It has become so hip to be an atheist, yet those same people do not stray very far away from judeo christain though i.e. still holding the idea that niggers invented the airplane, computer ect., women "think exactly the same way as men. They still hold all the same pathetic liberal politically correct nonsense so they are just as good as religious.
@zorokism What an ignorant stance to take that just because someone believes in God that they are ignorant. I'll go tell Francesco Redi to stop trying to disprove spontaneous generation because no one has evidence that flies don't grow from meat slabs. What an anti-scientific stance to dismiss questions because you can't find the answers. Find them! Scientists are supposed to be rebels, supposed to question established science, supposed to think the unthinkable.
I dont need faith, Ive spent the last 15 years exploring with hallucinogenic plants. I don't need faith because I have been there and seen for myself. If you cant conceive of "God" because Christianity or any other religion has tainted this word for you, that's your problem. God is everything, the universe is an intelligence test
Religious people, why do you feel it so NECESSARY to have your faith defended by science and "evidence". Face it, that isn't going to happen. As long as it works for you and you aren't harming anyone(i.e., taking away women's rights or gay rights or physically harming people etc) then just do your thing, live your life. There is a reason why it is called a faith, but if you feel you get results, then be satisfied with that.
@CaptainSpellingError It has happened: The universal constants' improbability beggars description absent intentionality. Atheists say there is no evidence and then conjure up the multiverse theory to counter the constant's facts in an effort to eliminate what they claim isn't evidence. Peculiar, isn't it?
@CaptainSpellingError There's a cap on the amount of words allowed so I tend to abbreviate my sentences. In other words, it's unfathomable the universal constants and complexity and conscious self-awareness is just an accident-far more likely some vague "bearer of intention" is in play. Call it God, call it what you will. The two-slit experiment shows that a conscious observer effects particle behavior (I can provide that paper-pub 2002 and 2012) suggesting a top-down theory-not the reverse
@jerrydecaire1 Can you PM me those paper names or links etc? I have a database if you can't dig up actual links. The two-slit experiment has always fascinated me in the best kind of way
I tried to provide that link but I keep getting ERROR in BIG RED Letters. Simply C&P this in the Google search bar: physical review a 65, 033818
You will see the second link on that page which will take you to the PR PDF. It's strong evidence that consciousness is fundamnetal but how that's interpreted will vary depending on your worldview.
If it's a tough read, refer to chapter 8 in Robert Lanza's popular book, BIOCENTRISM. They spell it out in layman's terms.
Kelley's "IRREDUCIBLE MIND: A New Psychology for the 21st Century" is also a good read and proffers up virtually every evidential argument there is to support the mind is not equal to the brain hypothesis.
"brights base all their decisions and beliefs on logic, rationality and evidence" No. I can buy that that's how they base their beliefs, but every decision? That's just not possible unless you're some sort of Vulcan. If you think that you- no, if you think that anyone- have never been swayed by emotions, fatigue, advertising, peer pressure.... then you're not looking at the evidence.
Not at all. You can base every decision and belief on logic and reason, and the things you cannot prove or don't have evidence for, you clarify that you are not certain but are going with it (or against it) anyway.
So you could be completely wrong yet you claim in your defense that you considered every variable that you imagined..I get it and don't disagree with it at this level, but the kind of self righteous vibe to the whole thing is off putting (and unjustified)
I agree. Every action done, and indeed every word uttered stems from some value that one has placed on 'this' as opposed to 'that.' People are usually able to cross that bridge because we have impulses and desires that predispose us to act in certain ways. These 'feelings' provide a motive for action, or for beliefs that justify actions. This
@TomFynn LOL its called anecdotal evidence, i could give you many examples but why would I? you don't know me, and I dont much care for what you think anyway..sorry
in this instance, i was referring to this nice old man's assertion that "brights" (he is right, its a stupid word. myself as an atheist would never use it to as it really only seems to associate me with white intellectual elites who certainly do not have a monopoly on truth no matter what their ego's may convince them of) base every decision off of rationality, and evidence...of course that claim is assenine, and is only meant as a sleight to those with other viewpoints
@bradley1107 Look up the history of the word bright in conjecture with atheism. Nothing to do with - even implied - racism. Or arrogance. And furthermore, "basing your decisions on" has nothing to with science, which is about finding out what's fact. Everyday life is *always* on limited information and you have to take wild guesses. That is completely different from making claims on reality *on no evidence at all*. Which is what religions are doing.
I don't mean that the word itself implies anything about racism..i dont think they are racists. but the fact remains they are a certain demographic and are associated with certain institutions which has molded in them a certain world view..for that reason, and because I don't much like the sound of it, I do not and will not call myself a bright..thats just me..i don't like to get lumped in
"If my dad and mom are up there someplace... I ask them to forgive me."
why would they need to pardon you for using your brain to the fullest, employing critical thinking skills and a skeptical and questioning nature about our universe?
I'm a Christian and I know there isn't some old guy in the sky, and I do believe in evolution, and I don't think Jesus had any magic powers. I don't play make believe in real life, but billions of grown people do, and say it's the truth. I no longer believe in Santa Claus and the other myths, legends and fairy tales that known evidence says aren't true.
I hate those Christians that judge people, they won't even listen to reasoning and they say myths that god is scientifically proven and believing him gives you powers to walk on water or rebirth.
Science and religion can be channeled as one depending in the substances involved. Most Westerners are driven with a supernatural idea and not in ethical psychological levels in consciousness.
@korvmannen you are clearly not following up on the latest of physics, the only reason you think they will go hand in hand is because you assume there is a god who created everything in the first place. Skäms på dig, i sverige har man chans till gratis utbildning och du tar inte chansen :(
some people argue that God is that which is eternal, that which did not come into being and will not come out of being. There is perhaps such a thing..Our mind cannot really percieve of the eternal or a lack of something eternal. Some define that eternal mystery as God. Of course, they might just be playing a game of semantics, one could argue? Not all religious people take literal interpretations of scripture..in other words they don't confuse the finger for the moon
Science and Religion will go hand to hand eventually, it's just a question of time. In the same way that it's unreasonable to believe in a man that sits on top of a cloud in heaven, it's just as unreasonable to expect that it's the only interpretation of a god. Science is undoubtedly trying to understand God's creation, and this far it seems to add up from ancient ideas about the universe.
never say never never doesnt exist wich is yes i know contriditory itself but there is so much of the universe unexplained and unexplored so who know we may find some outer influence be it god alien or who knows tht could have had some part in our religions evolution etc etc i completely support evolution but a logical man recognizes that current trains of thought can be subject to change from anything!!!
Basing all of one's decisions and beliefs on rationality, logic, and evidence might be fine if one endeavors to simply be as logical as he can be, but that does not mean that he is completely correct. There are some questions that rationality, logic, and evidence cannot answer.
"There are some questions that rationality, logic, and evidence cannot answer."
Then nothing can answer those questions. Saying 'I believe it to be true without logic, evidence etc'... is NOT an answer. It's not even a calculated guess.
"...that he is completely correct"
How can you know that you're correct without comparing it to the acquired evidence?
Do you suggest we just guess our way through life? That has been tried and tested already....it's called the middle ages.
@tabula123456 And that's why we need to go back to the Middle Ages! Where half of Europe was killed by a single strain of virus! Oh glory and wonder of not using your brain!
Then good for you...glad to hear it...sometimes...when chatting on here...it's very difficult to tell if someone is being sarcastic. The level of stupidity astounds me.
Cognitive dissonance is the reason why religion wont die. A child from birth is thought to believe in god and then the reality fights with fantasy inside his head. My parents forced me into religion, but I didn't see god so I didn't believe god.
Part Two of just below... No one, neither a creationist nor an evolutionist, would ever say that we have just been here forever. That just doesn't make sense. So, what does "science" support? There is certainly not one shread of evidence for evolution. I take this complete lack of evidence as direct evidence for creation.
@PlanetRockJesus not one shred of evidence for evolution? what you live in a cotton wool or bubble wrap factory? try pub med, try the library, try a museum, try your drs, I your god is a small god so be it. the facts will still be there wether you choose to join the 21st century or not. BTW evolution has nothing to do with atheism! wouldnt hurt for you to learn about the scientific process either, or the history of science!!
Who owns the word "science"? People talk as if "science" is some disembodied force that has a mind and a will. "Science" merely means knowledge. What is known about the universe and life? We know we got here somehow. The only way we could have is either by creation by an all-powerful creative God, or by chance evolution. Not that I think evolution is possible (as atheists also say that God existing is impossible), but I am at least breaking it down into two possibilities, for sake of argument.
So Dawkins belief that Consciousness is an emerging property of the brain is perfectly ok even though he doesn't have a shred of evidence to support it. I think what James means, you must supply evidence that supports our world view which is fair enough, he's not alone there. Rupert Sheldrake offered to show Dawkins an abundance of evidence to support ESP which was obtained using strict scientific protocals, he refused to even look at. Sheldrake also expose Randi for being a psuedo skeptic
Brights don't exist, by his definition. I am not opposed to people striving towards that ideal but I spend quite a portion of my life trying to base ALL of my convinction on rationality and evidence. (I don't believe even one in a thousand of those claims are sincere, and doubt me too if you feel compelled to) It is simply not possible because you have to many implicit as well as explicit beliefs.
@DerEchteSenf You don't have a channel ? You're like the ultimate youtube stalker. You can view and comment but the others can't see what you do comment. Also you just wanted to say :" I am a Bright" did you not ?
@DerEchteSenf Oh it makes sense. you just didn't grasp it. In fact you might not even be a bright in the large sense of the term and do you know why ? Because you, not understanding, made you say : It doesn't make sense. So you're right one can't completly be rational. You clearly aren't.
While you agreed in not being one, probably no one cares it's impossible to be a bright. Every person that watched the video just broadened the description, making it makes sense.
@DerEchteSenf In my opinion you just wanted to talk about yourself. You took an excuse being a point no one cares to discuss as it's self evident. But i don't hold grudges over something like that. Expressing ourselves is human like after all.
The idea of your being a stalker is made on the analogy (the principle of the human brain) Of you being able to see what people commented, what video they have on, and no having your channel accessible. You see and can't be seen. Stalker.
@Alkhoren You are the one not adressing point here. Nobody cares what you think about me or what I think about me. That is what nobody cares about. And that's what YOU seem to be eager to discuss.
That the large majority of people calling themselves rational (or "bright") do not not reflect that they are in fact only rational (however sincere there efforts) about a small portion of their beliefs. That DOES matter. Maybe you just don't like that?
@Alkhoren That perfection is not possible is not the point. The point is, that even a devoted "rational" person has a strong bias, determined by his or her intrests.
@DerEchteSenf Well you obviously care about what people think otherwise you wouldn't be commenting in the first place.
I'm not making this comment for other people to see, read or like, only for you. And that's where you're worng, i care about what you think about yourself. I care about my kin, humans.
I make my decisions rationally for the most part, the only bias i take are on what i call rational, which is already the best i can possibly do. Since i'm not a machine.
@DerEchteSenf I'm sad to say that from what i've seen you get you emotions controlling you in a powerfull way, way more than what humans can possibly refrain them.
You refuse to adress my name calling while a "name" isn't an insult. Which means you refuse to acknowledge the analogy, which is quite funny in my opinion.
And i don't hide i am very eager to discuss my person, i'm as little hypocrite as humanly possible. though you do seem to mistake what you are in my opinion.
@Alkhoren What you say about yourself - well this sort of IS relevant to what is said, so answer this question if you care: What makes you DIFFERENT from other people, who are not making decision "rationally"? Even with the same idea of rationalitiy, I think to differences would be completely random. But just give me your view.
As for you concern: As a rational approach, you could have written me a PN, but I don't much care for that, so don't bother.
@DerEchteSenf Hmm i don't really get your point. I'll do my best to answer with what i've grasped :
Emotions, are good for animals, when you can't think about what you are doing. If you take decisions based on what you feel and not what you think, you're bound to make errors from time to time. What makes me different from emotional people, is that even though i do feel these emotions, i shut them down to not cloud my judgement. I am aware of them and therefore can act. But i'm not the only one.
@DerEchteSenf Someody that tries to act as reasonably as possible wouldn't even have been phased by what i've just said, and probably wouldn't even have answered. You have the answer now champ, you know what to do.
@Alkhoren Well you can debate how a "rational person" would behave, I think that is very difficult to tell. Ultimately a rational person has no reason to act at all, unless you buy into Kantian ethics. That does not matter though. Because I think it should be clear that I did never claim to be a "rational person" - I denied that this is possibe. If you missed that, you lack comprehension.
@Alkhoren As for the topic: Yes. Yes of course I care. I care about this topic and like to share my opinion on it. For different reasons - some of them quite non-rational. Is there something wrong that? I don't think so.
@DerEchteSenf No i did understood what you meant and i agree with it all in fact. If you don't get my point it's not very important. I might even be wrong so i don't need to continue my "psychology analysis".
@desktorp The world was a better place back then. I mean sure, black people and gay people and women had far less rights, but at least you could get an ice-cream that wasn't served by some surly twenty-something faux-Buddhist fuckwad with tattoos, blue hair and a lip ring and WAY too much attitude for someone who still lived in his parents basement.
@DragonsREpic Thank you. Is it so hard for people to think for themselves? Like he said, a lot just choose something that's appealing and go with it for the rest of their lives. Or they never question what they're taught as a child and continue on that blind path.
@Awin6 Just thought I'd say, I'm an agnostic theist, so I still believe that God exists. But to me, hardened Atheists are just as stubborn and closed-minded as hardened Christians. They blindly follow what they were taught their entire lives without questioning or reason.
Yes, I know that there are Atheists that think with an open mind and know why they believe what they do. But by that logic, there must be Christians who do the same. So you shouldn't generalize people like that.
@PicturaSonus you're ignoring a key ingredient, EVIDENCE or lack thereof! You cannot put a Christain in the same category as an Atheist. Atheism is not a belief system, it is the lack of belief.
@meloveanna True. But there's also a difference between "not believing in god" and "believing there is not a god" Like you said, that difference is evidence. It's a very fine line, but it's there.
@PicturaSonus You have a very good point. I guess I have never met anyone considered a hardened atheist, but I can understand what you're saying and I agree. I apologize if my comment came across as generalizing a specific group, but my point was just that the majority of people never question what they're taught or find something that fits them best (which is really a good thing). I didn't necessarily agree with @DragonsREpic's comment about Christians not being able to forgive. My apologies.
@Awin6 That's totally fine, man, I understand. I grew up a Christian, and I still am one today, but I often find myself getting headaches at the people in the church who think that our religion is better than everyone else's, simply because the Bible told them so. So I totally agree with you.
@PicturaSonus And I find myself getting headaches from atheists that make it a point to tell others that their beliefs are wrong, so I know where you're coming from. Haha. I've seen how faith can have a positive effect in others, so telling them that everything they think is wrong bothers me. I'm not a religious person, but I haven't closed my mind off to anything. I don't see why there can't be some higher power or force guiding things along in life.
@Awin6 Yes faith can have a very positive effect on people BUT it is not divine intervention that inspires people.If sum1 is very sad and depressed and they believe that jesus loves them then that gives em strength but the strength they get comes from within not from god,the concept of god gives us a sense of protection and hope but once we realize that the strength is already inside of us then we will b much more stronger cuz we wont need 2 rely on an imaginary being to derive our strength.
@anuragborn2rock Two things here. First, I never said the positive effects had to do with divine intervention. I've always thought the same as you in that they gather that strength from within. It must have to do with letting go of certain stressors and focusing. Take Tim Tebow for instance. I hate the fact that he constantly prays and sings, thinking that his God is giving him the power to be successful, but I like the fact that he (at times) does well. You stated it all very well and I agree.
@Awin6 There cannot be a "higher power" or god for the same reason that there cannot be unicorns.Can u disprove existence of unicorns?I say they live in the spirit world so they r invisible to humans and we have no way 2 detect em but they exist n affect our lives.We can never communicate with em but their magical powers give me strength and u just gotta believe in them.Do u buy that?I guess not.Now you know why god cant exist.
@anuragborn2rock Secondly, don't be such a Debbie Downer. If people want to believe that there is a higher power, then let them. I'm just keeping myself open to the possibility. There's no harm in doing so. At this point in the extensive existence of the the universe, the likelihood of such a thing is low. I've been through all the things you stated in my own head, but I find it idiotic to bring up seeing that everyone has different ways of thinking, no matter how illogical. That won't change.
@Awin6 personally i dont care what people believe but ask urself if sum1 came to u n said "i believe in unicorns" would you reply "i respect ur beliefs"? and if u r keeping yourself open to possibilities,then would u also keep urself open to the possibility of unicorns?i guess not and if u do.then it is not harmless,there is a lot of harm in doing so.And if people have illogical ways of thinking we cant just accept that,we must get them to think rationally.
@anuragborn2rock Who are you to say that unicorns never existed? Maybe there was a point in time where horses had a horn and then it became unnecessary in nature for it and it disappeared. If someone wants to believe in unicorns no matter how illogical it is, let them. If it makes them happy, let them. I don't think a belief in unicorns is going to result in an extremely misdirected life. Logic does not apply to faith. It's just one of those things. In some cases, ignorance truly is bliss.
@Awin6 Are you actually suggesting that unicorns existed?That's like giving a middle finger to every scientist who has ever lived.If believing in unicorns makes someone happy we cant just let them because unicorns are not real and i'm sorry if this sounds cruel but if someone believes in things that r obviously not real (unicorns) then they are referred to as crazy.This is in complete contradiction to rational and scientific thinking which is based on evidence and results in us finding the truth
@Awin6 U do relise thats what hes done, right? people always question what they know, always. he chose to believe in science, thats his right, but it makes no one more right or wrong,
@Ultimatequickreviews I do realize that. That's the whole point of the comment. He found his own interests and didn't stay on the bandwagon of his parents. It's not about who's right or wrong because no one knows the truth. We can only continue searching. In my eyes, science makes more sense.
@DragonsREpic *till i took an arrow in the knee. I received like 8 years of christian education, but i think i was never a true believer. I remember saying in the room where we used to "study" : "Nah i don't believe jesus had all these powers". My point is, i doubt you suddenly become atheist, i believe it's in common sense to believe the most logical thing. As it is to not drink/smoke/do drugs some people do, so i don't know, maybe people just go against logic.
@Alkhoren i didnt become an atheist instantly eaither, i though about it over time, all religions have some sort of faith, you cant distinguish between any religion
@DragonsREpic the reason you or anyone didnt find anything meaningful is 'cus your method of searching is flawed. since everything you observe around you is occurring within you therefore i suggest you to start there and forget abt religion all together and if you desperately seek for the Truth, i promise you will get to it.
For all of you thinking you are just so smart and above religious thought, I will say this. Scientists in the past MUCH MUCH more genius than you, saw no conflict between religion and science. This probably will fly over most of your dogmatic minds.
@v01741r31 my approach to atheism? do you not understand that atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. you can be religious an and atheist (buddism) you can be irrational and atheists (believing in bigfoot). atheism isnt an answer to anything...it is the rejection of a bad guess about the universe, and/or poorly formed answer. my disbelief that 9/11 was an inside job tells you nothing about who I believe was the attacker, it simply tells you what i dont believe.
@v01741r31 i always find it difficult to analyze religion under the same microscope as other things because the same process that would be used to decide if cancer was present in your body cant be used to determine whether or not a "god" exist. i have so many questions about religion i could never fit them all, but i do think u were dead on when u said to be conscious of commiting hubris because to think we have all the facts is ignorant
@av733 i thought that was interesting too, but dont we all have a little bit of that built into us. what i mean is the repetitive evolutionary or cultural idea that someone is watching. i can remember being so nervous the first time i denounced "god"
You cannot instantly disregard something you have not yet found proof for, that obviously has effects on people. While religion itself needs to be abolished the spiritual beliefs it was founded upon are valid. Quantum physics would say that everything is energy. Since the particles themselves in a material object vibrate and therefore are putting off energy since in order for something to move a force of some kind must act on it and therefore energy is generated.
@Kjjoker1 But everything can be measured in that way also, thought can be measured in the form of a wave and it is known that the human brain produces large amounts of electricity. Wherever there is electricity there is also a magnetic field, so the human body is surrounded by an elecro-magnetic field as well as the earth and planets are. What is to say there is some way to use telepathy or the things we try to accomplish with technology with only our own bodies we have not yet discovered?
@Kjjoker1 Because if we generate thought which is made of the same substance as the universe itself then it would not be too outlandish to say that there may be some way we effect each other and the world around us with our thoughts. Just a thought I wanted people to consider. The fact that it is arranged so perfectly must mean something, that maybe God himself is the universe or something much larger. Since brainwaves are energy, and everything is energy, is not everything conscious, somehow?
Wouldn't the existence of famous scientists in history who saw no contradiction between science and religion kind of raise doubts about the video title? Yes, science and faith/religion are different methodologies, but that doesn't mean they are opposed to one another from the get go. Isaac Newton actually wrote more on religion than science :o
This video title is kind of misleading, as James Randi says nothing about it in the video, only that he is an atheist.
@v01741r31 "Wouldn't the existence of famous scientists in history who saw no contradiction between science and religion kind of raise doubts about the video title?" No, not at all. You missed the underlying point. Faith/ religion does not need any methodology and don't have any, they have just.. faith. Science on the other hand is based on it.
@v01741r31 Science and relegion contradict each other take cloning for example, Science community=ok, religious community=not ok, theres tons of other example but im too lazy to type
I disagree. Not only am I doubtful that you can show scientists universally approve of the act of cloning, I also think you misunderstand me. I'm not talking about communities here. I'm talking about science as a method of inquiry and religion as a method of inquiry. Science looks at the empirical/observable, religion looks at ourselves and our ontological standing in relation to the universe. Science can't tell us if human life is valuable for example. Hope you get me.
@v01741r31 I understand you,you are saying that science and religion does not necessarily oppose each other.Based on your example on sir Isaac Newton writing more on religion rather than science, did you know that Newton was a alchemist, if christians on that time were to know that, he would have been punished horribly for alchemy for alchemy on that time for them was turning any kind of metal to gold(eg iron to gold,silver to gold,etc) also Science does value human life for example..
@v01741r31 ...if you are sick which one would you go to? A faith healer or a doctor? Another example that I was supposed to say but im to lazy, here in my country (Philippines) theres a bill thats being passes in the senate called reproductive health bill which suggest the use of contraceptives,condoms,etc but the Catholic church of the Philippines does not approve of that? see what I mean Religion does not support Science and Science will never support religion.
As if one specific stance of the modern Catholics determine that there is some kind of innate conflict between science and religion. That's just not the way to determine what you are trying to say. Maybe in the end there is some kind of conflict, but sometimes opposing views help one another. I'm just saying this so called conflict can be far beyond any of us to say we can understand it. This is a youtube comment box, my post will soon be swept to oblivion. Good day.
Belief is easier, and then, god damn , your a child betrayal thieving bloodsucker. It's DNA, how can we say a church is wrong, everyone could be cloned and forgiven.
@helperthrope Well ya if you're in some sort of debate you should elaborate. I don't think he was thinking he was in such a debate since this is just Youtube. I understand the absence of belief is different from believing something isn't true. Atheism, for the smart people anyways means one who has seen the lack of evidence for god, therefore, there is no god. But if proof of god, they will look into it and if there is definite proof they would believe. Cause,well, it would be true
@helperthrope That's what he means about Atheism, it's just that he worded it wrong. Believe is a word that we use that can be interpreted differently. I believe there is no Santa means that I have no belief for him. Same thing, only people who choose to be difficult try and correct the person. Although if you're talking to a theist it's wise to make sure and use it correctly because we all know how incredibly difficult they become, trying frantically to make sense of their belief.
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
@helperthrope Hi again. I guess I missunderstood you I thought you were makin a statement + argument, but it can also be read as a statement + statement which changes the meaning, sorry for that. However, I think you missunderstand me aswell. To sum up what is what in my world.
Atheism: The belief that theres no God
Agnosticism: Non-belief, or the belief that its a 50/50 chance.
The truth of everything has been around for thousands of years. It is that there is a Maker of everything. Now I can prove there is such a Maker because the function of hydrogen working inside of us as ordained has a Maker and the Maker of the function of hydrogen is the Maker of all matter in the universe consisting primarily and initially of hydrogen. So there is One Maker of one set of working elements made to function in one set of life forms and there is no evidence of any other maker.
@helperthrope This a hundred times over. People need to understand the difference between saying. for example, "I believe God doesn't exist" and saying that "I don't believe God exists." To me, it is like saying that I believed something wasn't true before ever having been told by anyone that it was.
@helperthrope And also, you make the false assumption, that a belief has to be a part of a belief system... And also, If you dont believe in neither (god existence/god non-existence) you are agnostic, thats the difference between the two (atheism and agnosticism).
@helperthrope Well, I think youre wrong. I think a belief of non-existence is as much a belief as that of existence. You could call me asanataist if you want to, but it would be as we say in Sweden "kaka på kaka" (cookie on cookie), since dawkins definition of God is anything supernatural (beyond anything that can be discovered by empiric studies)... Which is the only definition of God that conciders everynes God (=The only definition that makes sense)
There are forces beyond human understanding, and religions become insignificant, the human evolution insignificant as well, but very important in the universe, the creator is there, in front, ignorance does not let us see it. In this life and the next Stay in the light. Ramón.
Yeah, in agreement with a top comment, I don't understand why the clip is titled something that is far more final than anything James actually said. All I can come up with is to get views, so that's unfortunately a point down for Bigthink with me. :(
I think Atheists are as arrogant as the so called Christians or religionist's that you guys decry , in that saying you are certain saying "there is no god" and anybody who believes there is is foolish. I think that's a little arrogant and condescending if you ask me.
fact that they insult you doesnt make them wrong. it just means that you are way to sensitive.
in a way it your comment makes you arrogant and condescending thinking that you are so important that you should not be insulted by them saying that you believe are foolish.
It has become so hip to be an atheist, yet those same people do not stray very far away from judeo christain though i.e. still holding the idea that niggers invented the airplane, computer ect., women "think exactly the same way as men. They still hold all the same pathetic liberal politically correct nonsense so they are just as good as religious.
shamelessfootfucker 12 hours ago
Religion is born from ignorance, science from knowledge , the two could never co-exist.
zorokism 1 day ago
Comment removed
ocelot113 19 hours ago
Comment removed
ocelot113 19 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zorokism What an ignorant stance to take that just because someone believes in God that they are ignorant. I'll go tell Francesco Redi to stop trying to disprove spontaneous generation because no one has evidence that flies don't grow from meat slabs. What an anti-scientific stance to dismiss questions because you can't find the answers. Find them! Scientists are supposed to be rebels, supposed to question established science, supposed to think the unthinkable.
ocelot113 19 hours ago
@ocelot113 Embracing the notion that scientific history is flawless is the deathnail of true and honest science.
ocelot113 19 hours ago
a whole minute later and I'm still waiting....
aboyborninjune 2 days ago
Damn right science will never support religion. Question is, when is (more) people going to stop support it?
aboyborninjune 2 days ago
I dont need faith, Ive spent the last 15 years exploring with hallucinogenic plants. I don't need faith because I have been there and seen for myself. If you cant conceive of "God" because Christianity or any other religion has tainted this word for you, that's your problem. God is everything, the universe is an intelligence test
mcnowski 2 days ago
Just throwing this out here.
Religious people, why do you feel it so NECESSARY to have your faith defended by science and "evidence". Face it, that isn't going to happen. As long as it works for you and you aren't harming anyone(i.e., taking away women's rights or gay rights or physically harming people etc) then just do your thing, live your life. There is a reason why it is called a faith, but if you feel you get results, then be satisfied with that.
CaptainSpellingError 2 days ago
@CaptainSpellingError It has happened: The universal constants' improbability beggars description absent intentionality. Atheists say there is no evidence and then conjure up the multiverse theory to counter the constant's facts in an effort to eliminate what they claim isn't evidence. Peculiar, isn't it?
jerrydecaire1 2 days ago
@jerrydecaire1 I don't understand the phrase "beggars description absent intentionality" I understand the words but I do not comprehend the phrase.
CaptainSpellingError 2 days ago
@CaptainSpellingError There's a cap on the amount of words allowed so I tend to abbreviate my sentences. In other words, it's unfathomable the universal constants and complexity and conscious self-awareness is just an accident-far more likely some vague "bearer of intention" is in play. Call it God, call it what you will. The two-slit experiment shows that a conscious observer effects particle behavior (I can provide that paper-pub 2002 and 2012) suggesting a top-down theory-not the reverse
jerrydecaire1 2 days ago
@jerrydecaire1 Can you PM me those paper names or links etc? I have a database if you can't dig up actual links. The two-slit experiment has always fascinated me in the best kind of way
CaptainSpellingError 2 days ago
@CaptainSpellingError
I tried to provide that link but I keep getting ERROR in BIG RED Letters. Simply C&P this in the Google search bar: physical review a 65, 033818
You will see the second link on that page which will take you to the PR PDF. It's strong evidence that consciousness is fundamnetal but how that's interpreted will vary depending on your worldview.
If it's a tough read, refer to chapter 8 in Robert Lanza's popular book, BIOCENTRISM. They spell it out in layman's terms.
jerrydecaire1 2 days ago
@CaptainSpellingError
Kelley's "IRREDUCIBLE MIND: A New Psychology for the 21st Century" is also a good read and proffers up virtually every evidential argument there is to support the mind is not equal to the brain hypothesis.
jerrydecaire1 2 days ago
@jerrydecaire1 Alright thanks!
CaptainSpellingError 2 days ago
Hitchens thought 'Bright' was a really dumb thing to call yourself. I agree.
Nickodemusodurn 2 days ago
SAGE
Lootraevefan 3 days ago
legend.
Benniboy93 4 days ago
"brights base all their decisions and beliefs on logic, rationality and evidence" No. I can buy that that's how they base their beliefs, but every decision? That's just not possible unless you're some sort of Vulcan. If you think that you- no, if you think that anyone- have never been swayed by emotions, fatigue, advertising, peer pressure.... then you're not looking at the evidence.
TheClockworkPenguin 5 days ago
@TheClockworkPenguin
Not at all. You can base every decision and belief on logic and reason, and the things you cannot prove or don't have evidence for, you clarify that you are not certain but are going with it (or against it) anyway.
brendanmcwilliams 4 days ago
@brendanmcwilliams
So you could be completely wrong yet you claim in your defense that you considered every variable that you imagined..I get it and don't disagree with it at this level, but the kind of self righteous vibe to the whole thing is off putting (and unjustified)
bradley1107 4 days ago
@TheClockworkPenguin
I agree. Every action done, and indeed every word uttered stems from some value that one has placed on 'this' as opposed to 'that.' People are usually able to cross that bridge because we have impulses and desires that predispose us to act in certain ways. These 'feelings' provide a motive for action, or for beliefs that justify actions. This
bradley1107 4 days ago
@bradley1107 I dont like religious or scientific based holier than thou attitudes..both are equally annoying to me
bradley1107 4 days ago
@bradley1107 "scientific based holier than thou" Let me know when you ever come across some, will you?
TomFynn 3 days ago
@TomFynn
I mean arrogance..thinking yourself better than others for whatever reason you claim to have
bradley1107 3 days ago
@bradley1107 Ah and where does that happen? Any evidence?
TomFynn 3 days ago
@TomFynn
Oh excuse me, you are correct, no one has ever been condescending towards others using their supposed rational authority..give me a break
bradley1107 3 days ago
@bradley1107 So you don't have evidence. Just a vague "somebody must have done it". Pity.
TomFynn 3 days ago
@TomFynn LOL its called anecdotal evidence, i could give you many examples but why would I? you don't know me, and I dont much care for what you think anyway..sorry
bradley1107 3 days ago
@TomFynn
in this instance, i was referring to this nice old man's assertion that "brights" (he is right, its a stupid word. myself as an atheist would never use it to as it really only seems to associate me with white intellectual elites who certainly do not have a monopoly on truth no matter what their ego's may convince them of) base every decision off of rationality, and evidence...of course that claim is assenine, and is only meant as a sleight to those with other viewpoints
bradley1107 3 days ago
@bradley1107 grammatical and spelling errors aside, you catch my drift
bradley1107 3 days ago
@bradley1107 Look up the history of the word bright in conjecture with atheism. Nothing to do with - even implied - racism. Or arrogance. And furthermore, "basing your decisions on" has nothing to with science, which is about finding out what's fact. Everyday life is *always* on limited information and you have to take wild guesses. That is completely different from making claims on reality *on no evidence at all*. Which is what religions are doing.
TomFynn 3 days ago
@TomFynn
I agree
bradley1107 3 days ago
@bradley1107
I don't mean that the word itself implies anything about racism..i dont think they are racists. but the fact remains they are a certain demographic and are associated with certain institutions which has molded in them a certain world view..for that reason, and because I don't much like the sound of it, I do not and will not call myself a bright..thats just me..i don't like to get lumped in
bradley1107 3 days ago
"If my dad and mom are up there someplace... I ask them to forgive me."
why would they need to pardon you for using your brain to the fullest, employing critical thinking skills and a skeptical and questioning nature about our universe?
JuanchoMan 6 days ago
@JuanchoMan I think he meant forgiveness not for the thinking part, but for the lying part.
LoverofLiszt 5 days ago
@JuanchoMan
He was talking about taking the quarter for the donation plate and lying about going to sunday school, instead he would go get an ice cream..
bradley1107 3 days ago
The size and colour of this man's beard gives me cause to think everything he says is true. I must have some lingering theist tendancies.
smithcas86 1 week ago
@smithcas86 Amen! Wait, I mean.. Oh... You know what I mean. Good comment!
SillyEddyPhotography 1 week ago
Go to Google and type in "The Truth Contest" and click the first link. Then, go to "The Present (with religion)"
TitaniumOreo 1 week ago
I'm a Christian and I know there isn't some old guy in the sky, and I do believe in evolution, and I don't think Jesus had any magic powers. I don't play make believe in real life, but billions of grown people do, and say it's the truth. I no longer believe in Santa Claus and the other myths, legends and fairy tales that known evidence says aren't true.
TitaniumOreo 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yay im bright
jaskbi 1 week ago in playlist Belief
"or down there some place" lol
DragonsREpic 1 week ago
I love how he casually remarks "or down there some place..."
Cyphlix 1 week ago
I hate those Christians that judge people, they won't even listen to reasoning and they say myths that god is scientifically proven and believing him gives you powers to walk on water or rebirth.
Mcmuffinwaffle 1 week ago
its amazing how clear minded he is at age 80+
themindbusterator 1 week ago 2
Science and religion can be channeled as one depending in the substances involved. Most Westerners are driven with a supernatural idea and not in ethical psychological levels in consciousness.
MerchantKXT 1 week ago
@korvmannen you are clearly not following up on the latest of physics, the only reason you think they will go hand in hand is because you assume there is a god who created everything in the first place. Skäms på dig, i sverige har man chans till gratis utbildning och du tar inte chansen :(
elon92 1 week ago
@elon92
some people argue that God is that which is eternal, that which did not come into being and will not come out of being. There is perhaps such a thing..Our mind cannot really percieve of the eternal or a lack of something eternal. Some define that eternal mystery as God. Of course, they might just be playing a game of semantics, one could argue? Not all religious people take literal interpretations of scripture..in other words they don't confuse the finger for the moon
bradley1107 3 days ago
what a funny guy
niinja2 1 week ago
Science and Religion will go hand to hand eventually, it's just a question of time. In the same way that it's unreasonable to believe in a man that sits on top of a cloud in heaven, it's just as unreasonable to expect that it's the only interpretation of a god. Science is undoubtedly trying to understand God's creation, and this far it seems to add up from ancient ideas about the universe.
Korvmannen 1 week ago
Why is James Randi such a bamf?
TheIronWaffleMan 2 weeks ago
never say never never doesnt exist wich is yes i know contriditory itself but there is so much of the universe unexplained and unexplored so who know we may find some outer influence be it god alien or who knows tht could have had some part in our religions evolution etc etc i completely support evolution but a logical man recognizes that current trains of thought can be subject to change from anything!!!
nawstra578 2 weeks ago
I love old men's eyebrows. They look like eagle wings.
thehugman 2 weeks ago
Basing all of one's decisions and beliefs on rationality, logic, and evidence might be fine if one endeavors to simply be as logical as he can be, but that does not mean that he is completely correct. There are some questions that rationality, logic, and evidence cannot answer.
jthomaston 2 weeks ago
@jthomaston like?
UltraDrago2000 2 weeks ago
@jthomaston
"There are some questions that rationality, logic, and evidence cannot answer."
Then nothing can answer those questions. Saying 'I believe it to be true without logic, evidence etc'... is NOT an answer. It's not even a calculated guess.
"...that he is completely correct"
How can you know that you're correct without comparing it to the acquired evidence?
Do you suggest we just guess our way through life? That has been tried and tested already....it's called the middle ages.
tabula123456 2 weeks ago 18
@tabula123456 And that's why we need to go back to the Middle Ages! Where half of Europe was killed by a single strain of virus! Oh glory and wonder of not using your brain!
weeryan2008 5 days ago
@weeryan2008
Either you misread my comment or you agree with me and are being subtly sarcastic or your reply was meant for another person.
But....if you're being serious i would suggest using your brain before suggesting others do.
tabula123456 5 days ago
@tabula123456 No no, I was being sarcastic.
weeryan2008 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@weeryan2008
" No no, I was being sarcastic."
Then good for you...glad to hear it...sometimes...when chatting on here...it's very difficult to tell if someone is being sarcastic. The level of stupidity astounds me.
But...I am glad you're not one of them
Al the best mate.
tabula123456 4 days ago
Haha, I love this guy
Relaxe 2 weeks ago
James Randi is hilarious.
PyProg 2 weeks ago
I LOVE JAMES RANDY ! WHAT A LUCID FREE THINKER !
ray180597 2 weeks ago
Cognitive dissonance is the reason why religion wont die. A child from birth is thought to believe in god and then the reality fights with fantasy inside his head. My parents forced me into religion, but I didn't see god so I didn't believe god.
TechnoManiac2 2 weeks ago in playlist Belief
@TechnoManiac2 U Same goes for logic & morality.
Sunky4u 2 weeks ago in playlist Belief
Angry Birds tie
Frostation 2 weeks ago
"Do you believe in fate Neo?" "No"
"Why not?" "because I don't like the idea that i'm not in control of my life"
BULLSHIT!
dt28469 2 weeks ago
Part Two of just below... No one, neither a creationist nor an evolutionist, would ever say that we have just been here forever. That just doesn't make sense. So, what does "science" support? There is certainly not one shread of evidence for evolution. I take this complete lack of evidence as direct evidence for creation.
PlanetRockJesus 3 weeks ago
@PlanetRockJesus Troll or crazy person :P
Pumba234 3 weeks ago
@PlanetRockJesus not one shred of evidence for evolution? what you live in a cotton wool or bubble wrap factory? try pub med, try the library, try a museum, try your drs, I your god is a small god so be it. the facts will still be there wether you choose to join the 21st century or not. BTW evolution has nothing to do with atheism! wouldnt hurt for you to learn about the scientific process either, or the history of science!!
jjcrazi 2 weeks ago
Who owns the word "science"? People talk as if "science" is some disembodied force that has a mind and a will. "Science" merely means knowledge. What is known about the universe and life? We know we got here somehow. The only way we could have is either by creation by an all-powerful creative God, or by chance evolution. Not that I think evolution is possible (as atheists also say that God existing is impossible), but I am at least breaking it down into two possibilities, for sake of argument.
PlanetRockJesus 3 weeks ago
...i want him as an uncle.
robertedge 3 weeks ago
I think religion is nonsense too but that doesn't mean we are cosmic zombies that are incapable of an original thought.
Aodhansdaddy 3 weeks ago
So Dawkins belief that Consciousness is an emerging property of the brain is perfectly ok even though he doesn't have a shred of evidence to support it. I think what James means, you must supply evidence that supports our world view which is fair enough, he's not alone there. Rupert Sheldrake offered to show Dawkins an abundance of evidence to support ESP which was obtained using strict scientific protocals, he refused to even look at. Sheldrake also expose Randi for being a psuedo skeptic
Aodhansdaddy 3 weeks ago
@Aodhansdaddy you are prob one of those people who watch ray comfort in complete agreement
jjcrazi 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some people want young white females to mix with non-white males.
I made a one-minute video highlighting a very small sample of race-mixing advertisements.
I love white people, and I am opposed to race-mixing. But I do not hate non-whites.
If you click on my name “awhitesoul2012” highlighted in blue below this comment, you can watch my video.
(I'm not a fan of Hitler or KKK.)
awhitesoul2012 3 weeks ago
Ice cream or religious indoctrination? I think he made the right call.
cerealkiller1124 4 weeks ago 71
spoc is a bright
lazercannoncheck 1 month ago
This guy is brilliant... its half eleven I think my dad is in bed and I laughed so hard I may have woke him up -_-
CloudysGuitarChannel 1 month ago
Brights don't exist, by his definition. I am not opposed to people striving towards that ideal but I spend quite a portion of my life trying to base ALL of my convinction on rationality and evidence. (I don't believe even one in a thousand of those claims are sincere, and doubt me too if you feel compelled to) It is simply not possible because you have to many implicit as well as explicit beliefs.
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf You don't have a channel ? You're like the ultimate youtube stalker. You can view and comment but the others can't see what you do comment. Also you just wanted to say :" I am a Bright" did you not ?
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@Alkhoren Sorry, but none of that makes sense. You obviously saw my comment and your idea of stalking I don't get either.
What I wanted to say I said: What he decribes is hard. Impossible even. Nobody can honestely claim to be a "Bright" by Randis standards.
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf Oh it makes sense. you just didn't grasp it. In fact you might not even be a bright in the large sense of the term and do you know why ? Because you, not understanding, made you say : It doesn't make sense. So you're right one can't completly be rational. You clearly aren't.
While you agreed in not being one, probably no one cares it's impossible to be a bright. Every person that watched the video just broadened the description, making it makes sense.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf In my opinion you just wanted to talk about yourself. You took an excuse being a point no one cares to discuss as it's self evident. But i don't hold grudges over something like that. Expressing ourselves is human like after all.
The idea of your being a stalker is made on the analogy (the principle of the human brain) Of you being able to see what people commented, what video they have on, and no having your channel accessible. You see and can't be seen. Stalker.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@Alkhoren You are the one not adressing point here. Nobody cares what you think about me or what I think about me. That is what nobody cares about. And that's what YOU seem to be eager to discuss.
That the large majority of people calling themselves rational (or "bright") do not not reflect that they are in fact only rational (however sincere there efforts) about a small portion of their beliefs. That DOES matter. Maybe you just don't like that?
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@Alkhoren That perfection is not possible is not the point. The point is, that even a devoted "rational" person has a strong bias, determined by his or her intrests.
Your name calling I will not adress.
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf Well you obviously care about what people think otherwise you wouldn't be commenting in the first place.
I'm not making this comment for other people to see, read or like, only for you. And that's where you're worng, i care about what you think about yourself. I care about my kin, humans.
I make my decisions rationally for the most part, the only bias i take are on what i call rational, which is already the best i can possibly do. Since i'm not a machine.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf I'm sad to say that from what i've seen you get you emotions controlling you in a powerfull way, way more than what humans can possibly refrain them.
You refuse to adress my name calling while a "name" isn't an insult. Which means you refuse to acknowledge the analogy, which is quite funny in my opinion.
And i don't hide i am very eager to discuss my person, i'm as little hypocrite as humanly possible. though you do seem to mistake what you are in my opinion.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@Alkhoren What you say about yourself - well this sort of IS relevant to what is said, so answer this question if you care: What makes you DIFFERENT from other people, who are not making decision "rationally"? Even with the same idea of rationalitiy, I think to differences would be completely random. But just give me your view.
As for you concern: As a rational approach, you could have written me a PN, but I don't much care for that, so don't bother.
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf Hmm i don't really get your point. I'll do my best to answer with what i've grasped :
Emotions, are good for animals, when you can't think about what you are doing. If you take decisions based on what you feel and not what you think, you're bound to make errors from time to time. What makes me different from emotional people, is that even though i do feel these emotions, i shut them down to not cloud my judgement. I am aware of them and therefore can act. But i'm not the only one.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf Someody that tries to act as reasonably as possible wouldn't even have been phased by what i've just said, and probably wouldn't even have answered. You have the answer now champ, you know what to do.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@Alkhoren Well you can debate how a "rational person" would behave, I think that is very difficult to tell. Ultimately a rational person has no reason to act at all, unless you buy into Kantian ethics. That does not matter though. Because I think it should be clear that I did never claim to be a "rational person" - I denied that this is possibe. If you missed that, you lack comprehension.
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@Alkhoren As for the topic: Yes. Yes of course I care. I care about this topic and like to share my opinion on it. For different reasons - some of them quite non-rational. Is there something wrong that? I don't think so.
DerEchteSenf 1 month ago
@DerEchteSenf No i did understood what you meant and i agree with it all in fact. If you don't get my point it's not very important. I might even be wrong so i don't need to continue my "psychology analysis".
Alkhoren 1 month ago
a 25 cent icecream cone with TWO FLAVORS..?! That IS a great discovery.
desktorp 1 month ago 63
@desktorp The world was a better place back then. I mean sure, black people and gay people and women had far less rights, but at least you could get an ice-cream that wasn't served by some surly twenty-something faux-Buddhist fuckwad with tattoos, blue hair and a lip ring and WAY too much attitude for someone who still lived in his parents basement.
smithcas86 6 days ago
@smithcas86 Im guessing youre a white male. it wasnt just black people and women who experienced discrimination
ElnAlter 5 days ago
@ElnAlter I DID say gay people as well.
smithcas86 5 days ago
@ElnAlter
Heck, white males are experiencing it right now...
alin1975 5 days ago
to bad christians cant forgive, hell neaither can god
shit i used to be a christian till i started thinking for myself
DragonsREpic 1 month ago
@DragonsREpic Thank you. Is it so hard for people to think for themselves? Like he said, a lot just choose something that's appealing and go with it for the rest of their lives. Or they never question what they're taught as a child and continue on that blind path.
Awin6 1 month ago 3
@Awin6 Just thought I'd say, I'm an agnostic theist, so I still believe that God exists. But to me, hardened Atheists are just as stubborn and closed-minded as hardened Christians. They blindly follow what they were taught their entire lives without questioning or reason.
Yes, I know that there are Atheists that think with an open mind and know why they believe what they do. But by that logic, there must be Christians who do the same. So you shouldn't generalize people like that.
PicturaSonus 1 month ago
@PicturaSonus you're ignoring a key ingredient, EVIDENCE or lack thereof! You cannot put a Christain in the same category as an Atheist. Atheism is not a belief system, it is the lack of belief.
meloveanna 1 month ago
@meloveanna True. But there's also a difference between "not believing in god" and "believing there is not a god" Like you said, that difference is evidence. It's a very fine line, but it's there.
PicturaSonus 1 month ago
@PicturaSonus You have a very good point. I guess I have never met anyone considered a hardened atheist, but I can understand what you're saying and I agree. I apologize if my comment came across as generalizing a specific group, but my point was just that the majority of people never question what they're taught or find something that fits them best (which is really a good thing). I didn't necessarily agree with @DragonsREpic's comment about Christians not being able to forgive. My apologies.
Awin6 1 month ago
@Awin6 That's totally fine, man, I understand. I grew up a Christian, and I still am one today, but I often find myself getting headaches at the people in the church who think that our religion is better than everyone else's, simply because the Bible told them so. So I totally agree with you.
PicturaSonus 1 month ago
@PicturaSonus And I find myself getting headaches from atheists that make it a point to tell others that their beliefs are wrong, so I know where you're coming from. Haha. I've seen how faith can have a positive effect in others, so telling them that everything they think is wrong bothers me. I'm not a religious person, but I haven't closed my mind off to anything. I don't see why there can't be some higher power or force guiding things along in life.
Awin6 1 month ago 2
@Awin6 Yes faith can have a very positive effect on people BUT it is not divine intervention that inspires people.If sum1 is very sad and depressed and they believe that jesus loves them then that gives em strength but the strength they get comes from within not from god,the concept of god gives us a sense of protection and hope but once we realize that the strength is already inside of us then we will b much more stronger cuz we wont need 2 rely on an imaginary being to derive our strength.
anuragborn2rock 3 weeks ago
@anuragborn2rock Two things here. First, I never said the positive effects had to do with divine intervention. I've always thought the same as you in that they gather that strength from within. It must have to do with letting go of certain stressors and focusing. Take Tim Tebow for instance. I hate the fact that he constantly prays and sings, thinking that his God is giving him the power to be successful, but I like the fact that he (at times) does well. You stated it all very well and I agree.
Awin6 3 weeks ago
@Awin6 There cannot be a "higher power" or god for the same reason that there cannot be unicorns.Can u disprove existence of unicorns?I say they live in the spirit world so they r invisible to humans and we have no way 2 detect em but they exist n affect our lives.We can never communicate with em but their magical powers give me strength and u just gotta believe in them.Do u buy that?I guess not.Now you know why god cant exist.
anuragborn2rock 3 weeks ago
@anuragborn2rock Secondly, don't be such a Debbie Downer. If people want to believe that there is a higher power, then let them. I'm just keeping myself open to the possibility. There's no harm in doing so. At this point in the extensive existence of the the universe, the likelihood of such a thing is low. I've been through all the things you stated in my own head, but I find it idiotic to bring up seeing that everyone has different ways of thinking, no matter how illogical. That won't change.
Awin6 3 weeks ago
@Awin6 personally i dont care what people believe but ask urself if sum1 came to u n said "i believe in unicorns" would you reply "i respect ur beliefs"? and if u r keeping yourself open to possibilities,then would u also keep urself open to the possibility of unicorns?i guess not and if u do.then it is not harmless,there is a lot of harm in doing so.And if people have illogical ways of thinking we cant just accept that,we must get them to think rationally.
anuragborn2rock 3 weeks ago
@anuragborn2rock Who are you to say that unicorns never existed? Maybe there was a point in time where horses had a horn and then it became unnecessary in nature for it and it disappeared. If someone wants to believe in unicorns no matter how illogical it is, let them. If it makes them happy, let them. I don't think a belief in unicorns is going to result in an extremely misdirected life. Logic does not apply to faith. It's just one of those things. In some cases, ignorance truly is bliss.
Awin6 3 weeks ago
@Awin6 Are you actually suggesting that unicorns existed?That's like giving a middle finger to every scientist who has ever lived.If believing in unicorns makes someone happy we cant just let them because unicorns are not real and i'm sorry if this sounds cruel but if someone believes in things that r obviously not real (unicorns) then they are referred to as crazy.This is in complete contradiction to rational and scientific thinking which is based on evidence and results in us finding the truth
anuragborn2rock 3 weeks ago
@anuragborn2rock Relax, I was just playing devil's advocate. Of course unicorns aren't real.... Yet.
Awin6 3 weeks ago
@Awin6 and god isn't real either :)
anuragborn2rock 3 weeks ago
@Awin6 U do relise thats what hes done, right? people always question what they know, always. he chose to believe in science, thats his right, but it makes no one more right or wrong,
Ultimatequickreviews 4 weeks ago
@Ultimatequickreviews I do realize that. That's the whole point of the comment. He found his own interests and didn't stay on the bandwagon of his parents. It's not about who's right or wrong because no one knows the truth. We can only continue searching. In my eyes, science makes more sense.
Awin6 3 weeks ago
@DragonsREpic *till i took an arrow in the knee. I received like 8 years of christian education, but i think i was never a true believer. I remember saying in the room where we used to "study" : "Nah i don't believe jesus had all these powers". My point is, i doubt you suddenly become atheist, i believe it's in common sense to believe the most logical thing. As it is to not drink/smoke/do drugs some people do, so i don't know, maybe people just go against logic.
Alkhoren 1 month ago
@Alkhoren i didnt become an atheist instantly eaither, i though about it over time, all religions have some sort of faith, you cant distinguish between any religion
DragonsREpic 1 week ago 6
@DragonsREpic the reason you or anyone didnt find anything meaningful is 'cus your method of searching is flawed. since everything you observe around you is occurring within you therefore i suggest you to start there and forget abt religion all together and if you desperately seek for the Truth, i promise you will get to it.
5tranger 1 week ago
For all of you thinking you are just so smart and above religious thought, I will say this. Scientists in the past MUCH MUCH more genius than you, saw no conflict between religion and science. This probably will fly over most of your dogmatic minds.
v01741r31 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@v01741r31 my approach to atheism? do you not understand that atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. you can be religious an and atheist (buddism) you can be irrational and atheists (believing in bigfoot). atheism isnt an answer to anything...it is the rejection of a bad guess about the universe, and/or poorly formed answer. my disbelief that 9/11 was an inside job tells you nothing about who I believe was the attacker, it simply tells you what i dont believe.
420simpson 1 month ago
@v01741r31 i always find it difficult to analyze religion under the same microscope as other things because the same process that would be used to decide if cancer was present in your body cant be used to determine whether or not a "god" exist. i have so many questions about religion i could never fit them all, but i do think u were dead on when u said to be conscious of commiting hubris because to think we have all the facts is ignorant
bobmoore20 1 month ago
@v01741r31 and yet information is freely available to me, that these scientists in the past and absolutely no idea of
you think any of these people would agree with your statement if they lived today? the answer is quite obvious
tomroxelf 1 month ago
So he suggests he is not religious, but then says his parents are watching him although they are dead?
av733 1 month ago
@av733 i thought that was interesting too, but dont we all have a little bit of that built into us. what i mean is the repetitive evolutionary or cultural idea that someone is watching. i can remember being so nervous the first time i denounced "god"
bobmoore20 1 month ago
Randi is Santa Claus........Please bring all the religious people some sense this Christmas!
drukenhard 1 month ago
You cannot instantly disregard something you have not yet found proof for, that obviously has effects on people. While religion itself needs to be abolished the spiritual beliefs it was founded upon are valid. Quantum physics would say that everything is energy. Since the particles themselves in a material object vibrate and therefore are putting off energy since in order for something to move a force of some kind must act on it and therefore energy is generated.
Kjjoker1 1 month ago in playlist Belief
@Kjjoker1 But everything can be measured in that way also, thought can be measured in the form of a wave and it is known that the human brain produces large amounts of electricity. Wherever there is electricity there is also a magnetic field, so the human body is surrounded by an elecro-magnetic field as well as the earth and planets are. What is to say there is some way to use telepathy or the things we try to accomplish with technology with only our own bodies we have not yet discovered?
Kjjoker1 1 month ago in playlist Belief
@Kjjoker1 Because if we generate thought which is made of the same substance as the universe itself then it would not be too outlandish to say that there may be some way we effect each other and the world around us with our thoughts. Just a thought I wanted people to consider. The fact that it is arranged so perfectly must mean something, that maybe God himself is the universe or something much larger. Since brainwaves are energy, and everything is energy, is not everything conscious, somehow?
Kjjoker1 1 month ago in playlist Belief
I wish they didn't label him a magician in the intro... he considers himself a conjurer. at least thats what I think I remember him saying.
KaslarProductions 1 month ago
"Or down there someplace" lol that was awesome.
R3APER24 1 month ago
Sooo, why is Santa here playing an atheist?lol
georgemfr 1 month ago
I think all of you are missing the big picture here! What he is trying to say is that we need these sundaes to go back to 25 cents.....
swat105 1 month ago
:ilied:
ImAleXD 1 month ago
Wouldn't the existence of famous scientists in history who saw no contradiction between science and religion kind of raise doubts about the video title? Yes, science and faith/religion are different methodologies, but that doesn't mean they are opposed to one another from the get go. Isaac Newton actually wrote more on religion than science :o
This video title is kind of misleading, as James Randi says nothing about it in the video, only that he is an atheist.
v01741r31 1 month ago
@v01741r31 "Wouldn't the existence of famous scientists in history who saw no contradiction between science and religion kind of raise doubts about the video title?" No, not at all. You missed the underlying point. Faith/ religion does not need any methodology and don't have any, they have just.. faith. Science on the other hand is based on it.
kaxitaksi 1 month ago
@kaxitaksi
Wow. You are either unintelligent or intellectually lazy.
v01741r31 1 month ago
@v01741r31 You still missed the point, use ur "methodology". Or if thats it, I wonder who's unintelligent AND lazy :)
kaxitaksi 1 month ago
@v01741r31 Science and relegion contradict each other take cloning for example, Science community=ok, religious community=not ok, theres tons of other example but im too lazy to type
Smokemalboro 1 month ago
@Smokemalb
I disagree. Not only am I doubtful that you can show scientists universally approve of the act of cloning, I also think you misunderstand me. I'm not talking about communities here. I'm talking about science as a method of inquiry and religion as a method of inquiry. Science looks at the empirical/observable, religion looks at ourselves and our ontological standing in relation to the universe. Science can't tell us if human life is valuable for example. Hope you get me.
v01741r31 1 month ago
@v01741r31 I understand you,you are saying that science and religion does not necessarily oppose each other.Based on your example on sir Isaac Newton writing more on religion rather than science, did you know that Newton was a alchemist, if christians on that time were to know that, he would have been punished horribly for alchemy for alchemy on that time for them was turning any kind of metal to gold(eg iron to gold,silver to gold,etc) also Science does value human life for example..
Smokemalboro 1 month ago
@v01741r31 ...if you are sick which one would you go to? A faith healer or a doctor? Another example that I was supposed to say but im to lazy, here in my country (Philippines) theres a bill thats being passes in the senate called reproductive health bill which suggest the use of contraceptives,condoms,etc but the Catholic church of the Philippines does not approve of that? see what I mean Religion does not support Science and Science will never support religion.
Smokemalboro 1 month ago
@malboro
As if one specific stance of the modern Catholics determine that there is some kind of innate conflict between science and religion. That's just not the way to determine what you are trying to say. Maybe in the end there is some kind of conflict, but sometimes opposing views help one another. I'm just saying this so called conflict can be far beyond any of us to say we can understand it. This is a youtube comment box, my post will soon be swept to oblivion. Good day.
v01741r31 1 month ago
Belief is easier, and then, god damn , your a child betrayal thieving bloodsucker. It's DNA, how can we say a church is wrong, everyone could be cloned and forgiven.
ftlqed 1 month ago
@helperthrope Well ya if you're in some sort of debate you should elaborate. I don't think he was thinking he was in such a debate since this is just Youtube. I understand the absence of belief is different from believing something isn't true. Atheism, for the smart people anyways means one who has seen the lack of evidence for god, therefore, there is no god. But if proof of god, they will look into it and if there is definite proof they would believe. Cause,well, it would be true
TheStarvingSamurai 1 month ago
@helperthrope That's what he means about Atheism, it's just that he worded it wrong. Believe is a word that we use that can be interpreted differently. I believe there is no Santa means that I have no belief for him. Same thing, only people who choose to be difficult try and correct the person. Although if you're talking to a theist it's wise to make sure and use it correctly because we all know how incredibly difficult they become, trying frantically to make sense of their belief.
TheStarvingSamurai 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
lightandbeautiful 1 month ago
@helperthrope Hi again. I guess I missunderstood you I thought you were makin a statement + argument, but it can also be read as a statement + statement which changes the meaning, sorry for that. However, I think you missunderstand me aswell. To sum up what is what in my world.
Atheism: The belief that theres no God
Agnosticism: Non-belief, or the belief that its a 50/50 chance.
Can we agree on that?
huggeslung 1 month ago
You sold your soul for 25 cents.
JungleJargon 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The truth of everything has been around for thousands of years. It is that there is a Maker of everything. Now I can prove there is such a Maker because the function of hydrogen working inside of us as ordained has a Maker and the Maker of the function of hydrogen is the Maker of all matter in the universe consisting primarily and initially of hydrogen. So there is One Maker of one set of working elements made to function in one set of life forms and there is no evidence of any other maker.
JungleJargon 1 month ago
If only ice cream was still only 25 cents.
7183Ryan 1 month ago
@helperthrope This a hundred times over. People need to understand the difference between saying. for example, "I believe God doesn't exist" and saying that "I don't believe God exists." To me, it is like saying that I believed something wasn't true before ever having been told by anyone that it was.
lazerbeam134 1 month ago
Talk about contradicting oneself!
dannywizz 1 month ago
@helperthrope And also, you make the false assumption, that a belief has to be a part of a belief system... And also, If you dont believe in neither (god existence/god non-existence) you are agnostic, thats the difference between the two (atheism and agnosticism).
huggeslung 1 month ago
@helperthrope Well, I think youre wrong. I think a belief of non-existence is as much a belief as that of existence. You could call me asanataist if you want to, but it would be as we say in Sweden "kaka på kaka" (cookie on cookie), since dawkins definition of God is anything supernatural (beyond anything that can be discovered by empiric studies)... Which is the only definition of God that conciders everynes God (=The only definition that makes sense)
huggeslung 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are forces beyond human understanding, and religions become insignificant, the human evolution insignificant as well, but very important in the universe, the creator is there, in front, ignorance does not let us see it. In this life and the next Stay in the light. Ramón.
MrRamon2004 1 month ago
Yeah, in agreement with a top comment, I don't understand why the clip is titled something that is far more final than anything James actually said. All I can come up with is to get views, so that's unfortunately a point down for Bigthink with me. :(
SayBinidus 1 month ago
I think Atheists are as arrogant as the so called Christians or religionist's that you guys decry , in that saying you are certain saying "there is no god" and anybody who believes there is is foolish. I think that's a little arrogant and condescending if you ask me.
MinecraftLIVE101 1 month ago
@MinecraftLIVE101
so? its still foolish.
fact that they insult you doesnt make them wrong. it just means that you are way to sensitive.
in a way it your comment makes you arrogant and condescending thinking that you are so important that you should not be insulted by them saying that you believe are foolish.
Crazylalalalala 1 month ago