaker 1: remember you, that this matters, that it matters that we
Speaker 1: keep questioning and pushing forward. I just wanted to throw
Speaker 1: that out there because it is a day to remember
Speaker 1: all those things.
Speaker 2: Yes, thank you for bringing that announcement into the end here,
Speaker 2: because it was something we said we wanted to do
Speaker 2: earlier and we almost did get to it by Sophia
Speaker 2: remembered and that's why she's on the team. But I
Speaker 2: want to point out that I want to say thank
Speaker 2: you for to everybody that supports the show in all
Speaker 2: the various ways that you have. There are other ways
Speaker 2: you can support the show. We mentioned one of them,
Speaker 2: which is the Patreon, but of course even just liking
Speaker 2: and subscribing and leaving a comment is a great way
Speaker 2: to support it. And last but not least the super
Speaker 2: chats as well, which I have another one here which
Speaker 2: was a dollar ninety nine from Buster Bear said what
Speaker 2: led me away interacting with Christians, So that's a take
Speaker 2: that I think a lot of people can agree with. Unfortunately, folks,
Speaker 2: that does mean the vault it's getting closed. It's not
Speaker 2: coming out today. But next time we will see if
Speaker 2: those pictures will come out. Maybe if all three of
Speaker 2: us host together again, I don't know, we'll see what
Speaker 2: goes with that, but next time we'll maybe hit that goal.
Speaker 2: But we appreciate all of you guys that donate it
Speaker 2: anyways despite the fact, because it does help the atheist
Speaker 2: Munium Austin and it tells them, hey, talk Heathan is
Speaker 2: a show that's worth supporting. So we appreciate you doing that.
Speaker 2: And if you're going to comment today, also you should
Speaker 2: comment on the prompt this week, which is what's the
Speaker 2: difference between Jesus the Tooth Fairy and Sasquatch. Leave your
Speaker 2: comment below, and the best three answers we will read
Speaker 2: next week. And discord, I think some folks are going
Speaker 2: to be in the discord after sure make it today,
Speaker 2: but Sophila is gonna Yeah, I got an appointment at
Speaker 2: Men's Warehouse. I gotta go to h Iron. Go, but
Speaker 2: Sophia is going so thank you so much, Sophia holding down.
Speaker 3: The fort in the background, I have to give a
Speaker 3: reason to My teenage daughter is watching my toddler while
Speaker 3: I do this. I have to go relieve her. I
Speaker 3: don't want anybody to think I'm rejecting you. I love
Speaker 3: the After Show.
Speaker 2: I I I pray that Jimmy doesn't reject me every
Speaker 2: single day, mostly about the Bears thing. I think the
Speaker 2: Bears scary, but also his love is is something I desire.
Speaker 2: I don't know where I'm going with this comment.
Speaker 1: I just love the idea that there's talk, there's going
Speaker 1: to be talk e than lore, that Jimmy controls Bears,
Speaker 1: and then that's just going to be how that goes.
Speaker 3: Now, I'm I am okay with that rumor. That's something
Speaker 3: happy to support.
Speaker 2: That he is like an Erson? What what like erson a?
Speaker 2: That's what bears are? What I'm trying to think of
Speaker 2: an Erson a mage or something some.
Speaker 1: Sort of drewid of some kind of that's simpler.
Speaker 2: I think Jimmy's just a druid. Yeah, our eventual d
Speaker 2: and d campaign. We got to write this down. I'm
Speaker 2: a paladin because palad Dan and then Jimmy's drew it.
Speaker 2: So there we go. All right, Okay, enough enough talking,
Speaker 2: even Laura. Let's let's get this thing wrapped up, folks.
Speaker 2: If well, we'll hang on, well almost, I'm getting my
Speaker 2: I'm getting my things mixed up here. If you don't believe,
Speaker 2: this is your community, and we appreciate you being here.
Speaker 2: If you do believe, we don't hate you.
Speaker 1: We're just not convinced, just not convinced.
Speaker 2: There's those love rings coming out, giving them all to you, guys.
Speaker 2: Thank you to everybody watching another week's episode of Talk
Speaker 2: hethan this has been Jimmie Junior, Sophia Spina and objectively
Speaker 2: Dan coming to you, uh this Sunday. Remember to Uh,
Speaker 2: I'd say remember to always keep on the truth. But
Speaker 2: that's a different show. We already did the We already
Speaker 2: did the outro. Let's just come here.
Speaker 12: We want the truth. So watch Truth Wanted Live Friday
Speaker 12: at seven pm Central. Visit tiny dot cc slash y
Speaker 12: t tw and call into the show at five one
Speaker 12: two nine nine two four two, or connect to the
Speaker 12: show online at tiny dot cc slash call tw