 Hello, and welcome to the Digital Freethought Radio Hour and WOZO Radio 103.9 LP FM here in Knoxville, Tennessee. We're recording this on Sunday morning, John. I've been wearing fifth, I guess now. 2023. I'm Larry Rhodes or DJ doubter five and issues will we have our co-host one bed on the line with us. Hello, I'm back. It's the wombat. What's up. Not a lot us at this early morning hour. With us today, we have a sleuth. Welcome. And we have John Richard. Lucifer. Lucifer. Oh, it's Lucifer. Okay. Hard to read that on there. Digital Freethought is a talk radio show about atheism, free thought, rational thought, humanism and the sciences. And conversely, we'll also talk about religion, religious faiths, gods, holy books, and superstition. And if you get the feeling that you're the only non-reliever in your town, well, you're just not here in Knoxville in the middle of the Bible Belt in the south of USA. We have a group of over 1000. We're the atheist society of Knoxville or ASK. And we'll tell you more about that after the mid show breaks. So be sure to stick around. Well, I'm at once our topic today. Chat GPT. The AI of all times have finally stumped the atheists. And we'll, we'll replay that in the bag to disagree. Hey, we haven't even asked the questions yet. That's what the show is going to be for. But we can place our bets now. So Christians get very excited because it's going to be a show. Good thing you guys got a Satanist here to bail you out. I was going to say that because in the introduction, Larry read through a whole list of things, but he missed out Satanism. Yeah, we can put that in there too. You're in good company. Speaking of which, though, since Greta, it's out and we can't do a newly invocation, we're going to go straight into my second favorite thing, which is just catching up on everybody in 30 seconds or less. Go on. Lucifer, Lucifer, go, go, go. All right, I've got a new podcast host. We've been working on new material right now. It's the skeptical Satanist we're on YouTube currently. Hopefully, we'll be spreading out from there after we get our content and our shit together. Nice. You know, what's great is the thing about a podcast is it's like almost a time capsule slash diary. And I think it's a good way, particularly I'm going to say this in a weird way, but I don't think men get enough opportunities to just talk about things that are on their mind in a welcoming environment. And I find it to be a very therapeutic experiment to just find friends that you like to talk with and engage with, even if it's virtually, where you just have a free space to openly speak. I feel like a lot of times we don't have rooms to share kinds of thoughts like that. My, my, my two cents. A lot of disconnect in society in general. Absolutely. Absolutely. Takes you a little bit out of the neck of chamber at least glad to engage with people and it's always valuable to be able to communicate rather than just the voices in your head regurgitating each other. I'm really happy about that. Where can we find the podcast. I can share that link with you. Sure. Pull it up to us at the end of the show. I want to hear the plugs for it. Sounds good. I want to revive your quest for living the life of every 13 year olds dream. Motorcycle games and space astronaut. What else? No, that I've been working. I still work a 40 hour week so I was retired for about a year and a half and then this job came along and it sounded interesting so I took it. I mainly play Star Citizen now, which is a space game. They're very interesting. It's kind of buggy because it's an alpha release. Sure. But boy what a game. It's really something. Let's go ahead. I'll ask you this. Is there any AIs in the in the game right now? Well, there are a lot of bots. Bots are AIs. They're rudimentary. You don't, you don't actually converse with them. They exchange bullets with them. Okay, okay, okay. We'll see. Pay attention to the show. There's cool stuff coming up ahead. Cool. John Richards would love to hear about you and your quest for chaos overseas. Well, I want to correct another era of a mission that's happened already in this show, because you introduced Larry as pursuing every 13 year old stream which consisted of online games and something else I forget but it's been a long time since I was 13. Here's a whittling on it. I don't think that's a comprehensive list. Fair enough. Fair enough. I'm probably out of date myself. I probably did myself. It's like I want to be on a fortnight's eSports team dad. It's like, oh, okay, that's what kids are into. Well, when I was 13, it was fishing. I was crazy about fishing. No, for me, when I was 12, I knew it was riding bicycles. And now is it because it really really an internet presence back then so. Oh, no, sure. It's about being outside with friends. Mine was spreading the love of Jesus. Oh, poor kid. That's a good point. Most believers don't realize that atheists came from which I was joking. No, and that's why we know religions so well. I can't believe. I can't believe what I'm hearing. Didn't any of you Americans discover girls. Now, now for that you're talking to the round crowd. John Richards, what's going on with you my friend. Well I'm still plugging away with free thought channel. And I'm happy to report that it's gaining subscribers at the rate of almost to a day. Whoa, that's double than last time. Yes, he's coming along very well. And we had a great to chat yesterday with an ex evangelical South African. It's well worth watching he's, he's got a journey, he's been on a journey, and he wants to tell us about it. And we spend an hour listening to him, describing all the trials and tribulations that he's undergone. Luckily, he's not being shunned very much. But anyway, I don't want to give away too many secrets of the of the story. Free thought channel. That was free thought hour. Very cool. Very cool. And you got another show coming up, don't you. Yeah. Yeah, and I hope you're going to join me in it tie and I'm hoping that dread will to whether I see he's not here with us today which is worrying because our numbers are down you know we have a panel show. There's news on the news. And sadly, one of our regular stalwart panelists died the week before last. So we've lost him, Frank Lavelle, who was a lovely fellow. Honestly, he came across on camera as a really adorable fellow. We've lost him and we've got another member of our regular panelists who's been invaded by relatives, and a third one who is on vacation so he's not going to be contactable. We normally have at least four people. I'm hoping you're going to be able to join us tie. I'm down. Great. Nice. Very, very cool. Yeah, absolutely. Oh, okay, awesome. Okay, okay, it'll be fun crowd and hopefully we'll be able to have dread end. And maybe if you're short on panelists, you could download one have you ever thought about that John Richards, because we live in a world now, where if you have people that you want to talk to. All you need is an internet connection and not people, but a that can happily have, in my opinion some pretty really enlightening conversations with you in a polite and faster fashion than it would be with a human being. Or you have to wait for them to type, where you don't have to. I think it's good to segue as you. Oh, yeah, yeah. We could find out I can ask chat GPT, who's the AI that we're asking for is come up with 40 segues. Here's topic a here's topic be connected to. Let's see if they can do that anyway. Okay, that's topic for today show. I want to see if an AI can ask questions that would stump atheists, including our resident say, Satanist who's on the show right now is Lucifer. I reached out to chat GPT who's like this new AI that's all the rave on the internet, produced by open AI and they have basically made a model for questions and answers of any sort. So text limits, feel free to use it as long as you want. And all they're doing is just gathering data to feed into a neural network that allows their model to be even more smart and more capable of answering questions and in polite fashion. There are some limitations on what it can answer so for example certain languages aren't available, and it will make it clear that you can upload pictures it's solely text in text out. You can also ask questions about the nature of the process but due to their regulations they can't explain how many servers are available, or how many elective requests there are, and they will try to keep other questions asked by other users, private as well. But they do recommend that you don't give any of your personal information as well they do require your phone number to make an account, which I don't necessarily like but I got phone numbers to burn so it's all good. Either way, I logged in and I asked it, please generate five detailed questions that would stump an atheist, and I'd love to go over those answers, or those questions with you, and see if we can actually get some stumps. I'm going to go out with the first one. And as a disclaimer, when I asked this question, please give me five detailed questions that was stumping atheists, the model itself, the chat GPT said hey listen, as an AI language model. I do not have personal opinions or beliefs, but I can provide you with five philosophical questions that some people might find challenging to answer. And in my head that's like okay you're an atheist to congratulations. Well, I won't go that far. You want to go that far he doesn't believe in a guy doesn't believe in God. I've seen the questions and it seems to me that they're asking the questions from a believer's point of view, like, particularly the first one. So anyway, let's, let's go on into. Alright alright these are philosophical questions that were proposed most likely by believers in a philosophical sense but it is reiterating that with a really nice disclaimer anyway here's the first one. Larry you're on the, you're on the chopping block today. First question. How can the universe exists without a creator. Let's see that's exactly what I'm talking about usually that's a question you get from believers or the rights. The thing about it is, the way they frame it is you know the, the creator would mean like a human or I mean something with a mental ability to discern will agency, but a creator could be another universe could be a virtual particle could be, you know, anything, but they don't refer to, you know, virtual particles and other universes that way or even nature as creator. So that's why I think it has a theist been. Yeah, so there's a little bend to it and I agree. When I googled questions that would stump atheists, almost all the questions I got from like priests were front loaded in that capacity, they're like, they were just begging the question of a God or a relief so it is a little weird but I would say for someone that asked me how can the universe exists without a creator, it would require a better fundamental question of well how do we recognize a creation. Are we saying everything's a creation. Yeah, these would be really good questions to like figure out before we get into the concept of answering the question that's begging and answer already, because we agree that everything's a creation then we don't have grounds to recognize what things that aren't a creation are so we don't have a frame of reference. And if we're saying things can exist without it being created, then there's no way to plead that the universe is also creation, because certain things can exist without it being necessarily created as well. So the question would just be like how do we determine this universe as a creation. And if we don't have grounds to determine that, then the better answer is we don't know if it's creation or not. So basically, we could also just say it doesn't meet the criteria of something that would be designed, because we have some hallmarks or rules for design it doesn't seem like that's the case with what we know about design so far. Right. John Richards what do you think. Well, who created the Grand Canyon. Well, there you go. That's that was my point I was going to make is usually when he has posed this question they started off with who. Right. Just, just what John Richards did. And that's a giveaway that they're trying to load the question. Right in the direction of their answer, the preferred answer. Right. And it's, is it a really philosophical, is it really a philosophical question that front loads, or honest, is it really an honest question if you can be used dishonestly absolutely I agree so the questions you asked were important though I would love to see what sluice for things on the subject. What do you think about the, the question of how did the universe get created without a creator. I mean, my question would be why, well I would ask a question back I guess, why would there have to be a creator. Right. Why wouldn't the question just be how can the universe exist. Right. Where did it come from. I mean, that would be a simple right question. Yeah, honest open. Likewise, one of these questions, typically, what they do is they when when presented to an atheist, they are meant to make the atheist seem afraid to just respond with I don't know so that they can fill in the gap with their own belief. But truly the right answer here could just be straight up, I don't know, or it appears to be natural consequences or natural forces well who created natural forces. I don't know. Again, they're if you're proposing, if you are proposing that they're, you know who it is. Now you have the burden of the evidence, because I can easily demonstrate that I don't know how the universe is created without a creator. You are supplementing that with your own answer and that's part where you have to come up with evidence. There's also something with that where it's like this idea that you're going to base things that we you're going to base a claim off of things that we don't know rather than the things that we do know which seems so backward to begin with. It's argument for maintenance. You could just you could make up anything at that point and say that you know we don't know so. And the sad truth of it is, I don't know is actually the right answer when you don't know something as a society get shunned from that correct answer. We're forced to raise our hand and come up with an answer. We're forced to mark a random multiple choice question if we don't know just for the chance of being right. We are forced to respond to seem authoritative to seem confident to seem likable, but a lot of people don't like uncertainty. We don't like and that's one of the reasons why religion is so popular, but uncertainty is a valid answer when you don't have defined variables. And as you learn more about the scientific method, begin to appreciate things like undefined or undetermined or to be determined, because that's your area that of where you can place focus on in the future. And that's where we can continue to move towards where discoveries come from exactly say I don't know. Yeah, you find out the trouble is religious people think that I don't know is a weak position. Right. Not it's just honest. It's an honest position exactly exactly so we got to know that difference. And we got to continue to be chat champions and chillers of I don't know when that is in fact the best answer, because it's not. It's not a destination. It's the indication that you are you can move towards the the truth. If you go back 200 years, there was a lot more we didn't know how I think you're also going to kind of embarrassed theists in that way because they've been given a book that they say has all of this knowledge and this is everything you know that we know. Correct. And this is the truth and everything and then you're saying something that's outside of that. If it's either there, they aren't informed you know this this thing or yeah their book was wrong. Right, there's nothing more uncomfortable than realizing that when you thought you knew something you actually don't know something that's an acquired taste. But in my head that's the indication of learning, because what is learning, aside from putting aside your own biases, or your own gaps and knowledge with new knowledge. If you have an ego that's getting in the way of that, it's not in your best interest to maintain it. Get rid of that and continue to keep learning keep stretching yourself because that's what religion is stopping you from doing reaching your best self. In fact, scientists quite like being wrong, because that's the only thing that they can be certain about right. You can't be certain about being right, because tomorrow you might meet some sort of observation that is inconsistent with your, your model, right, you can be certain about being wrong. Right. And so along with the idea that we should ask honest questions I just want to give like a quick identification that when we use science as a way to resolve mysteries or unknowns. That is not a conclusive answer. It is a process science is a process that is good only in the fact that it's self correcting which means that it's always constantly questioning itself questioning its methods and trying to improve upon itself to get to a more correct answer the next day or the next hour or the next minute and anyone can be a part of that if they are willing to ask meaningful and honest questions which is why we talk about the first question and how it's framed and whether or not it's honest, because that's the how you get good answers by asking good questions. All right, that's our scientific. Okay. No one stumped yet. All right, all right, cool cool fair enough. Here's the next question. John Richards you're on the on the hot seat today are you ready. If everything in the universe is determined by natural laws. How can human beings have free will. Well, again, we don't know. Suck it up. We don't know we're working on it. One day we might find out. And many prominent people say that we don't have free will. Yes, yes indeed they do. What I'm at what I would ask is if this God knows everything. I mean everything. He knows what you're going to do every step of the future that you have, and there's no free will because you can't change what you have, but he would know what he's going to do for the rest of eternity. Yeah, technically knows everything that he has no free will. Between omnipotence and omniscience. I was just I was going to bring up I think it's kind of funny that isn't it the devil that that created free will to begin with according to their stories. Oh my gosh. Well, then if your answer was well the devil made it. Satisfy that would satisfy. I'm wondering what do people mean when they say free will because we can understand even in this podcast we might have different definitions for the word belief. And so I have a definition of free will that is abiding by the natural laws of the universe. It is based on brain synapses and our chemistry and the things that we do in the past it's not truly random, but it's good enough to where I can make a distinction between choosing to leave a restaurant and being dragged out of a restaurant by a waiter. One is a violation my free will the other one isn't. That's how I'm defining it in my head. And so other people may have different ways of describing it. And that's just a question of what do you mean by free will, and then maybe we can have the conversation afterwards but for me. So universe that's governed by natural laws is consistent with my experience of free will based on how I'm defining free will. So I don't necessarily have a problem with that and I'd be happy to answer any more biochemical terms that are related to that or I've got a situation where I think there is no free will. It's when you're trying to discuss with your wife where you're going to go for dinner. I personally I don't think that you can prove that free will is a thing like what I mean your environment could control a lot of what you might consider free will or whatever there's a there's a lot of restraints on that I think I don't think that there's really any any evidence of that so Sure. And I understand the idea of like free will being more of like a random truly inspirational transcendent thing that like inspires a body in this meat space. I don't believe in that kind of free will like my free will is very like cut and dry bolts and nuts. And, and same thing with my, my personality like my personalities informed by the people I met the places that I've been to the food that I eat the places that I go, all that stuff. So like my personality who I am my identity everything is all part of my day to day experiences, or my legacy, including what I choose to do and what I choose not to do. And so I wrap that all into things that are based on the natural law because that's what I'm most impacted by, because as far as I'm aware I'm not impacted by supernatural or transcendentalism or anything like that or spiritualism. I have this world that I'm constantly fighting against its forces to stay alive. And that's what's going to shape me as well as what I choose to do. And I'm fine with that because in my head, the, the natural world is far more entertaining and complex than anything I could make up that's fictional, or what appears to be fictional, like as more as we understand how the, the actual natural world is, the more I'm realizing how beautiful and inherently complex, and, and, and just mind baffling levels of like, why is this planet so small in a universe so big. What else is going on in here this is crazy and I'm not going to live enough long enough to see all of it but I still get to see a little slice of it, and hopefully move our understanding a little bit like a, not even like enough to move the dial, but to help push that dial a little bit forward. That's so amazing to be a part of this time that's what I'm saying so like. This is a rabbit hole we could spend the whole show talking about whether libertarian free will is true or not. Sure, sure, sure. How about we do one more and then we can get into our break this one's for sluice for sluice for if there is no afterlife. What is the meaning of life. So, yeah, I think all of these questions are pretty loaded. But what I had actually wrote something down while I was looking at that. And I'd put the environment you're born into determines. And it could determine your meaning or the possibilities for you to have some meaning in life. And from there it's your choice. Okay, doubt or five, what do you think. Yeah, back him up. It's whatever you want it to be. You can make your purpose anything to make it personal, make it family, make it business anything you want. Sure. It's a question of who's meaning again, they want an agent to have imposed meaning on the nonsense. We make our own meaning. And I was as I was alluding to earlier I was saying like the idea that we are in basically a playground of physics that have been largely undiscovered chemical reactions that have been undetermined. Matters of phenomena that's observable that we've only seen a very small slice of this is a very exciting time to trap to have meaningful questions that you can throw out at the universe and get reliable, unbelievably world changing answers as a result. So like when we're figuring out stuff like this when we're playing around with the ai's when we're like coming up with new machines. All this stuff is very exciting to be a part of and I find a lot of meaning through that just contributing towards that effort. And educating other people to have the same kind of mindset or curiosity to further engage our our effort to push ourselves forward in this regard. So like that's my meaning that's where I get out of it and I got that for myself. And next day it could be jelly beans, you know, whatever I want it to be. What a what a wonderful time, and what a wonderful opportunity it is to be able to choose your own meaning in life and I have it dictated to you. And it changes it changes as your lives go along you don't have to pick one out in childhood and follow forever. Thank you. The other thing to bring to this is that the perception that that question is coming from is one of human viewpoint of human exceptionalism of human chosenness. And they never asked what is the meaning of a chimpanzee's life. What is the meaning of an eight of an aunt's life or what is the meaning of a tape worms live. Except that those things do not have any extrinsic meaning. Wait a second we're saying humans that made a human god for for humanity might be biased towards humans that's that's all the more reason to worship us by getting monster doubt or five would you might We'll come right back. Sure. This is the digital. What us chat GPT that question. Yeah, cool. This is the digital free thought radio our and w o z o radio 103.9 LP FM right here in Knoxville, Tennessee. And we'll be right back after this short break. Hello and welcome back to the second half of digital free thought radio hour. I'm doubter five and we're on w o z o radio 103.9 LP FM here in Knoxville, Tennessee. Let's take just a moment to talk about the atheist society of Knoxville. We're founded in 2002 we're in our 21st year, have over 1000 members, and we have weekly in person meetings every Tuesday evening in Knoxville's old city at Barley staff room and pizzeria. Look for us inside at the high top table or if it's pretty weather outside on the deck. We also have a Tuesday evening zoom meeting for those who don't like to get out or don't live in Knoxville. If you'd like to join us or email us for details at asking atheists at Knoxville atheists.org, or let's chat s e at gmail.com. You can find us online, Facebook meet up.com or at our website at Knoxville atheists.org. If you don't live in Knoxville you can still go to meet up and do a search for an atheist group in your town. Don't find one. Right. Where do you want to pick up guys we've been asking chat gbt the latest AI craze on the internet about what would be questions that would stump an atheist. We went over three of them so far we got two more on the list these are the top five questions that will stump an atheist we haven't stumped an atheist yet, but we will. We might with the next to doubt or five back on the hot seat. Question number four chat gbt wants you to know if there is no inherent morality. How do we determine what is right and wrong. So far from religion. Well, harm, harm comes to my mind. Well anything that harms you are your fellow man philosophically financially emotionally physically, then those you shouldn't do. Why do you need more than that. There you go whole books whole libraries of books downtown here in Knoxville and every other major city in the world that were law books, their, their laws that are made up by secular individuals without the input of religion. There you go whole whole libraries of moral moral codes, without, without a God, John Richard I want to fill this out at you too if there's no inherent morality how do we determine what is right and wrong. That's another begging question, isn't it because it's assuming that there is an absolute right. It says if there is no inherent morality I don't think I see the assumption in this one. This one I think right there was the assumption though. Yeah, I never I never said that there was. Where would the reality come from. Here's the word specific there could absolutely be inherent morality, but if there is no inherent morality is the premise of the question which is not an assumption or an argument that there is one so if there is no inherent morality. How do we determine what is right or wrong. But they kind of dropped the whole front part of that question. It's not pertinent to the answer. Yeah, indeed, because what you're doing what they're doing there is they're taking a concept which is in the conceptual realm which we can conceive of because there's no limit to what we can conceive I mean I'm conceiving of Humpty Dumpty right now. Yeah, and, and they're taking this concept that there is a absolute right or wrong, and they're trying to apply it to the natural realm where things happen where time progresses where events occur. And in that realm, no absolute rightness or wrongness exists. Everything is contingent. We respond to events and judge them on every instance, how to respond, and what might be right one day may not the next for example, I won't go out and murder somebody. If a dying man in agony wants to be taken from his misery, I might help him. So let me ask this then is there such a thing as inherent morality is that a point of umbrage, like would you guys argue that some atheists or anybody would argue aside from religious would argue that there is, in fact such a thing called inherent morality. And there you go because inherent means hereditary tradition is going looking back as opposed to intrinsic, which means you know found inside. And, and I would contend yes there is inherent morality because we have all these traditions, and they're all different. I mean, in Islam, it's okay if a thief is caught to chop his hand off. I don't subscribe to that morality and I hope you don't. So Lucifer what do you have to throw into this. Let me truncate the question for you how do you determine what is right or wrong. Okay. Empathy would be one, one means I suppose. Okay. Which is a lot of based off of you know what you wouldn't want done to yourself you don't want that done to other people just because we have to all work together as a community and everything we're a tribal type species and it's that's what it takes people getting along. So, I mean, there's, there's empathy but that was actually my argument to for the inherent morality is that there are studies and everything that trace empathy, like at near birth. Yeah, you're, and compassion, compassion for your fellow man. So like that that was kind of where I was going with the, I never said that there wasn't, you know, right, right, right, right. Well, so I can support that to I would say like biology has given us just through evolution, a way to process scenarios where we can benefit by certain actions and observe or model a clear lack of a benefit if we don't partake in a particular action So like if we had a bunch of people who said you know what would be great if we all pushed the person standing next to us off a cliff. Well that society may not last as long as ones who decide not to do that. And so, evolutionarily we might shift out the people who like to cause harm to those who are nearby them, and, and, and choose inherently choose or or through the system, prefer those that cooperate and work well together and now we have a society where we largely have people that that work with each other, which is great. And for those who do we have to come up with a system, because no true system that works on an evolutionary basis is designed perfectly it's trial and error. So we have to come up with stop gaps when we have issues where things fall through the cracks, and we have to come up with punitive laws and and make sure that they're justified measures and people who can be in charge of them, etc. So when I hear morality, I do think there is an inherent morality I think that does exist. So I wouldn't argue that there is such a thing as no inherent morality. However, I think there's higher standards of morality that we can work together on, and that I also believe that morality is very much like a system where it's a system. It's not a list of rules, it's not a list of edicts. It's a process that we have to continue to work with, and understand what the exceptions are. And what do we do when the rules are actually broken, not just declared. This is a wrong thing but now that the wrong thing's done, how do we resolve it. It's a whole system of consequences of actions and being aware of it, and how we can do to build a better society that like doubt or five says, causes less need less harm, because that's always what we're trying to get rid of needless harm. There's two sorts of definitions being used here. I think that what theist mean by inherent morality is something that is imposed from above, and has fitted in with the doctrine that they have their faith that they follow. So to define inherent morality as adaptations that we have evolved in order to succeed as a species by behaving socially and cooperatively, that's different, and I accept that that's definitely the case. So you know, my thing is, there's such a thing as like inherent counting. So like I can give my cat two hands, one has three treats, one has one treat, and he's going to go for the one with three treats because he knows that's more than the one tree. There's like rudimentary counting or mathematics that animals can do where they understand values and they understand one has more than the other and stuff like that. But math, there are different standards for it. And so a person who's studied and understood calculus or like linear algebra is doing a more advanced potentially more productive potentially more helpful version of math than what they may inherently know when they're born as a kid. And so what I'm saying is we should aspire to that higher standards of morality that we can operate under or operate with. That way we don't have to work on this subjective appreciation of each other, and what our consequences imply on each other. We can instead say here's the system that works. Here's a system that we've continued to improve pun. We don't have to worry about what our dictator says, this is the best way to do it. Let's try and let's work on this together because it's clearly has the best results if you just look at their standard society. Looking at this from an analogous to computing. Hardware chips come with some preloaded software it's part of their architecture. It enables them to work the way they work. Bios. Bios right. Yeah. That's the word I'm seeking. Yes. And then subsequently software is added to that. Now we definitely come with preloaded software, which we've evolved over 1000s possible. Millions of years, right, in order to be successful. And subsequently, and this is where I think the difference is those of a particular faith preference, like Bible basher's want to claim that they own morality. Right. Not this base level that we are preloaded with. Right. Everyone, because they realize, hey, let's just put in, if you repeat a lie enough times with enough confidence, then that becomes a new religion essentially right. That's what they're trying to pursue. Dr. Let's pose him the question. Welcome Brett Dredd. That are five welcome to the show we have questions presented to us by chat GPT the AI of note on the internet. I asked him. Please generate five detailed questions that would stump an atheist we're currently on question number four there has been no stumping as of yet but I do want to hear what you think on this idea which is, if there is no inherent morality, how do we determine what is right and wrong. How would you feel that answer. I think I would go along with what you guys were saying, essentially that morality is the sense of morality is something is developed over time. And whereas morality used to be fixed with the idea of a creator, absolute morality, I think is flawed outdated and certainly morality is developed in the secular world as a better response to the world. That we actually live in, right, as opposed to the one the ideal one that you know that might be described in a Bible or something. You know what's weird is absolute morality is almost demonstrably wrong if you just look at how it's the punitive measures are conducted even today so like if I injure a person I can burn a goat. It's like, okay, I'll keep that in mind where can I find a goat again. Dang it. Okay, well if I can't find a goat. Let me just burn my three sheep was it one cattle. And so it's just like people don't have that. And so who are the people that can be forgiven only people own land and property and livestock. And what about all the people who don't have it like this only works for very segmented part of the world that even have those animals available to them. It's not for anybody else it's a very weird system and now we have a much more dangerous system where, regardless of whatever you do all you have to do is pray, think to God, and ask for forgiveness and you will be forgiven. And doesn't have any repercussions on the fact that you still have someone who may be injured or insulted or offended. You don't have to go out of your way to make apologies or amendments to them. Think in your head and feel good about yourself, which is a dangerous feedback loop, because it's not training you how to interact with society. It's only training you feel good about the best friend that you think you have in your head. They're created the universe that's a bad situation for more people to believe in. And I would say that anyone that would contend that morality should be absolute and based on what God's will is defeating themselves by virtue of the fact that in the Old Testament, burning animal sacrifices, that was a moral thing to do. And it is no longer it can be agreed. I'm certain that nobody is doing animal sacrifices anymore generally speaking. So if the morality of God can change, then it's not absolute by virtue of that fact. So, yeah, I think I would agree with everyone that that the secular version of morality is the one that works, and it improves. It's like, it's even like self awareness. I mean, it's, it's a scalable thing. Yeah. And as we grow and develop as a species, our understanding of ourselves and our place in the world increases and changes, and our morality has to slide along that scale. Yeah, in order to accommodate those changes. What do you think, John? I've lived long enough to see morality change. Nice. We used to back in my young days in this country here, we used to be pretty severely homophobic, misogynistic. You know, in fact, I watched a movie the other day about Turing, Alan Turing, who was a homosexual, and at that time he was punished, demonized, and eventually committed suicide, because society was strongly against that sort of lifestyle. In spite of all his contributions. Yes, indeed. Yes, he's shameful. But, but now, fortunately, we've moved and we're much less homophobic, much less misogynistic. We've improved. Our morality has got better. Yeah. And the thing about what Dredd was saying about the problem with basing it on God's word is God's word is, I mean, the Bible, theoretically, or the Quran, and that is interpreted 16 different ways by different sex and segments of religion. I mean, some of them still demonize homosexuality, because of what it says in the Bible, but some of them look at what Jesus said and say, no, we need to love our neighbor no matter what they do. They still consider it a sin. So it's just, you know, you can't, there's no definitive word when the Bible is basically a Rorschach test. Yeah, yeah, indeed. Can I bring an up to date on this? Because in Australia, there has been a large church called the Anglican church, you know, it's a branch of the C of E, the one that's based here. And, and recently it's become to split because there's two factions. Now, the traditionalists don't want to marry gays, and their progressives are accepting the idea of marrying gays. So the traditionalists hived off and formed a separate version of the. And you know, they both have scripture in the back of how they believe about it. I would say this is the model morality for Christianity is based on there are points to get you towards the good afterlife, and there's also points to get you to the bad afterlife. And if you don't have a concept of an afterlife, if you don't believe in hell, then everything that you do could be wrong, and you don't care because they're all points at the end of the day. Whereas if you're Christian, you have a very clear idea of wrong means sin, and that tends to be the bad place whereas good means blessings and I get to the good place. Like the idea of morality is like, are you with this system or not do you believe in an afterlife you fear God do you believe in a God that loves you wants that relationship with you with the two. And we as atheists can easily segment them and talk about secular morality, and like these abstracts ethics, you know, like this imperial imperialism, if you will. But that's not fundamentally how Christians see morality because it's hand in hand with their, their belief system. I wonder. Go ahead. Can I just respond. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's all about being loyal to your tribe in a religion. That's the primary consideration, but it's interesting because the Pope has recently announced that he doesn't think homosexuality is a crime, but it is a sin. Right. And oh, I have problems with that still, because it. I got there's a lot of problems I got with the Pope either way but like, you know, you point a finger you got four pointing back to yourself but it also like, anyway, didn't want to get too distracted I want to ask I want to sluice for to get a chance to get into this. I love the name sluice. I was wondering. So is there a possibility now that if you were to bridge the gap between true empiricism and, and what a Christian believes morality is and say listen, maybe it's the role model that you're looking at because when you have God telling you what's right and wrong, you might be doing a lot of wrong things that still lead to harm. Whereas if you look at the devil, if you look at Satan, here's an example of a guy who never gets offended like skepticism versus faith. Like just look at this book and just pick a different role model that's also supernatural who seems to be in better control of what they my best story for why Satan is more moral than God is the story where Jesus is on a mount. He hiked up to a top of mountain. The devil comes to him and he's like hey listen if you worship me, you don't have to do this fasting thing that you're doing. I'll give you food and you can be worshipping all that stuff like would that be happy. And Jesus like, stay away from me saying you'll never test me and say it was like, okay so you don't want to worship me that's fine see you later. It doesn't harass him. There's no, I'm going to send you to the bad place. I'm going to spite you. It's all just super cool. I wish more gods or more beings in the Bible were like Satan like why couldn't it just be a yes or no check mark. The noodley one is that way. Yeah. Even get the 30 day God back here. Well, like I said earlier it's awfully funny that they have such you know they look at the devil in such a way whenever they love free will so much right. If it wasn't for him he was the one going against God and created the other so that's that's their their free will supposedly if they have to choose between those things or 10,000% the Bible strikes me as if like Trump wrote a book about how awesome he was and there was like a secretary in the back being like I don't think you should push the bomb China button. It is like I'm going to make you the bad guy in my book and everyone's like that guy was the bad guys like no Trump's the bad guy. He's the bad guy throughout this book ran by a jerk. You should know that it's right up there. I'm going to go through one last question before we're done with the end of the show. This one's open to everybody actually let's throw it up to dread because you just got in here dread I got a question to you from chat GPT. This is the last question last opportunity to stump an atheist. Here we go. Question number five. How do we account for the subjective experiences of love, beauty and pleasure. If there is no transcendent reality. I mean, that's, I don't know, I don't know is that I don't even know if that's a valid question. That's the theme of today's show. I've been staring at that question this whole time on the screen each time you see me looking that's what I've been staring at and trying to figure out the transcendent. Right. And what is there have to be one transcendent reality. I guess what is it even like I'm trying to hear here's the thing might unlike you guys my my my question would be for the first half of the question which is how do we account for subjective experiences subjectively. Right. We are our bodies I mean, would you like me to explain my subjective experience because it may not be the same as anyone else's but I can try my best to explain because it's inherently my experience. It's, it's one follows the other fault fallacy. I mean, show me that they would have a dependency on each other. Well, you're just assuming it. Correlation not causation right right. Yeah, post hoc or go proper hoc. John Richards what we got. Well, all of these things. Super nature. Afterlife transcendence. Yeah. They're all undemonstrated. These are all fallacies potentially that are being used in an attempt to bolster up the first fallacy that there is a God, you know the first era. So this is an ad hoc fallacy this is saying, I can't justify my original name, but here's another clay. But here's the problem. Here. This is what it is. It's turtles all the way down. But here's my problem. We can account for our subjective experiences just by virtue of the fact that they are subjective and we are experiencing them. I don't like tautologies. I don't really don't like tautologies but it's like one of those things where it's like, explain to me, give me an opinion to answer about why you have opinions I'm like, I'm going to give you my opinion on it. It's like, I don't like like that's just you just literally asked me for a circle. You can't tell them about my subjective experiences based on like the same prompt, or maybe the same stimulation or, or, or situation that John Richards might have, because we're different people, we're different places in the world, and we will give you different answers. But if this is an open question, where we can explain how we feel about things, I'll be happy to explain to you my ideas on love, and thoughts and stuff like that but just know that there's going to be no true objective answer because it's inherently my subjective experience. I don't need a transcendent reality to supplicate that or supplement that, in any degree, some people might feel like they do but however, that doesn't demonstrate that that's actually a real thing. Even if people point to it, whereas for the things that I present, I would say, you can, for the, for the conditions of my subjective experience, you can test them, you can observe them, and I can, as an authority of the person having them, at least verify those things and I'd be happy to, to clarify any of those points whereas someone who says, Well, I know it's true because my transcendent God is like, Well, that still doesn't prove that the transcendent God exists. That's just right now an opinion. That's just a claim. It's on the same phenomenon that I'm using to come up with conclusions. Those are two different, like how, how do you put those two things even in the same question because you're asking about some transcendent reality, not giving a definition of it, and then expecting the other person to fill that in for you like it's so weird. And then go, but like how do we account for the subjective experience of the lovely beauty and play well we can all agree that those things exist like we're all. And if you want to get into the pleasure thing I mean there's plenty of kinks and things you know so I'd say that my brand didn't even go there but we pretty well kind of yeah we can we can prove those things in a way. Yeah, it's like, how can we have possible without leprechauns. But from the Christian perspective, it's credence to demonstrate that their God exists and in the way that is, and this is a devil's advocate sorry so Lucifer I know you hate that. But I was saying, if I have a feeling of love, and my opinion is that that's coming to me from a transcendent reality. And that's proof that I can experience of that transcendent reality and if other people who I believe in other people who are my leaders. They say that this came from trends of reality, I can assume that my feeling is the same as their feeling which gives me even more credence that this source is a real source and not just something that atheists say doesn't exist, but is actually a thing that does exist that I'm experiencing on a regular basis. It's one of those weird reprogramming steps that happen when you become indoctrinated, where you don't have a way to assess the reasons why you believe things. I believe other people who rewire you and basically say hey this correlation is now a causation, and that's going to be the the credence for your evidence. It feels just as real as being angry at a spy balloon that may not necessarily be a spy balloon, or like I mean, I also have to wonder, how do they account for subjective experiences whenever they claim that God controls all of these things. That are five, what do you got. I'm not sure I understand what he means by that objective. How can we have subjective if that if that was yeah if that was from a Christian's perspective that'd be my question back to them is how do we. So how do they account for that the subjective experiences of love beauty and pleasure and all that whenever they say that, well I guess they'd go to free will probably huh probably. I mean there's all kinds of subjective experiences in the Bible and the God exists in the Bible as well. I don't really say that say that they're dependent on each other, or not dependent. Guys, great answers to all the questions on the show. We may ask chat GPT to come up with some more detailed questions to stomp us in the future. We ought to figure out a way to get it on the show. Next week, I'll make a better effort to be here in the morning so I can give the benediction. No sweat. Actually, question chat GPT to come up with a past a very interesting song. Nice. So I would like to share that next week with you guys. We're wrapping up we're wrapping up for now sluice for what's that YouTube channel. Oh, I got the link up. It's the skeptical Satanist 8656. Yep. Very cool. Cool. Satanist. Yeah. Satanist 8656. Dread Pirate Hayes, where can we find your stuff at? I'm on YouTube at my pirate M I N D P Y R E T E and I live stream this at 70 MP ST on Sunday mornings. And then also try to join the the views on the news with John Richards at 11 am. I'm going to join today. Yeah, not today. I hope you're going to join today. Oh, yeah, yeah, I'll be there. Right. Yeah, we'll be with you. John Richards working to find your stuff that. Free thought channel. It's all on there. I've been doing lots of three minute videos and they cover much of what we've been talking about today. Nice. But here's an idea. I would like to, I don't know whether we can do this through a Facebook group or something, but I'd like to poll Christians, asking them a whether they believe in God, and be whether they believe in the devil. And I'd like to find out if there's any difference and if so how much. Interesting. That are five. Where can we find your stuff at? Well, where do we find your stuff? You're skipping over yourself. You're probably watching it. I'm on let's chat. It's YouTube. What's up? Okay. Well, my content can be found at digital free thought.com my book. Thank you. Is what atheism. What's it all about available on Amazon. Be sure when you go to digital free thought.com to click on the blog button for a radio show archives, atheists songs and articles on the subject of atheism. Remember, everybody is going to somebody else's health. The time to worry about it is when they prove that heavens and hells and souls are real. Until then, don't sweat it. Enjoy your life. And we'll see you next Wednesday night at seven o'clock on W o zero radio. Say bye everybody. Bye.