@LarryBeil I haven't see,med to contradict myself yet. I explained my criteria for an evil person (which does not actually exist). A person would have to not only plan, but also know everything about the horrible deed to be done. That doesn't happen, because we people are all pawns in this game of life. No one has the ultimate upper-hand, and no one is evil. Please stop with the hate speech; it's sickening.
Man...You contradict yourself during a statement, not just proceeding arguments, but the current one you type at times! You claimed people are not evil. Then in the same paragraph you said, "Evil people, in my opinion, would have to plan out their evil deeds, like the god of the bible." So people aren't evil according to you? Yet, people that plan their evil deeds are evil? You can't make up your mind. You sure you aren't OCD AND Dissociative identity disorder as well? You admitted to OCD
I think your OCD led you to deluded thinking, because you don't make sense, and your bias is so insane that you block anything reasonable or logical from being a possibility. Its all about what you think, you can't even stop to actually think about what someone else says. You, sir, are so emotionally biased, that reason is the farthest from your capacity at this moment. Lets hope you learn how to reason some day. I'm saying this so you can read the truth about how you reason.
@LarryBeil Again, I think the name-calling is a bit childish and unnecessary. Please stop. Thank you in advance.
I am not closed off to other world views. I recently have changed my world view, based on the response of another YouTuber. I've changed my world view several times, since becoming an atheist. I'm sorry if I come across as arrogant, but I'm just giving my opinions to those who are interested enough in watching my video. My videos express my developing world views.
lol this dingbat claims that actions are evil, but the individual that completed the action is not... So let me get this straight, you knowingly have many options in a situation for example. Someone comes up to you and ask for your autograph. Instead of giving it to them, you choose the action of punching them in the face. So you decide to punch. So your decision is not evil? You choose the violent option and that isn't wrong? You sir, have the weakest logic out of any athiest I've seen.
@LarryBeil Please keep this civil. The name-calling and hate is unnecessary.
I don't believe in evil people, no. Technically, since the label "evil" is based on the observer, someone may believe someone else to be an "evil person," but that's not the view I take. Actions, in my view, are evil/negative in essence (relating subjectively in some way to the observer), and the decision/choice for an "evil action" is Part of the "evil action," since we are merely biological machines.
Sorry, I had to comment, because the creator of this videos comments are borderline retarded. If someone murdered your mother with a knife, are you claiming that the knife is evil and not the person committing it? And answer this question, because you never answer questions, you just dodge them from what I've observed. Your bias is borderline insanity, and you base your arguments like a little kid, on emotion, and not logically.
Sorry, I had to comment, because the creator of this videos comments are borderline retarded. If someone murdered your mother with a knife, are you claiming that the knife is evil and not the person committing it? And answer this question, because you never answer questions, you just dodge them from what I've observed. Your bias is borderline insanity, and you base your arguments like a little kid, on emotion, and not logically.
lol. You couldn't think of this? It's such an easy logical statement to disprove you. Heres a quote real quick, that you did in your video. "If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil." OK, an evil person is wicked. After judgment, God will rid of all evil, and cast the wicked into the Lake of Fire. Problem solved.
@VickEqualsCheat lol. Problem not solved. You've just demonstrated the bigger problem. Not only did "God" supposedly create this universe, but IT also supposedly knows all. This means that IT knew everything that would occur, yet still created what you call "wicked people." So, rather than NOT creating "wicked people," God cruelly tortures them after they die (though they were doomed from his creation of them). And God does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop evil Situations (disasters, wars, etc.).
@JustinTheAtheist Going by your reasons, on point 6, it said, "If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil." I'm going by what you put in the video. God does have the desire to eliminate all people and will. Just because it isn't happening now, doesn't mean it won't happen after judgment.
@VickEqualsCheat all evil people* If you have 7 points, which you did, then if the first 5 are right, but the 6th point is not, then it is therefore, false. Just because evil currently exists doesn't mean it always will. To be logical, you must think deeper.
@VickEqualsCheat Simply moving "evil people" somewhere else after their deaths is not "Eliminating evil," as we were discussing before. And I don't believe there are "evil people." Evil is an emotional connection to an event. Without people, evil wouldn't exist, because our minds perceive things as "evil," "good," or "neutral," (having no relevance with oneself).
The points were from Stanford's website (as I showed in the video), and they did and do stand up to scrutiny.
@JustinTheAtheist Without people, evil wouldn't exist? How so? I'm not saying that's false, but your assuming again, which lacks logic. In another alternate reality, how can you say that evil couldn't exist with some other type of being? By the way: e·vil/ˈēvəl/
Adjective:
Profoundly immoral and malevolent.
Noun:
Profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity, esp. when regarded as a supernatural force.
@VickEqualsCheat Evil and good are subjective perceptions of reality. What is good for one is bad or evil for another. And there is neutral (no personal effect).
Yes, you may want to define evil as it is regarded religiously, but I am referring to the far more general definition of negativity. God's love is supposed to be illuminating, yet negativity may always creep in and spread. With feelings, with actions, with the feelings/actions of others.
@JustinTheAtheist You said evil and good are subjective perceptions of reality. Assuming this is correct, could this question be a possibilty for you? Have you ever thought that your perception of God could be incorrect, assuming He exists?
@VickEqualsCheat That's how I became an atheist. I was thinking a lot about God for months on end (every night, I would pray just for a response to know he was there for me), but I never got a reply. I still believed in God until I saw Donnie Darko, which introduced me to the fact that atheism exists. All-in-all I spent a few years holding closely to my beliefs of God, heaven, and hell, only to come to the conclusion later that none were real (I have OCD and dwelled on god until I lost faith.
@VickEqualsCheat "Just because it isn't happening now, doesn't mean it won't happen after judgment."
Creating evil in order to commit evil on innocents is malevolent, rather than benevolent. Based on the quote above, your god seems to be either malevolent or nonexistent.
@JustinTheAtheist Back to your statement you just made. Assuming that what you said was true, that God knows all, even wicked people, knowing beforehand they would suffer in torment after judgment, then that does not prove God doesn't have the desire to eliminate evil. Assuming God exists, then why can't he desire to eliminate evil in the future. The present is not the future. You need to base your arguments less on your bias and more logically.
@VickEqualsCheat Again, you misunderstand what I've said. Allowing evil to exist is evil. By allowing evil, rather than replacing all evil with either "good" or "neutral," any god would be viewed as not caring about this universe or not existing at all. A god that is portrayed as an all powerful, knowing, and loving being that cares specifically for humans (above all other creatures in the universe) does not fit with the characteristics you've described (torturing innocents forever...).
@JustinTheAtheist You're putting words that I never said. I never said He'd torture innocents forever, that is a lie. Allowing is different than causing, by the way.
@VickEqualsCheat All are innocent of eternal torture. You said you believe in that "hell"
If there's an all powerful and knowing god that is creator of everything, it didn't simply Allow evil to exist, it created the very concept and all evil (knowing all the evil that would spread, as suffering and negative emotions escalate).
@JustinTheAtheist Never said that buddy. I never said I believe in that 'hell' of people going there innocent that face eternal torture. If you could find me saying that, I'd like to see you copy and paste it. Because I've seen all of my posts on this video, and it's not there. Also, if you alter what I said when you paste it, you just suck.
@VickEqualsCheat I honestly don't care if you believe in it at all. I just thought you said that, but I guess it was one of the other people that have been responding to my comments today. Sorry.
@JustinTheAtheist Do you allow anyone that you perceive as evil exist? If no, how'd you exterminate them? If yes, then by your own definition, you are evil.
@VickEqualsCheat People aren't evil (at least no universally); actions/events are evil. People may commit "evil acts" but there are no "evil people" in my view. Since control over our own minds and bodies is beyond our means (we lack freewill, and instead have the illusion of choice that gives us hope/optimism that we have control), there are no evil people. Evil people, in my opinion, would have to plan out their evil deeds, like the god of the bible.
@JustinTheAtheist lol. So if someone blows up two towers, killing lots of people, innocent people, then the person that did this is not evil? Just the towers blowing up are evil? lol
@VickEqualsCheat Wow, you have a sick sense of humor joking about 9/11 like that.
No people are evil, and no people deserve torture. Not for the color of one's skin, or one's race, ethnicity, religion, lack of religion, sexual orientation, gender, or cultural upbringing/brainwashing. You think brainwashed children that eventually commit acts of terrorism deserve torture for not being able to do anything but be brainwashed and waste their lives at someone else's hand?
@JustinTheAtheist I was laughing at the fact of how skewed your perception was by asking an obvious question, not the event, another false assumption made by you. Can you answer my question? If someone murdered your mother with a knife, then the person doing this is not evil, just the knife, right?
@JustinTheAtheist I was laughing at the fact of how skewed your perception was by asking an obvious question, not the event, another false assumption made by you. Can you answer my question? If someone murdered your mother with a knife, then the person doing this is not evil, just the knife, right?
@JustinTheAtheist I was laughing at the fact of how skewed your perception was by asking an obvious question, not the event, another false assumption made by you. Can you answer my question? If someone murdered your mother with a knife, then the person doing this is not evil, just the knife, right?
@JustinTheAtheist lol, you are so ignorant its rediculous. I was laughing at how rediculous that statement was, that the towers are evil, and not the people committing the heinous acts. But anyways, answer this question, because you keep dodging my questions. If someone murdered your mother with a knife, your claiming that the person doing this is not evil, but the knife is?
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
Epicurus said no such thing and wouldn't have. 1) he was a theist (polytheist to be precise) 2) his primary audience, 3rd and 4th century BC Athenians, would have found such a statement ridiculous. None of their gods was omnipotent, omnibenevolent or omniscient, yet no-one questioned calling them gods
@jonathanfater First, show us the "false dichotomy," and second, No. "Good" and "Evil" are subjective concepts that change based on the observer. And Yes, morality is based on Evolution by means of Natural Selection.
@jonathanfater I've seen enough William Lain Craig videos to know he has no intellectually persuasive persona.
"...the philosophical consensus today is that the logical version of The Problem of Evil has been dissolved,"
This does not mean anything (especially if William's vote was counted).
I understand that the definition must first be proposed, and not everyone believes in the definition I used, but that is the definition I used, and it proves to be logically impossible.
@jonathanfater It is the definition that many people use to describe the "God of the bible," so maybe this video isn't for you (if you're not talking about any biblical gods).
Which god were you talking about, if you don't mind me asking?
@jonathanfater That's funny. The "God of the bible" is supposed to be all powerful, knowing, and loving. Yet these 3 attributes to not fall in line with observable reality. "Good" and "evil" are concepts perceived by individuals/groups of people, and there is not a shred of evidence to support any gods intervening with the workings of the universe (or the lives of the humans, which the biblical god is supposed to be fondly attached). The biblical god is one of many contradictions.
@JustinTheAtheist The problem with you is you think that because God is powerful, knowing, and loving, that that will prevent him from allowing evil to be, but that isn't so.
"there is not a shred of evidence to support any gods intervening with the workings of the universe"
@jonathanfater The god of the bible is said to have created the universe and intervened in humans' lives (at one point in time, at least), yet there is no evidence of any of this.
Allowing evil is not such a harmless thing for a god to do. If this god really did create the universe and knew exactly how everything within it would play out, then this god Created Evil (not simply allowing it, but creating it out of nothing - like everything else, supposedly).
@JustinTheAtheist "and intervened in humans' lives (at one point in time, at least), yet there is no evidence of any of this"
LOL how would or can there be evidence for something like that? It's ridiculous for you to even say this. If you were home alone and God were to visit you, would there be evidence for other people to believe that God visited you at your house? NO!
@jonathanfater The shroud of turin is supposed to be evidence of Jesus' resurrection, and there are plenty of religious people trying to show evidence of divine events taking place on Earth.
"If you were home alone and God were to visit you, would there be evidence for other people to believe that God visited you at your house?"
YES! If God were actually in this universe and in our dimension, then yes, his great power and information would be observable scientifically.
@JustinTheAtheist If God were to come in this universe and to our dimension as he is in all his glory and power, well ಠ_ಠ We'll ALL be dead and extinct. So God coming here, um not such a God idea.
@jonathanfater So he couldn't even Save us from himself, yet christians believe he Saved us from himself/his father's wrath. Interesting. You limit the power of your god when it's convenient for you.
@JustinTheAtheist I'm guessing you haven't read the Bible on this matter. When one goes to heaven one would get a new imperishable, indestructible body that would be able to withstand the presence of God.
God saving us from his wrath? that something else.
Hypatheticlly You can be right with the excitence off God. Reason is because a god would not exist in our relm so to speak. Reason because it could die, scince everything thing in our known universe can die change but yet also live. Your argument isn't wrong just we don't base the existence off a higher intelegence and being on logic it is based on our own experinces and faith at what we may have changed in our own lives. No one can tell you to belive or not thats up to you.
Creation is God's consciousness disolved into fractals. Those fractals carry larger portions of godself as the physical vessels evolves into more complex beings. As creation evolves the consciouness of the dreaming God begins to awaken through intellectual discovery of self.
@wiseyeffect I somewhat agree, but I would not call it "God," because we are all connected; nothing is above everything (though, like fractals, there is always something higher up, just as there is always something lower down).
Oh look. Techno boy has been put on loan by Dhorpatan to be someone elses bitch for the day! How sweet you atheists share him around like a little puppy. I'm surprised you still dare talk on such issues since you made a career out of getting owned by CT. Looks like poor Justin has just suffered the same intellectual death too! You atheist non-philosophers make atheism look like talk shit - you're the biggest advertizement against atheism out there!!
@soctratesforthewin And here is cartesiantheists bitch the troll here as well! If CT owned me then shit tastes good. Show me a single instance where he owned me. You who make a video about me and then block me.
You are unblocked so feel free to comment on my channel if you wish, I now have to go to work.
So I call you a bitch and the best you can muster in reply is the same insult! Not very creative Technoboy! Well clearly you eat lots of shit and like it then. That would explain why so much of it comes out of your mouth then too. Hahahaha. Why in the blue hell would I want to comment on your joke of a profile. That's where the kids play. I don't wanna go back to pre-school thanks. You little kiddies run along now. I see someone else has PWND you again. Funny!!
Doctorw2 knows God exists and doesn't want to share with the world.. Something's off. But remember Justin, these definitions of "God" only works for some religions as Christianity and Jewism. Norse religion for example has a completely different definition of God as they have multiple Gods with different abilities. Same for Roman/Greek Gods.
And by the way, since you are making these videos and reasearch as yourself, wouldn't you call yourself more of a agnostician rather than atheist?
I believe Evil is a "tool" for us to learn from- as you learn you are subject to less "evil"- evil is an illusion that causes friction, that causes the soul to evolve, evil is a perspective.
@doctorw2 You are correct. Evil is a subjective thing. Everything in the universe is neutral until it is given meaning by an observer. However, the mere existence of evil, even though it is subjective, is something that a perfectly All-Loving being would not allow to exist. One should expect God to prevent every time are the evils against innocent children.
@JustinTheAtheist well, it is not as simple as that. good and evil are mental concepts which only a living being can discern through cognitive processes. GOD is a conceptual entity love is an ambigious concept there are different types and degrees of love which are subject to certain conditions and purposes. a being of pure intellect and conciousness would not act the way a human being would act since we are driven by emotion and primal instincts of our genetic past.
@doctorw2 I somewhat agree with you again. However, if God were lacking in emotion, then God would not be perfect, because the concept of being All-Loving could never apply to God. I'm merely taking the definition of "God" that most people use and pushing it as far as it'll go, until it collapses in on itself.
@JustinTheAtheist the definition that most people use for GOD is in error becuase it is based on anthropormorphisims. anything that is outside the realm of human experience people will always give a human explanation for using their own understanding of things from a human point of view. To call GOD all loving or perfect is to define him in human terms using human standards which are flawed.
@doctorw2 Which leads you inevitably to the Argument from Ignorance. However, if humans cannot understand God, then we must not have been able to communicate with God, and thus, God probably doesn't exist. And the definitions that most people use cannot exist.
@JustinTheAtheist not necessarily, just becuase humans can not understand GOD that does not mean he can not communicate with them, he can but, only on a limited level of communication. the definitions that people use to describe GOD come from the realm of human experience thus GOD confines himself to that level of understanding since this is easier for us but, ultimately GOD is beyond human experiences.
@doctorw2 What I was really getting at was the obvious truth that all you are doing is making things up. You were not endowed this "sacred wisdom" through communication with this "All Mighty God"
You can speculate all you want, but you're not bringing anyone closer to any sense of truth.
@JustinTheAtheist all i am trying to do is make other people see that religion and GOD are not the same thing. in order to know GOD you must be connected to other people,the ecology, and with your true self. when you live simply and serve others in need without any ulterior religious motive than you begin to understand the truth and see clearly who GOD is.
@doctorw2 Well, you can try to spread whatever message you want to whatever people you want, but the fact of the matter is that God cannot exist. See my website for details.
@JustinTheAtheist i am not trying to cop out on the question you presented, but if i tell you the truth you would not accept it as that. i have several friends who are atheists and i admire their honesty and their sincere search for truth but, i tell them and other people that GOD and religion are not the same thing and thats the only message im trying to convey to you.
@doctorw2 Yes, I realize that God and religion are 2 completely different things. They are 2 separate categories that also happen to be incorrect and absurd.
@JustinTheAtheist theres nothing absurd about mans quest for the ultimate truth religion was and is merely mans way of explaining and relating to the ultimate mystery of life and finding his place in the univerese As for GOD this concept is ambigious and is subject to whatever enviromental and cultural factors a person has lived in but, is not the actual truth of what GOD is.
@doctorw2 No. Religion is the means by which man has thrown out logic altogether and replaced his understanding of reality with a fairy tale. Science searches for the answers, while religion makes up answers.
God, on the other hand, is a super hero from most religions that can easily be shown to be incapable of existing.
@JustinTheAtheist thats a rather biased assesment justin just think about humanities distant past and how our distant ancestors had to cope with what was happening to them and their changing world . seeing stars in the sky not knowing they were suns they would have to explain it as gods in the sky and our own sun as a god that brought forth life others would have their own explaination of how things worked in the world these attempts flawed as they are were attempts to explain lifes questions.
@doctorw2 No, they did not HAVE to explain things which they did not understand, and religions today still incorrectly explain things that we already understand through science.
@JustinTheAtheist yes, they did have to explain things as human beings we have this insatiable curiousity that drives us to explain the enigmas of life its part of our divine heritage to ask important questions like who am i? how does this work? why am i or anything for that matter here? was the universe made or was it always here and what is my place in it? the religions of today are simply man made rules or traditions on serving or relating to whatever concept of GOD that culture has.
@JustinTheAtheist our ancestors were not making things up they were just brainstorming ideas and there is nothing wrong with that ideas are part of the scientific process what you have to realize is that religion gave birth to the excersize of scientific thought even though religion and science are at odds end with each other they both compliment one another in many ways. GOD was not created by any one only mens thoughts about GOD are created.
I laugh when people say evil doesn't exist, rather it's the absence of God's love. If that's the case, God's love doesn't exist, rather it's the absence of evil.
@TheSpiritOfTruth Why then? Why create evil when you can create a perfect world without it. Evil isn't necessary and cannot exist if God truly is benevolent and perfect.
@JustinTheAtheist Evil exists because humans exist the way God wants us to exist - that is with free will. Because you can't have a proper, loving relationship with a puppet. But the thing is, regardless of the evil, he sent the Messiah, which is a way out for humans, but involves big sacrifice on God's part. But nothing anybody can say can reveal this to you :) sounds like hocuspocusmumbojumbo but it really is quite true. All the best justin
Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. ... I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)
As is well known, the theory of the maxima and minima of functions was indebted to (Leibniz) for the greatest progress through the discovery of the method of tangents. Well, he conceives God in the creation of the world like a mathematician who is solving a minimum problem, or rather, in our modern phraseology, a problem in the calculus of variations the question being to determine among an infinite number of possible worlds, that for which the sum of necessary evil is a minimum.
@Pandan8or Not quite. All actions are predetermined through causality, and all actions performed by conscious beings is influenced and caused to exist. Punishment is to correct wrong-doing, but the wrong-doing is actually letting wrongs exist.
@JustinTheAtheist But being omniscient, surely God would know that evil was going to enter his perfect creation, but yet he still created humans because of the love He had for us even when we did not exist. And the issue of right and wrong is not the important thing - It's the relationship.. I think that's a misconception many people have about God.. What is most important is a relationship instead of do good-go to heaven, do wrong go to hell. I see your point though, that he just shouldn't...
@JustinTheAtheist... (cont'd) have created the world in the first place.. But non-existence would kinda suck if you think about it... but i guess if He didn't exist then there would be no issue at all would there?
@JustinTheAtheist but does the number of issues to do with something affect the truth value of it? The issue i was talking about was the whole question of evil etc. I don't think that an argument based on number of issues can stand (not saying that is your only argument).. Oh dear, that Spirit of Truth guy is floundering a bit..
@1:26 point 5: Does evil exist? Objective evil? Isn't is percieved evil? I don't think evil exist. Noelplum made video about it. Evil people, but not evil on it self. And always in the framework of us humans.
Because objectively, the only thing we humans do for 99,9% of the time is rearranging atoms. We do create some other elements in reactors, but you catch the drift.
Who's to care if I blew up the world tomorrow? Would it be evil if nobody was there to remember it or suffer the conceq.
@ContinuumXT Objectively, no, but since evil does exist subjectively, it does exist, and if God wanted to, he should be able to stop it from existing all together.
@JustinTheAtheist Hmm feels like sippery slope. Suffering exists for every sentient being. Evil is not a thing out there on its own. Or if I perceive god does that make it real? Surely a god could do anything, but nothing he could do if it's not objectve.
@ContinuumXT Evil only exists as a perception, while god is said to exist without the need for perception. However, god cannot exist, and evil as a subjective emotion exists. You understand perfectly.
I don't think you succesfully ruled out the free will defense. As long as free will is logically possible, not even actually true, then the free will defense succeeds in destroying the logical problem of evil.
@lifeandphilosophy if you haven't already, I recommend that you see my second video, which shows freewill to be illogical in its nature. However, I will be making another video soon that shows a diagram of how freewill is not only illogical, but also absurd.
For something to be a choice of FREE will, that choice must have nothing that influenced it into existence. So it logically follows that this free choice cannot be part of the chain/web of causation that all other actions are apart of. Therefore, a FREE choice would be one that spontaneously came into existence independent from the chain/web of causation.
This "choice" would actually be a causeless cause, so it could NOT be considered a choice, since it has no cause by definition. Not even the person thinking of it could have chosen to bring it into existence, since it came into existence Without Cause
Christian dogma is not complexity of the mind or the mystery of life---the christian concept of god is solipsistic and petty--Einsteins god is one thing but christian dogma fails to cover reality-the problem of evil is a problem to the christian idea of god not to a deist who can believe in an indifferent god
This isn't an issue of the Christian God but God as a concept in all cultures, as there has never been a time in human history where the human species has built a society with no Godly deities to pray upon. Shouldn't that make you wonder that God might not just be man's invention, but is very real and a vital essential part of human existence and survival? This is where I'm focusing on : That the unexplained nature and complexity of the mind can only...(cont.)
...indicate that a greater superconscious being must have created this unsolvable state of being. I do not have any doubts that God is real, but at the same time I understand that some people prefer to convert this idea into a more practical state, such as what existentialist philosophers did.
First, the nature and complexity of the mind is NOT unexplainable. Science puts no limits on what is capable of being understood, and as I've said before, 1 of the 3 basic assumptions that we must make to be logical thinkers is that reality is capable of being understood. Claiming otherwise defies logic and halts logical thought.
Second, we have a great amount of information of the human mind, as I've said in 1 of my other comments. There's no need for a "greater superconscious being."
And if you have absolutely No doubts, then that is a shame. It is our doubts that make us logically evaluate things and really think about them in depth. Without doubt, you are closed minded to any other possibilities. I am not saying that to be offensive; when you have no doubts, you effectively stop intelligent and enlightening thoughts altogether. All I ask is that you be consistent in abiding by the 3 basic assumptions that we all have in living our daily lives. Have doubts about everything.
You know, I couldn't agree with you more : a belief with not a hint of doubt is not a belief - it is a superstition. Some philosopher said that, and he is absolutely right. I'm keeping your advice, but at the same time, you have to understand that when something is very obvious and clear to us, we see no reason why should be skeptical about it.
As for the structure and use of the brain, it makes sense that way. If you find that specific video in reference to that, please send me the link
I'll try to find the specific video when I have the chance. If you have the chance, I highly recommend viewing all of the episodes of Carl Sagan's Cosmos.
Wow, you didn't understand the point at all, did you? If you start adding "superpowers" to the things you are trying to defend (i.e. enabling Santa to exceed the cosmic speed limit or enabling God to exist without time or causation), then you are officially committing intellectual suicide, by claiming that logic does not apply. You are using logic (knowingly or not) to defend God (to me, others, or yourself), yet you abandon logic when it is convenient at defending God. BE CONSISTENT!
I'm not sure what you mean by "superpowers"? The concept of God does in no way or form exclude logic from its fundamental value. I would urge you to read about Descartes' Dualism.
Personally, I have never abandoned logic to defend God's existence. Just because it cannot be proven scientifically - due to the minds non-material nature - does not mean that it is not there.
I realize that anything is possible, due to the fact that we don't know everything, but when you apply logic to God, as I've done in all of my videos, you can see that God seemingly Must defy logic in order to exist. In this way, the only true way to defend God is to say that logic doesn't apply to him, which is inconsistency, as you use logic to evaluate your beliefs of God, your definition of "God" and your relationship with God (it takes logic to evaluate prayers, miracles, and communication)
but if I decide to claim that logic doesn't apply to God's existence, then I would have to disconnect this dogma from the pragmatic practical world which would make me question the value of science as well. Logic interweaves throught the physical realm all the way to the sacred unexplained phenomena, if you apply it carefully that is.
EXACTLY!! We use/apply logic to EVERYTHING, including science AND religion. We logically evaluate everything. Our perceptions of reality are based on logical thought, and our "understandings" of "God" are also based on logical thought. Otherwise, you are stating that understanding God is the essence of being illogical... When one claims that God defies logic, that person is claiming that logic doesn't apply, which means that "anything goes" Anything is possible and as likely as anything else.
When you apply logic to God and ask all relevant questions about God, it can be seen that "God" does not exist. Many people say that "God defies logic" which means that logic does not apply. The implications are that there is no point discussing God, since you can NEVER logically understand God. It kills all intellectual conversation.
"When you apply logic to God and ask all relevant questions about God, it can be seen that "God" does not exist"
The only thing you are achieving by saying this, is to degrade/deduce the value of the dogmatic belief. When it comes to these matters, an extended stretched out version of logical sense is required, in order to understand its true value. Can you see where I'm coming from?
How can you even know that God does not exist if you can't recognize the mystic nature of the mind? I'm not asking you to explain how it works, I'm asking you to accept that consiousness can not exist with no ordained, preset plan of action and because of its peculiar nature we can not investigate in the conventional scientific methods, but what we Can do is accept that there is a Greater Being that put this together.
I disagree. We must logically acknowledge that true and absolute knowledge is nonexistent within humans (but it is not necessarily unattainable). We surely should not Assume that consciousness and order was planned by a "Greater Being" That is absurd. If you Assume that, then you destroy any reasonable discussions of God's possibility of existence or traits/qualities that are attributed to him (since you are already Assuming these things. Never assume what you don't have to.
There are 3 basic assumptions that we all must make, in order to be logical thinkers:
1. Reality exists
2. Reality is capable of being understood
3. Our perceptions of reality are correct
You must assume all 3 of these in order to be thinking/discussing logically. For instance, if you say that we do not perceive reality correctly, then you are arguing that logic cannot be used to evaluate anything, since logic itself would be flawed.
Arguing that logic is flawed is Arguing From Ignorance.
1. The physical mind is taking place within our physical brains. Our perceptions within our minds are our realities.
2. Understanding reality works through science. We use the scientific method (AND logical and reasoned though processes) to evaluate our observations/perceptions of reality.
3. Reality is that which exists. It is all that exists. It is existence. To say that we assume reality exists is to say that we are assuming that existence itself exists.
But you can not explain why these logical and reasoned processes have the sequence that they do in order to understand reality - there is only one tiny part of the brain that scientists have ever come close to finding the origin of what turns a thought out process into consiousness, and this spot merely touches the surface of how consiousness works. It is remaining a mystery and can not be explained.
I highly recommend that you watch some of the videos in my playlist called Carl Sagan. He had a tv show called Cosmos, in which he explained things as small as the history of certain philosophers to things as big as evolution and the Big Bang. He actually does talk in one episode of how the brains of animals are merely added onto from previous brains (small amphibious brain structures in the center, with larger reptilian brain structures outside of that, followed by mammalian brain structures).
I know about the last common ancestor and about the motor sensory part of the human brain and that it is the direct result of evolution thru natural selection, but it doesn't answer every question.
It is true that we humans do not know everything about our own brains, nor do we know everything about anything. However, we have come a long way in understanding the brain/mind, and it is foolish to say that we know little. We know much about it. There are many forms of psychology that analyze and interpret behavior, and there are many other sciences that analyze brain activity and which parts of the brain do what. We have much knowledge on this subject.
That is irrelevant in understanding the workings of the brain. If anything, it shows that our brains are not perfectly "designed."
This is (if it is true) a fact that supports evolution. As species evolve, the brain simply gets more parts added to it (on top of the existing brain matter). We have the brains of amphibians, reptiles, and mammals within our brains (as Carl Sagan said, though he worded it better). We shouldn't be expected to use all of our brains, because it would be unnecessary.
@LarryBeil I haven't see,med to contradict myself yet. I explained my criteria for an evil person (which does not actually exist). A person would have to not only plan, but also know everything about the horrible deed to be done. That doesn't happen, because we people are all pawns in this game of life. No one has the ultimate upper-hand, and no one is evil. Please stop with the hate speech; it's sickening.
JustinTheAtheist 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Man...You contradict yourself during a statement, not just proceeding arguments, but the current one you type at times! You claimed people are not evil. Then in the same paragraph you said, "Evil people, in my opinion, would have to plan out their evil deeds, like the god of the bible." So people aren't evil according to you? Yet, people that plan their evil deeds are evil? You can't make up your mind. You sure you aren't OCD AND Dissociative identity disorder as well? You admitted to OCD
LarryBeil 4 weeks ago
I think your OCD led you to deluded thinking, because you don't make sense, and your bias is so insane that you block anything reasonable or logical from being a possibility. Its all about what you think, you can't even stop to actually think about what someone else says. You, sir, are so emotionally biased, that reason is the farthest from your capacity at this moment. Lets hope you learn how to reason some day. I'm saying this so you can read the truth about how you reason.
LarryBeil 4 weeks ago
@LarryBeil Again, I think the name-calling is a bit childish and unnecessary. Please stop. Thank you in advance.
I am not closed off to other world views. I recently have changed my world view, based on the response of another YouTuber. I've changed my world view several times, since becoming an atheist. I'm sorry if I come across as arrogant, but I'm just giving my opinions to those who are interested enough in watching my video. My videos express my developing world views.
JustinTheAtheist 4 weeks ago
lol this dingbat claims that actions are evil, but the individual that completed the action is not... So let me get this straight, you knowingly have many options in a situation for example. Someone comes up to you and ask for your autograph. Instead of giving it to them, you choose the action of punching them in the face. So you decide to punch. So your decision is not evil? You choose the violent option and that isn't wrong? You sir, have the weakest logic out of any athiest I've seen.
LarryBeil 4 weeks ago
@LarryBeil Please keep this civil. The name-calling and hate is unnecessary.
I don't believe in evil people, no. Technically, since the label "evil" is based on the observer, someone may believe someone else to be an "evil person," but that's not the view I take. Actions, in my view, are evil/negative in essence (relating subjectively in some way to the observer), and the decision/choice for an "evil action" is Part of the "evil action," since we are merely biological machines.
JustinTheAtheist 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry, I had to comment, because the creator of this videos comments are borderline retarded. If someone murdered your mother with a knife, are you claiming that the knife is evil and not the person committing it? And answer this question, because you never answer questions, you just dodge them from what I've observed. Your bias is borderline insanity, and you base your arguments like a little kid, on emotion, and not logically.
LarryBeil 1 month ago
Sorry, I had to comment, because the creator of this videos comments are borderline retarded. If someone murdered your mother with a knife, are you claiming that the knife is evil and not the person committing it? And answer this question, because you never answer questions, you just dodge them from what I've observed. Your bias is borderline insanity, and you base your arguments like a little kid, on emotion, and not logically.
LarryBeil 1 month ago
lol. You couldn't think of this? It's such an easy logical statement to disprove you. Heres a quote real quick, that you did in your video. "If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil." OK, an evil person is wicked. After judgment, God will rid of all evil, and cast the wicked into the Lake of Fire. Problem solved.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat lol. Problem not solved. You've just demonstrated the bigger problem. Not only did "God" supposedly create this universe, but IT also supposedly knows all. This means that IT knew everything that would occur, yet still created what you call "wicked people." So, rather than NOT creating "wicked people," God cruelly tortures them after they die (though they were doomed from his creation of them). And God does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop evil Situations (disasters, wars, etc.).
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist Going by your reasons, on point 6, it said, "If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil." I'm going by what you put in the video. God does have the desire to eliminate all people and will. Just because it isn't happening now, doesn't mean it won't happen after judgment.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat all evil people* If you have 7 points, which you did, then if the first 5 are right, but the 6th point is not, then it is therefore, false. Just because evil currently exists doesn't mean it always will. To be logical, you must think deeper.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Simply moving "evil people" somewhere else after their deaths is not "Eliminating evil," as we were discussing before. And I don't believe there are "evil people." Evil is an emotional connection to an event. Without people, evil wouldn't exist, because our minds perceive things as "evil," "good," or "neutral," (having no relevance with oneself).
The points were from Stanford's website (as I showed in the video), and they did and do stand up to scrutiny.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist Without people, evil wouldn't exist? How so? I'm not saying that's false, but your assuming again, which lacks logic. In another alternate reality, how can you say that evil couldn't exist with some other type of being? By the way: e·vil/ˈēvəl/
Adjective:
Profoundly immoral and malevolent.
Noun:
Profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity, esp. when regarded as a supernatural force.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Evil and good are subjective perceptions of reality. What is good for one is bad or evil for another. And there is neutral (no personal effect).
Yes, you may want to define evil as it is regarded religiously, but I am referring to the far more general definition of negativity. God's love is supposed to be illuminating, yet negativity may always creep in and spread. With feelings, with actions, with the feelings/actions of others.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist You said evil and good are subjective perceptions of reality. Assuming this is correct, could this question be a possibilty for you? Have you ever thought that your perception of God could be incorrect, assuming He exists?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat That's how I became an atheist. I was thinking a lot about God for months on end (every night, I would pray just for a response to know he was there for me), but I never got a reply. I still believed in God until I saw Donnie Darko, which introduced me to the fact that atheism exists. All-in-all I spent a few years holding closely to my beliefs of God, heaven, and hell, only to come to the conclusion later that none were real (I have OCD and dwelled on god until I lost faith.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat "Just because it isn't happening now, doesn't mean it won't happen after judgment."
Creating evil in order to commit evil on innocents is malevolent, rather than benevolent. Based on the quote above, your god seems to be either malevolent or nonexistent.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist Back to your statement you just made. Assuming that what you said was true, that God knows all, even wicked people, knowing beforehand they would suffer in torment after judgment, then that does not prove God doesn't have the desire to eliminate evil. Assuming God exists, then why can't he desire to eliminate evil in the future. The present is not the future. You need to base your arguments less on your bias and more logically.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Again, you misunderstand what I've said. Allowing evil to exist is evil. By allowing evil, rather than replacing all evil with either "good" or "neutral," any god would be viewed as not caring about this universe or not existing at all. A god that is portrayed as an all powerful, knowing, and loving being that cares specifically for humans (above all other creatures in the universe) does not fit with the characteristics you've described (torturing innocents forever...).
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist You're putting words that I never said. I never said He'd torture innocents forever, that is a lie. Allowing is different than causing, by the way.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat All are innocent of eternal torture. You said you believe in that "hell"
If there's an all powerful and knowing god that is creator of everything, it didn't simply Allow evil to exist, it created the very concept and all evil (knowing all the evil that would spread, as suffering and negative emotions escalate).
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist Never said that buddy. I never said I believe in that 'hell' of people going there innocent that face eternal torture. If you could find me saying that, I'd like to see you copy and paste it. Because I've seen all of my posts on this video, and it's not there. Also, if you alter what I said when you paste it, you just suck.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat I honestly don't care if you believe in it at all. I just thought you said that, but I guess it was one of the other people that have been responding to my comments today. Sorry.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist Do you allow anyone that you perceive as evil exist? If no, how'd you exterminate them? If yes, then by your own definition, you are evil.
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat People aren't evil (at least no universally); actions/events are evil. People may commit "evil acts" but there are no "evil people" in my view. Since control over our own minds and bodies is beyond our means (we lack freewill, and instead have the illusion of choice that gives us hope/optimism that we have control), there are no evil people. Evil people, in my opinion, would have to plan out their evil deeds, like the god of the bible.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist lol. So if someone blows up two towers, killing lots of people, innocent people, then the person that did this is not evil? Just the towers blowing up are evil? lol
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat Wow, you have a sick sense of humor joking about 9/11 like that.
No people are evil, and no people deserve torture. Not for the color of one's skin, or one's race, ethnicity, religion, lack of religion, sexual orientation, gender, or cultural upbringing/brainwashing. You think brainwashed children that eventually commit acts of terrorism deserve torture for not being able to do anything but be brainwashed and waste their lives at someone else's hand?
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist I was laughing at the fact of how skewed your perception was by asking an obvious question, not the event, another false assumption made by you. Can you answer my question? If someone murdered your mother with a knife, then the person doing this is not evil, just the knife, right?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JustinTheAtheist I was laughing at the fact of how skewed your perception was by asking an obvious question, not the event, another false assumption made by you. Can you answer my question? If someone murdered your mother with a knife, then the person doing this is not evil, just the knife, right?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JustinTheAtheist I was laughing at the fact of how skewed your perception was by asking an obvious question, not the event, another false assumption made by you. Can you answer my question? If someone murdered your mother with a knife, then the person doing this is not evil, just the knife, right?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist lol, you are so ignorant its rediculous. I was laughing at how rediculous that statement was, that the towers are evil, and not the people committing the heinous acts. But anyways, answer this question, because you keep dodging my questions. If someone murdered your mother with a knife, your claiming that the person doing this is not evil, but the knife is?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist So we arent in control of our minds and bodies? I can't walk down the street with my body if I want? I can't wash my hands?
VickEqualsCheat 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@VickEqualsCheat You control your pancreas? Your liver? Your heart? Your subconscious? All the parts of your body that you don't control influence the choices you make and the way you think, feel, and act.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Epicurus said no such thing and wouldn't have. 1) he was a theist (polytheist to be precise) 2) his primary audience, 3rd and 4th century BC Athenians, would have found such a statement ridiculous. None of their gods was omnipotent, omnibenevolent or omniscient, yet no-one questioned calling them gods
StupidTheist 2 months ago
The problem of evil is the worst argument ever! against God. This video full of false dichotomy from beginning to end.
If God does not exist then evil does not exist as well, morality is just an aid to survival and nothing else.
jonathanfater 3 months ago
@jonathanfater First, show us the "false dichotomy," and second, No. "Good" and "Evil" are subjective concepts that change based on the observer. And Yes, morality is based on Evolution by means of Natural Selection.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist At 0:05-0:24 false dichotomy. The video down there will show why.
At 0:51 number 6, if God were to eliminate evil he would have to wipe out the entire human race since humans do and are capable of doing evil.
watch video: watch?v=EPqSrnR6VtI
jonathanfater 1 month ago
@jonathanfater I've seen enough William Lain Craig videos to know he has no intellectually persuasive persona.
"...the philosophical consensus today is that the logical version of The Problem of Evil has been dissolved,"
This does not mean anything (especially if William's vote was counted).
I understand that the definition must first be proposed, and not everyone believes in the definition I used, but that is the definition I used, and it proves to be logically impossible.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist "but that is the definition I used"
'sigh' and that's the problem. Well you can have your definitions if it makes you happy.
jonathanfater 1 month ago
@jonathanfater It is the definition that many people use to describe the "God of the bible," so maybe this video isn't for you (if you're not talking about any biblical gods).
Which god were you talking about, if you don't mind me asking?
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist (>_<) the God of the Bible.
jonathanfater 1 month ago
@jonathanfater That's funny. The "God of the bible" is supposed to be all powerful, knowing, and loving. Yet these 3 attributes to not fall in line with observable reality. "Good" and "evil" are concepts perceived by individuals/groups of people, and there is not a shred of evidence to support any gods intervening with the workings of the universe (or the lives of the humans, which the biblical god is supposed to be fondly attached). The biblical god is one of many contradictions.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist The problem with you is you think that because God is powerful, knowing, and loving, that that will prevent him from allowing evil to be, but that isn't so.
"there is not a shred of evidence to support any gods intervening with the workings of the universe"
What are you talking about here?
jonathanfater 1 month ago
@jonathanfater The god of the bible is said to have created the universe and intervened in humans' lives (at one point in time, at least), yet there is no evidence of any of this.
Allowing evil is not such a harmless thing for a god to do. If this god really did create the universe and knew exactly how everything within it would play out, then this god Created Evil (not simply allowing it, but creating it out of nothing - like everything else, supposedly).
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist "and intervened in humans' lives (at one point in time, at least), yet there is no evidence of any of this"
LOL how would or can there be evidence for something like that? It's ridiculous for you to even say this. If you were home alone and God were to visit you, would there be evidence for other people to believe that God visited you at your house? NO!
What is your definition of evil?
jonathanfater 1 month ago
@jonathanfater The shroud of turin is supposed to be evidence of Jesus' resurrection, and there are plenty of religious people trying to show evidence of divine events taking place on Earth.
"If you were home alone and God were to visit you, would there be evidence for other people to believe that God visited you at your house?"
YES! If God were actually in this universe and in our dimension, then yes, his great power and information would be observable scientifically.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist If God were to come in this universe and to our dimension as he is in all his glory and power, well ಠ_ಠ We'll ALL be dead and extinct. So God coming here, um not such a God idea.
jonathanfater 1 month ago
@jonathanfater So he couldn't even Save us from himself, yet christians believe he Saved us from himself/his father's wrath. Interesting. You limit the power of your god when it's convenient for you.
JustinTheAtheist 1 month ago
@JustinTheAtheist I'm guessing you haven't read the Bible on this matter. When one goes to heaven one would get a new imperishable, indestructible body that would be able to withstand the presence of God.
God saving us from his wrath? that something else.
jonathanfater 1 month ago
Hypatheticlly You can be right with the excitence off God. Reason is because a god would not exist in our relm so to speak. Reason because it could die, scince everything thing in our known universe can die change but yet also live. Your argument isn't wrong just we don't base the existence off a higher intelegence and being on logic it is based on our own experinces and faith at what we may have changed in our own lives. No one can tell you to belive or not thats up to you.
SteveAust9 6 months ago
Creation is God's consciousness disolved into fractals. Those fractals carry larger portions of godself as the physical vessels evolves into more complex beings. As creation evolves the consciouness of the dreaming God begins to awaken through intellectual discovery of self.
wiseyeffect 7 months ago
@wiseyeffect I somewhat agree, but I would not call it "God," because we are all connected; nothing is above everything (though, like fractals, there is always something higher up, just as there is always something lower down).
JustinTheAtheist 5 months ago
@jdude1209 Anyone wanting to me to read revelations should first pick up a science text book and start reading.
JustinTheAtheist 11 months ago
Best not to feed the trolls.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
Justin: Ask cartesian theist to give you a single argument that will get you past deism, he won't do it!
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
@HonestTechnoAtheist
Oh look. Techno boy has been put on loan by Dhorpatan to be someone elses bitch for the day! How sweet you atheists share him around like a little puppy. I'm surprised you still dare talk on such issues since you made a career out of getting owned by CT. Looks like poor Justin has just suffered the same intellectual death too! You atheist non-philosophers make atheism look like talk shit - you're the biggest advertizement against atheism out there!!
soctratesforthewin 1 year ago
@soctratesforthewin And here is cartesiantheists bitch the troll here as well! If CT owned me then shit tastes good. Show me a single instance where he owned me. You who make a video about me and then block me.
You are unblocked so feel free to comment on my channel if you wish, I now have to go to work.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
@HonestTechnoAtheist
So I call you a bitch and the best you can muster in reply is the same insult! Not very creative Technoboy! Well clearly you eat lots of shit and like it then. That would explain why so much of it comes out of your mouth then too. Hahahaha. Why in the blue hell would I want to comment on your joke of a profile. That's where the kids play. I don't wanna go back to pre-school thanks. You little kiddies run along now. I see someone else has PWND you again. Funny!!
soctratesforthewin 1 year ago
@CartesianTheist Evil cannot be justified, due to the absence of free will and the fact that determinism exists. Show me otherwise.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
Catholic answer to the problem of evil, click my name to see the video.
TheDefenceOfTruth 1 year ago
Doctorw2 knows God exists and doesn't want to share with the world.. Something's off. But remember Justin, these definitions of "God" only works for some religions as Christianity and Jewism. Norse religion for example has a completely different definition of God as they have multiple Gods with different abilities. Same for Roman/Greek Gods.
And by the way, since you are making these videos and reasearch as yourself, wouldn't you call yourself more of a agnostician rather than atheist?
KnightSauro 1 year ago
@KnightSauro I am an Ignostic Agnostic Atheist. Look at my channel description to see what they all mean.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
I believe Evil is a "tool" for us to learn from- as you learn you are subject to less "evil"- evil is an illusion that causes friction, that causes the soul to evolve, evil is a perspective.
occultpriestess 1 year ago
@occultpriestess Now why should anyone believe in the existence of souls?
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
evil is a human construct GOD has nothing to do with this concept.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 You are correct. Evil is a subjective thing. Everything in the universe is neutral until it is given meaning by an observer. However, the mere existence of evil, even though it is subjective, is something that a perfectly All-Loving being would not allow to exist. One should expect God to prevent every time are the evils against innocent children.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist well, it is not as simple as that. good and evil are mental concepts which only a living being can discern through cognitive processes. GOD is a conceptual entity love is an ambigious concept there are different types and degrees of love which are subject to certain conditions and purposes. a being of pure intellect and conciousness would not act the way a human being would act since we are driven by emotion and primal instincts of our genetic past.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 I somewhat agree with you again. However, if God were lacking in emotion, then God would not be perfect, because the concept of being All-Loving could never apply to God. I'm merely taking the definition of "God" that most people use and pushing it as far as it'll go, until it collapses in on itself.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist the definition that most people use for GOD is in error becuase it is based on anthropormorphisims. anything that is outside the realm of human experience people will always give a human explanation for using their own understanding of things from a human point of view. To call GOD all loving or perfect is to define him in human terms using human standards which are flawed.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Which leads you inevitably to the Argument from Ignorance. However, if humans cannot understand God, then we must not have been able to communicate with God, and thus, God probably doesn't exist. And the definitions that most people use cannot exist.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist not necessarily, just becuase humans can not understand GOD that does not mean he can not communicate with them, he can but, only on a limited level of communication. the definitions that people use to describe GOD come from the realm of human experience thus GOD confines himself to that level of understanding since this is easier for us but, ultimately GOD is beyond human experiences.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 What I was really getting at was the obvious truth that all you are doing is making things up. You were not endowed this "sacred wisdom" through communication with this "All Mighty God"
You can speculate all you want, but you're not bringing anyone closer to any sense of truth.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist all i am trying to do is make other people see that religion and GOD are not the same thing. in order to know GOD you must be connected to other people,the ecology, and with your true self. when you live simply and serve others in need without any ulterior religious motive than you begin to understand the truth and see clearly who GOD is.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Well, you can try to spread whatever message you want to whatever people you want, but the fact of the matter is that God cannot exist. See my website for details.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist well, thats ok if you want to believe that but, speaking for myself i know GOD exists.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 That's AMAZING!! :O
How do you KNOW?
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist i hope are not being sarcastic Justin.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Seriously, answer the question. How do you KNOW?
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist sorry i cant tell any one, this is something each person must discover on their own.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Ha ha. Nice. I guess we're done then, unless you have something intelligent so say.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist i am not trying to cop out on the question you presented, but if i tell you the truth you would not accept it as that. i have several friends who are atheists and i admire their honesty and their sincere search for truth but, i tell them and other people that GOD and religion are not the same thing and thats the only message im trying to convey to you.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Yes, I realize that God and religion are 2 completely different things. They are 2 separate categories that also happen to be incorrect and absurd.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist theres nothing absurd about mans quest for the ultimate truth religion was and is merely mans way of explaining and relating to the ultimate mystery of life and finding his place in the univerese As for GOD this concept is ambigious and is subject to whatever enviromental and cultural factors a person has lived in but, is not the actual truth of what GOD is.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 No. Religion is the means by which man has thrown out logic altogether and replaced his understanding of reality with a fairy tale. Science searches for the answers, while religion makes up answers.
God, on the other hand, is a super hero from most religions that can easily be shown to be incapable of existing.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist thats a rather biased assesment justin just think about humanities distant past and how our distant ancestors had to cope with what was happening to them and their changing world . seeing stars in the sky not knowing they were suns they would have to explain it as gods in the sky and our own sun as a god that brought forth life others would have their own explaination of how things worked in the world these attempts flawed as they are were attempts to explain lifes questions.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 No, they did not HAVE to explain things which they did not understand, and religions today still incorrectly explain things that we already understand through science.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist yes, they did have to explain things as human beings we have this insatiable curiousity that drives us to explain the enigmas of life its part of our divine heritage to ask important questions like who am i? how does this work? why am i or anything for that matter here? was the universe made or was it always here and what is my place in it? the religions of today are simply man made rules or traditions on serving or relating to whatever concept of GOD that culture has.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Yes, we question, but it is a complete failure to make things up.
God was created by man. God cannot exist.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JustinTheAtheist our ancestors were not making things up they were just brainstorming ideas and there is nothing wrong with that ideas are part of the scientific process what you have to realize is that religion gave birth to the excersize of scientific thought even though religion and science are at odds end with each other they both compliment one another in many ways. GOD was not created by any one only mens thoughts about GOD are created.
doctorw2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JustinTheAtheist i hope you are not being sarcastic justin.
doctorw2 1 year ago
@doctorw2 Please go to my site GodCannotExistcom to see the official Problem of Evil, Counter Arguments, and Counter-Counter Arguments.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
I laugh when people say evil doesn't exist, rather it's the absence of God's love. If that's the case, God's love doesn't exist, rather it's the absence of evil.
HybridD91 1 year ago
BTW, the "true love" of God is ineffable. Figure that out!
TheSpiritOfTruth 1 year ago
@TheSpiritOfTruth Yes, God's "true love" exists, and he himself tainted it with evil and suffering. That makes so much sense.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
Evil (relative to "us") serves God's ultimate purpose of Creation which is the greater good.
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. [Isaiah 45:7]
TheSpiritOfTruth 1 year ago
@TheSpiritOfTruth Why then? Why create evil when you can create a perfect world without it. Evil isn't necessary and cannot exist if God truly is benevolent and perfect.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist Evil exists because humans exist the way God wants us to exist - that is with free will. Because you can't have a proper, loving relationship with a puppet. But the thing is, regardless of the evil, he sent the Messiah, which is a way out for humans, but involves big sacrifice on God's part. But nothing anybody can say can reveal this to you :) sounds like hocuspocusmumbojumbo but it really is quite true. All the best justin
Pandan8or 1 year ago
@Pandan8or No. Tis not hocuspocusmumbojumbo. Tis quite untrue.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@Pandan8or
If god created man and man can create evil: then WHO CREATED EVIL?
simple382 1 year ago
Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. ... I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670)
TheSpiritOfTruth 1 year ago
As is well known, the theory of the maxima and minima of functions was indebted to (Leibniz) for the greatest progress through the discovery of the method of tangents. Well, he conceives God in the creation of the world like a mathematician who is solving a minimum problem, or rather, in our modern phraseology, a problem in the calculus of variations the question being to determine among an infinite number of possible worlds, that for which the sum of necessary evil is a minimum.
TheSpiritOfTruth 1 year ago
Premise 4: God is Morally Perfect, and therefore has the desire to eliminate all evil...
Does this mean the abolishment of suffering (that is in the short term)?
Morally perfect would be: Benevolent, merciful, loving and just yes?
The 'just' part is important, because, for example, a just judge would not allow his son, whom he loves, to be unpunished for a crime he commits.
And, if a Judeo-Christian God exists, then Jesus (the final solution to pain and suffering) would be a way out
Pandan8or 1 year ago
@Pandan8or Not quite. All actions are predetermined through causality, and all actions performed by conscious beings is influenced and caused to exist. Punishment is to correct wrong-doing, but the wrong-doing is actually letting wrongs exist.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist But being omniscient, surely God would know that evil was going to enter his perfect creation, but yet he still created humans because of the love He had for us even when we did not exist. And the issue of right and wrong is not the important thing - It's the relationship.. I think that's a misconception many people have about God.. What is most important is a relationship instead of do good-go to heaven, do wrong go to hell. I see your point though, that he just shouldn't...
Pandan8or 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist... (cont'd) have created the world in the first place.. But non-existence would kinda suck if you think about it... but i guess if He didn't exist then there would be no issue at all would there?
Pandan8or 1 year ago
@Pandan8or Exactly. There are numerous issues and problems if God does exist, but none if God does not exist.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist but does the number of issues to do with something affect the truth value of it? The issue i was talking about was the whole question of evil etc. I don't think that an argument based on number of issues can stand (not saying that is your only argument).. Oh dear, that Spirit of Truth guy is floundering a bit..
Pandan8or 1 year ago
@1:26 point 5: Does evil exist? Objective evil? Isn't is percieved evil? I don't think evil exist. Noelplum made video about it. Evil people, but not evil on it self. And always in the framework of us humans.
Because objectively, the only thing we humans do for 99,9% of the time is rearranging atoms. We do create some other elements in reactors, but you catch the drift.
Who's to care if I blew up the world tomorrow? Would it be evil if nobody was there to remember it or suffer the conceq.
ContinuumXT 1 year ago
@ContinuumXT Objectively, no, but since evil does exist subjectively, it does exist, and if God wanted to, he should be able to stop it from existing all together.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
@JustinTheAtheist Hmm feels like sippery slope. Suffering exists for every sentient being. Evil is not a thing out there on its own. Or if I perceive god does that make it real? Surely a god could do anything, but nothing he could do if it's not objectve.
ContinuumXT 1 year ago
@ContinuumXT Evil only exists as a perception, while god is said to exist without the need for perception. However, god cannot exist, and evil as a subjective emotion exists. You understand perfectly.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
I don't think you succesfully ruled out the free will defense. As long as free will is logically possible, not even actually true, then the free will defense succeeds in destroying the logical problem of evil.
lifeandphilosophy 1 year ago
@lifeandphilosophy if you haven't already, I recommend that you see my second video, which shows freewill to be illogical in its nature. However, I will be making another video soon that shows a diagram of how freewill is not only illogical, but also absurd.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
For something to be a choice of FREE will, that choice must have nothing that influenced it into existence. So it logically follows that this free choice cannot be part of the chain/web of causation that all other actions are apart of. Therefore, a FREE choice would be one that spontaneously came into existence independent from the chain/web of causation.
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
This "choice" would actually be a causeless cause, so it could NOT be considered a choice, since it has no cause by definition. Not even the person thinking of it could have chosen to bring it into existence, since it came into existence Without Cause
JustinTheAtheist 1 year ago
Christian dogma is not complexity of the mind or the mystery of life---the christian concept of god is solipsistic and petty--Einsteins god is one thing but christian dogma fails to cover reality-the problem of evil is a problem to the christian idea of god not to a deist who can believe in an indifferent god
illuminatiLiberi 2 years ago 2
This isn't an issue of the Christian God but God as a concept in all cultures, as there has never been a time in human history where the human species has built a society with no Godly deities to pray upon. Shouldn't that make you wonder that God might not just be man's invention, but is very real and a vital essential part of human existence and survival? This is where I'm focusing on : That the unexplained nature and complexity of the mind can only...(cont.)
scaleshchess 2 years ago
Actually, scaleshchess, your very argument compliments the idea that theology is merely an evolutionary trait that humans developed.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
...indicate that a greater superconscious being must have created this unsolvable state of being. I do not have any doubts that God is real, but at the same time I understand that some people prefer to convert this idea into a more practical state, such as what existentialist philosophers did.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
No.
First, the nature and complexity of the mind is NOT unexplainable. Science puts no limits on what is capable of being understood, and as I've said before, 1 of the 3 basic assumptions that we must make to be logical thinkers is that reality is capable of being understood. Claiming otherwise defies logic and halts logical thought.
Second, we have a great amount of information of the human mind, as I've said in 1 of my other comments. There's no need for a "greater superconscious being."
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
And if you have absolutely No doubts, then that is a shame. It is our doubts that make us logically evaluate things and really think about them in depth. Without doubt, you are closed minded to any other possibilities. I am not saying that to be offensive; when you have no doubts, you effectively stop intelligent and enlightening thoughts altogether. All I ask is that you be consistent in abiding by the 3 basic assumptions that we all have in living our daily lives. Have doubts about everything.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
You know, I couldn't agree with you more : a belief with not a hint of doubt is not a belief - it is a superstition. Some philosopher said that, and he is absolutely right. I'm keeping your advice, but at the same time, you have to understand that when something is very obvious and clear to us, we see no reason why should be skeptical about it.
As for the structure and use of the brain, it makes sense that way. If you find that specific video in reference to that, please send me the link
scaleshchess 2 years ago
I'll try to find the specific video when I have the chance. If you have the chance, I highly recommend viewing all of the episodes of Carl Sagan's Cosmos.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
I completely agree with you, illuminateLiberi. ^_^
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
so, you are comparing santa to light traveling in space.
wow.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
Wow, you didn't understand the point at all, did you? If you start adding "superpowers" to the things you are trying to defend (i.e. enabling Santa to exceed the cosmic speed limit or enabling God to exist without time or causation), then you are officially committing intellectual suicide, by claiming that logic does not apply. You are using logic (knowingly or not) to defend God (to me, others, or yourself), yet you abandon logic when it is convenient at defending God. BE CONSISTENT!
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "superpowers"? The concept of God does in no way or form exclude logic from its fundamental value. I would urge you to read about Descartes' Dualism.
Personally, I have never abandoned logic to defend God's existence. Just because it cannot be proven scientifically - due to the minds non-material nature - does not mean that it is not there.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
I realize that anything is possible, due to the fact that we don't know everything, but when you apply logic to God, as I've done in all of my videos, you can see that God seemingly Must defy logic in order to exist. In this way, the only true way to defend God is to say that logic doesn't apply to him, which is inconsistency, as you use logic to evaluate your beliefs of God, your definition of "God" and your relationship with God (it takes logic to evaluate prayers, miracles, and communication)
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
but if I decide to claim that logic doesn't apply to God's existence, then I would have to disconnect this dogma from the pragmatic practical world which would make me question the value of science as well. Logic interweaves throught the physical realm all the way to the sacred unexplained phenomena, if you apply it carefully that is.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
EXACTLY!! We use/apply logic to EVERYTHING, including science AND religion. We logically evaluate everything. Our perceptions of reality are based on logical thought, and our "understandings" of "God" are also based on logical thought. Otherwise, you are stating that understanding God is the essence of being illogical... When one claims that God defies logic, that person is claiming that logic doesn't apply, which means that "anything goes" Anything is possible and as likely as anything else.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
When you apply logic to God and ask all relevant questions about God, it can be seen that "God" does not exist. Many people say that "God defies logic" which means that logic does not apply. The implications are that there is no point discussing God, since you can NEVER logically understand God. It kills all intellectual conversation.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
"When you apply logic to God and ask all relevant questions about God, it can be seen that "God" does not exist"
The only thing you are achieving by saying this, is to degrade/deduce the value of the dogmatic belief. When it comes to these matters, an extended stretched out version of logical sense is required, in order to understand its true value. Can you see where I'm coming from?
scaleshchess 2 years ago
Actually, not quite. Please elaborate a bit more.
If you're talking about my very definition of "God" I realize that I only use one commonly accepted definition. "God" could be defined other ways...
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
How can you even know that God does not exist if you can't recognize the mystic nature of the mind? I'm not asking you to explain how it works, I'm asking you to accept that consiousness can not exist with no ordained, preset plan of action and because of its peculiar nature we can not investigate in the conventional scientific methods, but what we Can do is accept that there is a Greater Being that put this together.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
I can't find the right words to express this thoroughly...
scaleshchess 2 years ago
I disagree. We must logically acknowledge that true and absolute knowledge is nonexistent within humans (but it is not necessarily unattainable). We surely should not Assume that consciousness and order was planned by a "Greater Being" That is absurd. If you Assume that, then you destroy any reasonable discussions of God's possibility of existence or traits/qualities that are attributed to him (since you are already Assuming these things. Never assume what you don't have to.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
There are 3 basic assumptions that we all must make, in order to be logical thinkers:
1. Reality exists
2. Reality is capable of being understood
3. Our perceptions of reality are correct
You must assume all 3 of these in order to be thinking/discussing logically. For instance, if you say that we do not perceive reality correctly, then you are arguing that logic cannot be used to evaluate anything, since logic itself would be flawed.
Arguing that logic is flawed is Arguing From Ignorance.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
I have the following 3 questions for you :
1. Where does reality exist ( where is the physical mind taking place) ?
2. Explain how does the mechanism of understanding reality work?
3. How do you define reality?
scaleshchess 2 years ago
1. The physical mind is taking place within our physical brains. Our perceptions within our minds are our realities.
2. Understanding reality works through science. We use the scientific method (AND logical and reasoned though processes) to evaluate our observations/perceptions of reality.
3. Reality is that which exists. It is all that exists. It is existence. To say that we assume reality exists is to say that we are assuming that existence itself exists.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
But you can not explain why these logical and reasoned processes have the sequence that they do in order to understand reality - there is only one tiny part of the brain that scientists have ever come close to finding the origin of what turns a thought out process into consiousness, and this spot merely touches the surface of how consiousness works. It is remaining a mystery and can not be explained.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
I highly recommend that you watch some of the videos in my playlist called Carl Sagan. He had a tv show called Cosmos, in which he explained things as small as the history of certain philosophers to things as big as evolution and the Big Bang. He actually does talk in one episode of how the brains of animals are merely added onto from previous brains (small amphibious brain structures in the center, with larger reptilian brain structures outside of that, followed by mammalian brain structures).
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
I know about the last common ancestor and about the motor sensory part of the human brain and that it is the direct result of evolution thru natural selection, but it doesn't answer every question.
scaleshchess 2 years ago
It is true that we humans do not know everything about our own brains, nor do we know everything about anything. However, we have come a long way in understanding the brain/mind, and it is foolish to say that we know little. We know much about it. There are many forms of psychology that analyze and interpret behavior, and there are many other sciences that analyze brain activity and which parts of the brain do what. We have much knowledge on this subject.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago
Then explain to me, Justin...
Why do we use only 9% of the brain, since as you say we have come to know that much? How come we can't use its full capacity and functions?
scaleshchess 2 years ago
That is irrelevant in understanding the workings of the brain. If anything, it shows that our brains are not perfectly "designed."
This is (if it is true) a fact that supports evolution. As species evolve, the brain simply gets more parts added to it (on top of the existing brain matter). We have the brains of amphibians, reptiles, and mammals within our brains (as Carl Sagan said, though he worded it better). We shouldn't be expected to use all of our brains, because it would be unnecessary.
JustinTheAtheist 2 years ago