@animaljp3 ....perhaps in God's original design, it would have been painless, and perhaps extremely pleasurable. There was a definite change in Adam and Eve the very moment they separated from God, because they could see the change and they felt naked. Given that people seem to be designed as conduits for God's energy, it seems safe to assume that when this energy was gone, humanity would have serious physical issues, such as pain during child birth.
@Laylow4now God wanted change, so had pain. He wanted to see change in everything. Pain already was there, for Genisis says God INCREASED pain, not made it.
@animaljp3 ...O.K., but the point is that humanity has changed from their original design in Eden, and this separation from God is the source of our problems, such as pain in child birth.
I think its best described as "the most obvious answer is usually the correct one". Lets not get caught up in a literal translation. It is a concept and a very simple one at that, and even though there is some beauty to its simplicity, It is still very simplistic. Frankly I find the concept itself to be quite obvious and not the least bit profound.
All things being equal the simpler answer tends to be the right one.
So IF both answers explain the facts to about the same degree the one that is less complex tends to be the right one because it would be more probable. of course the example in this video is not equal, one of these answers has fact to back it up the other dose not.
daring someone to jeapordize their eternal security just to prove a point is an arrogant and irresponsible thing to do my friend. If you love and serve God, its your DUTY to be loving and kind to everyone and in spite of how they treat you, otherwise, what makes you any different from the world around you? I would instead encourage you to be gentle with those who have not yet known Jesus, and pray for them to do so. we will be judged for your treatment of them while here on earth. peace...
"If evolution were true, then the natural process of life would still be seeing things evolve"
Your RIGHT!! it's called macroevolution - say it with me now macroevolution... Besides...who wants to live forever? that's a long long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long long long long ,long ,long ,long long ,long ,long time....know what I mean?
just to clarify, God does not "require torment" for anyone to believe in Him. He requires perfect justice, as a perfect being, but since we cannot possibly live up to the standard, He gave us his Son, Jesus the Christ as an atonement for our sins, that we can choose to either freely accept or reject. "Torment" is a consequence for not believeing in His son, Jesus, and accepting his sacrifice for our reconcilliation, not a prerequisite. Torment is eternal becasue God is eternal, cant do it over
Interesting, I hadn't thought about what occams razor meant. Good vid. PiroNiro made a video asking people to help fix the star ratings, so thats what I'm doing. Cheers :)
When a healing or paranormal claim is made, just because the more complex natural explanation or hoax seems more complex or implausable, it is actually more plausable than a miraculous explanation. The miraculous might sound simple, but applying Hume's argument, it is always more likely that an implausable natural explanation is more likely than any supernatural one due to the consistency of the natural laws.
I'm not good at explaining myself so you may need to re-read or guess what i mean!
In law, criminals often try to throw the police, so the more complex solution is often the right one because criminals hide their tracks by making the simple explanation look right.
Also, in illusion and magic, the behind the scenes stuff is often very complex in order to make something look simple, but the complex answer is still the simplest possible means of achieving it.
"Apple" was a slip. I know it's the forbidden fruit, but the tradition of it being an apple has been passed down from Medieval times when Latin was predominant; "malum" meaning both "evil" and "apple."
That's where using "simple" in Occam's Razor gets very confusing, hence why I suggest saying the answer with the least amount of assumptions is often the best or correct. I believe you're reiterating my point when you speak of natural vs. supernatural explanations.
This is all insignificant turkey babel..people making attempts at trying to explain things intellectually as pertains to things that are quite simple to ascertain if one would only put down the contrary books of theory! Evolution=theory=uncertainty=NOT based in fact or reality=WHO CARES!
If #1 has less assumptions than #2, it doesnt mean #1 is correct. It means #1 has a higher probability of being correct than #2. It could well be that #2 is correct and #1 isn't, but that would be unlikely. You could also have a situation (which is very common) where both #1 and #2 are incorrect.
You can never be sure you are correct. You can only be sure you are incorrect.
I'm going to argue semantics right now because I feel like being a pain. I'm sure that I am correct when I state that male and female Homo sapiens have the same number of ribs, excluding those who have had ribs removed or were born with genetic defects affecting the number of ribs.
You're cute. And smart. My two favorite qualities in a woman.
PS: From the computer science perspective, Occam's Razor can actually be formulated in terms of the compression of information that a given theory allows. So given two theories with equal explanitory power, the one with greater compression of information is to be preferred because it requires a smaller "program" to generate the results.
Fascinating video. I never thought about the evolutionary reasons for a woman's pain in childbirth, maybe that's because I'm a man, sorry. What made me laugh was I've had this half baked theory that the 'tree of knowledge' story in Genesis might actually be born of the ancient memory that things were much more simple before we decided to evolve. I got this mental postcard of some poor Lucy Australopithecus suffering thru chhildbirth crying "Whose idea was it to start sharpening rocks anyway?!?"
There was an article in a National Geographic called "The Downside of Upright," and it went through all the troubles we have to go through for being bipedal, including birthing and a slew of joint problems.
While I understand your humorous point, Australopithecines, having "modern" lower halves, still had small skulls/brains, so childbirth wasn't too harsh for them. I think childbirth started becoming very dangerous when our ancestors crossed into genus Homo territory. I'm nitpicky. :P
I do not know. I'm sure birth isn't exactly comfortable for most mammals (and maybe even some egg laying organisms). However, I do think that we're up there with the most painful and life-threatening process. I don't believe there are too many other species that have to do barrel rolls to get out of the birth canal.
You have several assumptions for your evolution theory. Answer this, if we evolved, just like your Charles Darwin said, their would be an innumerable amount of intermediate fossils, not one has been found to date! NOT ONE!
Any organism that came from another and reproduces is an "intermediate" or a "transitional" organism. This includes every single one of your ancestors. Whether individual organisms become fossils or not only affects paleontology; one of the many fields that evolution envelops.
Another thing that just came to mind is one other problem with athiesm. With athiesm, you have to prove a universal negative. If you don't understand what I mean by this, just ask me to explain and I shall. I hope that your common misconceptions series will also stem into common misconceptions on the metaphysics of God.
I don't have to prove a universal negative in order to be atheist. I don't believe in gods because there is no evidence for them and, with Occam's Razor applied, no need. Atheism is the belief that there are no deities because no evidence shows that there are. It doesn't claim absolute knowledge, that would be gnosticism.
I am an agnostic atheist. I don't believe that there are any gods, but I don't know that for a fact (in the same way I don't know that there aren't any leprechauns).
When Darwin came up with the theory of evolution through natural selection, some assumptions were being made. However, 149 years of science after Origins was published have put the assumptions to rest.
I would agree with you that the answer with the least amount of assumptions is usually correct. However, In Darwin's Book, "Origin of Species" He states that most of the fossil evidence is flawed to the point that one can only make assumptions as to why Fossil A changed to Fossl B and it must be assumed that Fossil A changed to Fossil B. It is not so hard for one who believes in an Omnipotent God to assume that this God would be able to make such a change.
matter can not come from matter, how from nothing? answer God.
animaljp3 2 months ago
technicly, nothing is simple.
animaljp3 2 months ago
Why are you confused about this? There are currently about 7 billion people on earth. We don't seem to have a problem with birthing kids.
Laylow4now 2 months ago
@Laylow4now it was about PAIN not easiness
animaljp3 2 months ago
@animaljp3 ....perhaps in God's original design, it would have been painless, and perhaps extremely pleasurable. There was a definite change in Adam and Eve the very moment they separated from God, because they could see the change and they felt naked. Given that people seem to be designed as conduits for God's energy, it seems safe to assume that when this energy was gone, humanity would have serious physical issues, such as pain during child birth.
Laylow4now 2 months ago
@Laylow4now God wanted change, so had pain. He wanted to see change in everything. Pain already was there, for Genisis says God INCREASED pain, not made it.
animaljp3 1 month ago
@animaljp3 ...O.K., but the point is that humanity has changed from their original design in Eden, and this separation from God is the source of our problems, such as pain in child birth.
Laylow4now 1 month ago
@Laylow4now bible says " I(God) will INCREASE the pain of childbearing.
animaljp3 1 month ago
Occam's Razor is, in my humble opinion, a toy for would-be philisophers but nothing beyond that.
The correct explanation (correct as in: shown to be true in scientific experiment) for a process is very often NOT the simplest/most obvious one.
Warsel 1 year ago
Well put. Few people understand Occam's Razor well, fewer still have talent at describing it. Excellent and elegant description and understanding.
smokeinhiseyes 2 years ago
I think its best described as "the most obvious answer is usually the correct one". Lets not get caught up in a literal translation. It is a concept and a very simple one at that, and even though there is some beauty to its simplicity, It is still very simplistic. Frankly I find the concept itself to be quite obvious and not the least bit profound.
MrKydaman 2 years ago
What about alien women?
ironman197268 2 years ago
if I were a creationist (which I am not) I would say "because god hates us. This is the reason for diseases as well."
Daclunator 2 years ago
I like this this phrasing best.
All things being equal the simpler answer tends to be the right one.
So IF both answers explain the facts to about the same degree the one that is less complex tends to be the right one because it would be more probable. of course the example in this video is not equal, one of these answers has fact to back it up the other dose not.
ill leave it you to to decide which is which.
fireflygirl246 2 years ago
daring someone to jeapordize their eternal security just to prove a point is an arrogant and irresponsible thing to do my friend. If you love and serve God, its your DUTY to be loving and kind to everyone and in spite of how they treat you, otherwise, what makes you any different from the world around you? I would instead encourage you to be gentle with those who have not yet known Jesus, and pray for them to do so. we will be judged for your treatment of them while here on earth. peace...
symmetricalseraphim 3 years ago
hey symmetricalseraphim and GIDAN2987 i have a solution for all your problems.
There is no God.
Knukleheada 2 years ago 2
I'm sure what you meant to say was " There is no God but Thor". That's ok, everyone seems to forget the last part.
crypticjim 2 years ago
But what about the Flying Spaghetti Monster Who Touched Us All With His Noodly Appendage? :P
Everyone forgets that, too!
ToBeOrNotToBeThatGuy 2 years ago
I prefer Frigg, as I dont like Thursdays but DO like Friday.
BradBrassman 2 years ago
Great video - thanks for posting !
1947Chief 3 years ago
"If evolution were true, then the natural process of life would still be seeing things evolve"
Your RIGHT!! it's called macroevolution - say it with me now macroevolution... Besides...who wants to live forever? that's a long long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long ,long long long long ,long ,long ,long long ,long ,long time....know what I mean?
omertia 3 years ago
you talk about logic but your precedence are not necessarily true so your end product is not necessarily true.
kelasche 3 years ago
Your pretty face wins all arguments, k?
shepherdschapelDOTco 3 years ago
Evolution was only used as an example of applying Occam's Razor, not as the focus of the video. So thanks for missing the point.
I accept the Theory of Evolution as the theory that most accurately explains the evidence available to us about our ancestry.
You are aware that most Christians accept the Theory of Evolution, right?
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
That has nothing to do with this video.
I'm "hardcore into [my] atheism"? I wish I knew that.
I've already gone through hard times since becoming an atheist, and no gods crossed my mind. Not Yahweh, not Quetzalcoatl, not one.
I find it bizarre that you think your god seems to require torment for people to believe in him. Quite odd indeed.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
just to clarify, God does not "require torment" for anyone to believe in Him. He requires perfect justice, as a perfect being, but since we cannot possibly live up to the standard, He gave us his Son, Jesus the Christ as an atonement for our sins, that we can choose to either freely accept or reject. "Torment" is a consequence for not believeing in His son, Jesus, and accepting his sacrifice for our reconcilliation, not a prerequisite. Torment is eternal becasue God is eternal, cant do it over
symmetricalseraphim 3 years ago
@symmetricalseraphim Thats retarded, just because someone is more perfect is no reason to judge lesser people more harshly.
percyth11 1 year ago
@VivoVitamBonam Do you have any kids?
lpwiseman 9 months ago
Thank you for the explanation, I never fully understood Occams Razer so this video will help allot !!!
DactylorhizaEire 3 years ago
5 star, great video, creationists are very ignorant as seen in the comments and ratings.
TachiRdiesDirty 3 years ago
Wait, that wasn't a cup of water. That was a vase! =)
sy1234 3 years ago
Interesting, I hadn't thought about what occams razor meant. Good vid. PiroNiro made a video asking people to help fix the star ratings, so thats what I'm doing. Cheers :)
Brianswers 3 years ago
Thanks. :)
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
When a healing or paranormal claim is made, just because the more complex natural explanation or hoax seems more complex or implausable, it is actually more plausable than a miraculous explanation. The miraculous might sound simple, but applying Hume's argument, it is always more likely that an implausable natural explanation is more likely than any supernatural one due to the consistency of the natural laws.
I'm not good at explaining myself so you may need to re-read or guess what i mean!
scepticchristian 3 years ago
Apple? That's not in the Bible.
In law, criminals often try to throw the police, so the more complex solution is often the right one because criminals hide their tracks by making the simple explanation look right.
Also, in illusion and magic, the behind the scenes stuff is often very complex in order to make something look simple, but the complex answer is still the simplest possible means of achieving it.
scepticchristian 3 years ago
"Apple" was a slip. I know it's the forbidden fruit, but the tradition of it being an apple has been passed down from Medieval times when Latin was predominant; "malum" meaning both "evil" and "apple."
That's where using "simple" in Occam's Razor gets very confusing, hence why I suggest saying the answer with the least amount of assumptions is often the best or correct. I believe you're reiterating my point when you speak of natural vs. supernatural explanations.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
This is all insignificant turkey babel..people making attempts at trying to explain things intellectually as pertains to things that are quite simple to ascertain if one would only put down the contrary books of theory! Evolution=theory=uncertainty=NOT based in fact or reality=WHO CARES!
wonnthree 3 years ago
I find it ironic you call my language juvenile only to proceed making comments such as these.
You missed the point of the video.
Learn what "theory" means in science.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
If #1 has less assumptions than #2, it doesnt mean #1 is correct. It means #1 has a higher probability of being correct than #2. It could well be that #2 is correct and #1 isn't, but that would be unlikely. You could also have a situation (which is very common) where both #1 and #2 are incorrect.
You can never be sure you are correct. You can only be sure you are incorrect.
hamsterpoop 3 years ago
Hence why I said "best" and "usually correct."
I'm going to argue semantics right now because I feel like being a pain. I'm sure that I am correct when I state that male and female Homo sapiens have the same number of ribs, excluding those who have had ribs removed or were born with genetic defects affecting the number of ribs.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
I prefer "more likely of being correct" :P
But don't get me wrong, I agree with the whole "assumption" thing.
And what the programmer dude said was awesome. Just had to mention.
hamsterpoop 3 years ago
I agree, the smallest number of assumptions
is a more accurate of a description
of Occam's Razor.
TheReasonWhyGuy 3 years ago
You're cute. And smart. My two favorite qualities in a woman.
PS: From the computer science perspective, Occam's Razor can actually be formulated in terms of the compression of information that a given theory allows. So given two theories with equal explanitory power, the one with greater compression of information is to be preferred because it requires a smaller "program" to generate the results.
nageljr 3 years ago
Gratias ago. :)
It's interesting to note how technology mimics life. It's not ultimately surprising since we made it, but it's still fun.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
Fascinating video. I never thought about the evolutionary reasons for a woman's pain in childbirth, maybe that's because I'm a man, sorry. What made me laugh was I've had this half baked theory that the 'tree of knowledge' story in Genesis might actually be born of the ancient memory that things were much more simple before we decided to evolve. I got this mental postcard of some poor Lucy Australopithecus suffering thru chhildbirth crying "Whose idea was it to start sharpening rocks anyway?!?"
woozlbug 3 years ago
There was an article in a National Geographic called "The Downside of Upright," and it went through all the troubles we have to go through for being bipedal, including birthing and a slew of joint problems.
While I understand your humorous point, Australopithecines, having "modern" lower halves, still had small skulls/brains, so childbirth wasn't too harsh for them. I think childbirth started becoming very dangerous when our ancestors crossed into genus Homo territory. I'm nitpicky. :P
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
Are we the only animal that has such difficulty with childbirth then?
woozlbug 3 years ago
I do not know. I'm sure birth isn't exactly comfortable for most mammals (and maybe even some egg laying organisms). However, I do think that we're up there with the most painful and life-threatening process. I don't believe there are too many other species that have to do barrel rolls to get out of the birth canal.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
You have several assumptions for your evolution theory. Answer this, if we evolved, just like your Charles Darwin said, their would be an innumerable amount of intermediate fossils, not one has been found to date! NOT ONE!
jmat1969 3 years ago
Thanks for missing the point of the video.
Any organism that came from another and reproduces is an "intermediate" or a "transitional" organism. This includes every single one of your ancestors. Whether individual organisms become fossils or not only affects paleontology; one of the many fields that evolution envelops.
talkorigins[dot]org/indexcc/CC/CC200[dot]html
/watch?v=D0wwhSlo1NI
/watch?v=O4GdZOlPrX8
/watch?v=XUcB_HiCKnM
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
Are you deliberately dense? Thousands upon thousands of transitional fossils have been found. Read a damned textbook.
nageljr 3 years ago
Thanks you, and you're adorable.
Tonymostrom 3 years ago
Another thing that just came to mind is one other problem with athiesm. With athiesm, you have to prove a universal negative. If you don't understand what I mean by this, just ask me to explain and I shall. I hope that your common misconceptions series will also stem into common misconceptions on the metaphysics of God.
njjnkn 3 years ago
I don't have to prove a universal negative in order to be atheist. I don't believe in gods because there is no evidence for them and, with Occam's Razor applied, no need. Atheism is the belief that there are no deities because no evidence shows that there are. It doesn't claim absolute knowledge, that would be gnosticism.
I am an agnostic atheist. I don't believe that there are any gods, but I don't know that for a fact (in the same way I don't know that there aren't any leprechauns).
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
Darwin states a lot of flaws in his theory of evolution. He says, most of Evolutionary theory is based upon assumptions.
njjnkn 3 years ago
When Darwin came up with the theory of evolution through natural selection, some assumptions were being made. However, 149 years of science after Origins was published have put the assumptions to rest.
VivoVitamBonam 3 years ago
I'll have to read that book.
njjnkn 3 years ago
I would agree with you that the answer with the least amount of assumptions is usually correct. However, In Darwin's Book, "Origin of Species" He states that most of the fossil evidence is flawed to the point that one can only make assumptions as to why Fossil A changed to Fossl B and it must be assumed that Fossil A changed to Fossil B. It is not so hard for one who believes in an Omnipotent God to assume that this God would be able to make such a change.
njjnkn 3 years ago