I love it when people smirk, gasp, laugh or chuckle when asked "which god they believe in" because it just goes to show you they don't even take a second to consider the possibilities of other gods and their religions. They are completely self assured that their belief is 100% true.
I think the various tics they have are the TINY area of their brain that is aware of how retarded their positions are and is trying so hard to get out.
I'm polytheistic and I used to wear a pentacle all the time. Coworker saw it and asked what it was, I told her I'm pagan. She asked what that meant, I said put simply, it means I believe in the existence of many gods. Her response was "oh.... OK but do you believe in God?" I stared at her for several seconds and said "... which one?" she stared back as if MY question was the stupid one and said "... You know. GOD. You DO believe in God, right?" It kind of highlighted the same thing you're describing, how smug and arrogant Christians can be about how OF COURSE they're right and if COURSE their God is just the default (and typically only) god and when people talk about a god, it's OBVIOUS they're talking about Yaweh,because who else could you be talking about?
@@bobturner177 perhaps you're right, but I feel very secure in my suspicion that this woman was not thinking I was potentially a hindu and that she was asking if I believe in Brahman when she asked "yeah but do you believe in GOD?" with an eye roll and a smug tone on God as if her meaning was clearly evident. This was Oklahoma, USA. Her meaning WAS quite evident. She wasn't thinking of any other monotheistic religion.
From my peeps, we believe in the Creator. Which is probably the God of the Abraham? Who knows but my peep are like sure. And of course there are many gods. Its in the Commandments. Don't worship they! Just me!
Yeah... It's all gobbledygook, tap dancing, mumbo-jumbling nonsense! Plenty of nutters out there that believe that *they* have the secret sauce of the Universe! Yeah... Hit me up with some guacamole please!!!
He sounds very young, he probably is smart, but highly indoctrinated. By now he may have seen the light. Everyone seems dumber when arguing for an incorrect position.
I've knew I was ignorant the moment I realized I only knew 0.00002% of the data. Unfortunately you sometimes must swim in the middle of the ocean before you recognize that it goes beyond the horizon.
@@Edwin-wn7wd People do the same thing on any call in show, regardless of whether the host is leading the caller down a rabbit hole or the caller is leading the host.
@@Edwin-wn7wd Matt asks questions to help clarify things not only to himself .. but sometimes , also to make the believers realize , how stupid of an argument they are making .... they realize if they answer it ,they will be cornered by logic and can't take their arguement forward ... they are dishonest idiots . Just like you probably 😊
@@Edwin-wn7wd Huh? The caller IS on the show to "jump down Matt's rabbit hole" (whatever that means). These atheists have full control over what is said. It's their show, kiddo. It's called "Atheist Experience", after all. Not "Theists Refusing to Answer Simple Questions"...
It’s incredible how skeptical this caller can be about trusting a basic thing like everyone believes A or doesn’t believe A. But he accepts an unfalsifiable supernatural God without question.
10:00 A or not A, I believe or I don't believe, those are the only two possibilities. Says Matt. Well, that's not true. Somebody might not know whether they do or don't believe, they might be in the condition of prevarication.
Then they still do NOT believe. It is an absolute negation. It is a true dichotomy. Until the person makes up thier mind to accept or believe the proposition, or any proposition, they have not or do not accept it. In the case of the question regarding a deity this not accepting belief makes them an atheist. I find this a little telling that this identical question regarding logic ONLY tends to be or be posed as a problem or becomes problematic when someone's pet belief comes under scrutiny. Now all of a sudden, what under all other normal circumstances is perfectly reasonable, understandable and once understood seems kind of obvious, now becomes shrouded in unwarranted doubt and cynicism, now becomes incredibly difficult to grasp and virtually any red herrings and horseshit can be lobbed in to attempt to obfuscate and muddy the waters. This I think is also one of the major problems believers; or indeed ideologues both religious or not, have with analogies. They on some level realise that if it holds reasonable for the analogy it should under any similar circumstance. However because it is thier pet deity/idea it get's a special pleading card to draw. Though the majority realise this should be used as a last resort, as it is never convincing.
It sounds suspiciously Cartesian in the idea that we really can't be absolutely certain about anything, but apparently God is even more certain than our own selves
I have a friend like this. Awishy-washy conversationalist that enjoys get into debates with people simply see and hear people get frustrated. My friend will not admit he is a passive sadist. This shit giggles because he enjoys being annoying. Some boys grow up being like this little worm. He doesn't give a shit about Matt and Tracie's point of view. It's a high of having the upper hand in a social exchange. At least believing he does.
Wow! The abundance of intellectual dishonesty from Ol Brad here is mind blowing! I don't understand how people can feel no shame when arguing so dishonestly. This is on a whole other level beyond willful ignorance but I don't even know what to call it.
I think they also drink because the parents and administration of the schools they work at constantly take the side of the little shitheads that act like assholes, instead of supporting the teacher
See! She was right after all when saying such a planet is possible! Tho granted, us as humans are very opinionated about earth existing. With us living on it and all.
I particularly like the call where Brad / Andrew / Josh started playing video games in the last few minutes. Matt has a high tolerance level for froot loops!
Its funny how in even society in general its seen as a virtue. But all its really saying is "I'll believe just about anything based on no evidence what so ever" Ha! How is that a virtue!?
Oh my god I almost split my side laughing! Matt is just so patient but you can hear it in his voice when he's turned the corner and hit the switch. LOLOLOLOL!!!
I love it when Matt FINALLY gets tired. I laughed my ass off when, at around 14 minutes, the guy is trying to present another tired arguesertion and Matt asks "You wanna put money on it"? Too funny.
Faith is negation of intellectual integrity and honesty, and pretending to know shit you do not or cannot know, or certainly demonstrate. But then indoctrination can and does have people believing and convincing themselves of all manner of horseshit. Convincing people faith is a good or positive thing is reprehensible and insidious. It is way past time we stopped doing this in schools and educational establishments.
@Zachary Stewart No, not faith. I have confidence that tomorrow will exist, based on a lifetime of experience of each day being followed by another day. Confidence based on experience and evidence is completely different from faith based on no experience and no evidence whatsoever.
@Zachary What evidence? What REAL evidence have you for the truth of your religion? No, I said evidence, not "argument". If you don't know the difference, don't try to fake it.
One would think after several, the screeners would be able to figure out what his angle is and detect it easily in spite of shifting numbers or such (lots of money to waste for just doing sophomoric apologetics)
People think these callers are funny. I completely disagree. let's not forget the past and what happens when religion has all the power. Say goodbye to your freedom forever. Welcome to your worst nightmare.
The best way is discourse and ridicule - If when someone says they believe in a god, always try to start with a laugh, and then say "Why?" - in those countries where it wont get you killed.
@@FirstnameLastname-bn4gv There is no best way. And it helps to ridicule the whole concept before having to argue reality over fantasy with someone who won't really listen. It takes most believers as short a time as possible explaining why they believe (personal experience + bible, or just bible). Then they will run through everything they have been told is wrong with...well everything we know and can prove to be true....because it shows the fantasy as what it is. If an adult said they believed in santa or fairies or bigfoot - they get ridiculed. Why should the religious (who have even more ridiculous claims) get taken seriously ?
@@jonovens7974 I disagree. There are more and less effective ways of communicating with theists. If you ridicule them, they’ll only double down. If you sincerely want them to re-examine their beliefs in a productive manner, I suggest trying a softer approach. Believe it or not, it is possible.
Logical arguments are not evidence. Lmao. Why is hard for him to get this. Also, there is no point in talking about a god that does not manifest in reality. This is because there is no distinction between one that does not manifest in reality and one that does not exist.
LOL, yeah. It wouldn't be quite as head shakingly pitiful and sad if the arguments were actually logical or stood up to the slightest scrutiny. But they very VERY rarely do. When on the very odd occasion they tend to be more than ridiculous, spurious assertion and bullshit, they never actually seem to be connected or connectible to a deity with more than wishful thinking and a fair tailwind.
I'm going to have to contend with your claim that logical arguments/proofs are not evidence. In fact, if you can prove a claim by logical deduction, that is the strongest possible evidence for its truth, since its truth is necessary. The problem is that claims that can be proved with logic are few and far between because there just isn't enough constraint in pure logic most of the time. That's where empirical/a posteriori evidence comes into play. The question of God is one of those places where there just hasn't been a sound deductive proof of existence presented, despite plenty of attempts. And because of how the concept of God is often defined as invisible and transcendent of physics, there isn't much way to gather empirical evidence for the concept either. So it ends up with no evidentiary basis to stand on at all.
@James Hodson I'm really hesitant to use any stereotype. I just wish people were more polite and friendly with each other. Matt is a bit different because he is a character. His positions are all honest. But aside from the justified frustration of people calling in unprepared, he has to make it fun to watch. And setting aside his harshness, I really is an impressive feat of academic ability. I'm "literally" an expert in philosophy. And even I have a hard time keeping up with him.
He really does sound quite young, sheltered and naive doesn't he. Poor kid will doubtless have his eyes opened somewhat when he gets out into the world and standing on his own two plates of meat. I wonder if he's being or was homeschooled. Though I don't doubt he has spent time in church.
God this is such an awesome segment that showcases how well tracee and Matt worked together. Her analogies are bar none the absolute best I’ve ever heard in regards of logical explanations. It will never be this good again.
Just for fun, I checked the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It clearly includes Matt’s definition (“atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists.“) as one of the options. Brad is wrong when he claims that Matt “redefines” it.
It’s so sad seeing him sift through information to find things that don’t 110% rule out god (in his mind) and then use that as evidence. The indoctrination is strong with this one.
I used to believe that a belief in a god was the result of plain, old, ordinary ignorance. But my belief has now "evolved" to believing that a belief in a god is the result of deep and abiding stupidity.
I guess the major issue in such conversation is that to understand how we use the notion of the null hypothesis, one has to first live a life in which 'God' is not a phenomenon one believes he experiences on an ordinary basis. This is a testament to the power of indoctrination and community rituals, the two fundamentals of any religion. This is also why people like Brad cannot fathom Matt's line of thinking, whereas any person who grew up an atheist, and any person who began skeptical inquiry about one's religion, can. In other words, if one doesn't even consider the underpinnings of one's beliefs - asking oneself how is it that one believes X, and _why_ one believes X - there is no practical way for them to realise that they had as yet no satisfactory reason to believe X according to their own standards of evidence.
The likelihood of ANY 13 card deal from a deck of 52 cards is EXACTLY the same - and each deal is incredibly UNLIKELY - therefore God is responsible ALL card deals.
That's what someone who is squirming in a pool of desperation looks like who wants there to be a god against all the available evidence and reasoning. "Please let me have my delusion - allow me this fallacy so that I can believe - lie to me so that I can continue to lie to myself."
Apologists don't tend to have respect for their opponents in a discussion, because many are working under a presumption they have to reinforce with arguments like epistemological uncertainty or metaphysical speculation
@@ToHoldNothing he doesn't want to answer any questions because his goal is to trick his debate partner into agreeing to a premise he necessarily has to prove for his deduction to be ultimately right. If he was coming into the conversation with the intention to seek truth, he wouldn't need to try to manipulate someone into agreeing with him
@@elohellol8481 Leading questions, I believe? Or question begging, either way fallacious logic Intellectual humility is not a virtue at all when it comes to advancing ideological and dogmatic truths, like the idea that faith is a virtue, that faith being the type that persists in belief because of confirmation bias rather than evidentiary standards that are remotely objective
@@ToHoldNothing maybe we are talking past each other a bit here. I'm saying if one goes into a debate with intent to solely "trick" someone into agreeing with them, intellectual honesty goes out of the door at that point.
@@elohellol8481 Agreed: it's more about rhetoric than logic with those kinds of people, you're trying to convince someone without actually giving substantive arguments, only ways to make them appear to agree with you by being deceptive, effectively.
Brad is the kind of thinker that would not accept possible physical explanations of the existence of our Universe as promulgated by chemistry, physics, cosmology and philosophy, but would accept the metaphysical existence of a sentient god because he looked down in his bowl of Alphabets and saw a "g" an "o" and a "d" floating in close proximity to each other in the milk.
I love that you can insert the word Dragon into any theist argument in place of God and it still makes the same amount of sense, cause, well Dragons are cool.
In my experience, people who respond to a statement with "interesting", are saying they didn't understand the statement., but they think they have successfully fooled someone into thinking they are intelligent. It never works.
Brad/Alex/Andrew/Josh (I think that covers all the names that he's ever used in past shows I saw) was always trying get his "gotcha" moment on the show. I found his attempts to be dishonest, pathetic, and eventually saw them as what they truly were: A brave person who was selflessly showing us how the Dunning-Kruger effect works. Thank you, Brad/Alex/Andrew/Josh. You truly are quite the philosophizor and probably could have bested So-crates. Bravo.
22:53 nicely and succinctly explained for about a minute, and this caller after that doesn't really acknowledge that he gets that. Still. (I do not believe God exists) does not equal or lead to necessarily (I believe no God exists). How difficult is that to comprehend exactly?
At least Brad tried to put two of his brain cells together to understand basic logic theory. He [Brad] just showed me that I need to study more to not be like him and actually understand philosophical debates and discussions
Not at all. Matt frequently talks over callers, hangs up on them without cause or for disingenuous reasons and often tries to frame questions to block the supernatural as a possible answer and when the caller gets around this with logic he will get flustered and angry and often curse and get insulting and rude. Brad did a great job of answering his questions, stating his case, (when he was able to before being cut off) and staying on point up until the end. Brad, nor any Christian should be afraid of the "wisdom" of this world which is foolishness in the eyes of God almighty. May God bless you to know Him through His Son Jesus Christ! Proverbs 29:25 “The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe.” 2 Timothy 1:7 “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.”
People like Brad only prove the amazing & Godly amount of patience, understanding & tolerance Matt has for those who do not know what they do. If your going to call in wanting to debate Matt who knows his stuff & heard it all already, an obvious pro at what he does make sure not to belittle his intelligence & make sure to call in with a strong “new” argument to present to him at the least an argument that’s challenging & interesting. don’t expect him to entertain your poor attempt & lack of an argument & when he shuts it down don’t expect him to think of an argument for you Brad. His juvenile understanding of making & presenting an arguable case only makes your faith & belief in God unsure & from a place of ignorance.
You know, I think I can speak for everyone when I say we all just want to know the truth regarding the question of a God existing. So... Why don't we all agree to put religion on hold for now and push science as hard as we can to see where it takes us? I'm sure, in our pursuit of knowledge of how the universe works, we'll eventually find something, either positive or negative, regarding the existence of an extra-planar being. Until then, we should stop judging, excluding, hating, and killing people we don't understand or agree with. Let's face it: it doesn't matter if God exists because we effect each other's lives far more directly than any supposed God. We need to start taking care of each other and this planet we are fortunate enough to live on.
I don't think a god personally vested in humanity is possible If you want to say , oh gravity or quantum fluctuations are actually god fine , but a personal god that cares about humanity and judges humanity was disproven decades ago by mobile phones and GPS
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I love it when people smirk, gasp, laugh or chuckle when asked "which god they believe in" because it just goes to show you they don't even take a second to consider the possibilities of other gods and their religions. They are completely self assured that their belief is 100% true.
I think the various tics they have are the TINY area of their brain that is aware of how retarded their positions are and is trying so hard to get out.
It's so irritating
I'm polytheistic and I used to wear a pentacle all the time. Coworker saw it and asked what it was, I told her I'm pagan. She asked what that meant, I said put simply, it means I believe in the existence of many gods. Her response was "oh.... OK but do you believe in God?" I stared at her for several seconds and said "... which one?" she stared back as if MY question was the stupid one and said "... You know. GOD. You DO believe in God, right?" It kind of highlighted the same thing you're describing, how smug and arrogant Christians can be about how OF COURSE they're right and if COURSE their God is just the default (and typically only) god and when people talk about a god, it's OBVIOUS they're talking about Yaweh,because who else could you be talking about?
@@bobturner177 perhaps you're right, but I feel very secure in my suspicion that this woman was not thinking I was potentially a hindu and that she was asking if I believe in Brahman when she asked "yeah but do you believe in GOD?" with an eye roll and a smug tone on God as if her meaning was clearly evident. This was Oklahoma, USA. Her meaning WAS quite evident. She wasn't thinking of any other monotheistic religion.
From my peeps, we believe in the Creator. Which is probably the God of the Abraham? Who knows but my peep are like sure.
And of course there are many gods. Its in the Commandments. Don't worship they! Just me!
Man, this Brad / Alex kid is exactly the type of person that actually helped convince me OUT of being a theist (Christian). Thanks Brad / Alex!
"Task successfully failed"
Bralex
Brad/Alex/Andrew and he asked the same question. Why you don't believe in God. Hahaha
@@mikejohe1920 he reminds me of the Andrew guy from stone church in Houston.
Yeah... It's all gobbledygook, tap dancing, mumbo-jumbling nonsense! Plenty of nutters out there that believe that *they* have the secret sauce of the Universe! Yeah... Hit me up with some guacamole please!!!
This is what happens when you constantly tell your kid how brilliant he is
LMAO
He sounds very young, he probably is smart, but highly indoctrinated. By now he may have seen the light. Everyone seems dumber when arguing for an incorrect position.
@@djb6496 19:46
@@djb6496 22:41 22: 22:43 22:41
It's called the Participation Trophy Syndrome.
“Brad you are not even listening”
“Ok”
No, not ok.
Brad: “How can I do that?”
A good question to ask yourself before you make a claim. A stupid question to ask somebody else after you make a claim.😂
I love it when at 3:26; Matt asks "Which God?" and the kid doesn't know what to say! Hilarious!
Matt presented his position(s) here flawlessly. He’s at the top of his game here
Pretty easy to do when the caller is a bona fide idiot… That seems like that’s all they get on this show… But I do love, Matt
A lot of theists seem to suffer from the Dunning Kruger effect, and Brad is a good example of this.
Excellent use of the phycological expression, "Dunning Kruger effect" - well done and yes, accurate!
I've knew I was ignorant the moment I realized I only knew 0.00002% of the data.
Unfortunately you sometimes must swim in the middle of the ocean before you recognize that it goes beyond the horizon.
Every single call....
Matt: asks question to clarify point
Caller: ok let me clarify by not answering your question and talking about something else
Yeah because they are on the show to demonstrate their argument.. not jump down Matt's rabbit hole.
@@Edwin-wn7wd People do the same thing on any call in show, regardless of whether the host is leading the caller down a rabbit hole or the caller is leading the host.
@@Edwin-wn7wd Awwwwwww, are you a Jesus freak?
@@Edwin-wn7wd Matt asks questions to help clarify things not only to himself .. but sometimes , also to make the believers realize , how stupid of an argument they are making .... they realize if they answer it ,they will be cornered by logic and can't take their arguement forward ... they are dishonest idiots . Just like you probably 😊
@@Edwin-wn7wd Huh? The caller IS on the show to "jump down Matt's rabbit hole" (whatever that means). These atheists have full control over what is said. It's their show, kiddo. It's called "Atheist Experience", after all. Not "Theists Refusing to Answer Simple Questions"...
It’s incredible how skeptical this caller can be about trusting a basic thing like everyone believes A or doesn’t believe A. But he accepts an unfalsifiable supernatural God without question.
10:00 A or not A, I believe or I don't believe, those are the only two possibilities. Says Matt. Well, that's not true. Somebody might not know whether they do or don't believe, they might be in the condition of prevarication.
Then they still do NOT believe. It is an absolute negation. It is a true dichotomy.
Until the person makes up thier mind to accept or believe the proposition, or any proposition, they have not or do not accept it. In the case of the question regarding a deity this not accepting belief makes them an atheist.
I find this a little telling that this identical question regarding logic ONLY tends to be or be posed as a problem or becomes problematic when someone's pet belief comes under scrutiny. Now all of a sudden, what under all other normal circumstances is perfectly reasonable, understandable and once understood seems kind of obvious, now becomes shrouded in unwarranted doubt and cynicism, now becomes incredibly difficult to grasp and virtually any red herrings and horseshit can be lobbed in to attempt to obfuscate and muddy the waters.
This I think is also one of the major problems believers; or indeed ideologues both religious or not, have with analogies. They on some level realise that if it holds reasonable for the analogy it should under any similar circumstance. However because it is thier pet deity/idea it get's a special pleading card to draw. Though the majority realise this should be used as a last resort, as it is never convincing.
It sounds suspiciously Cartesian in the idea that we really can't be absolutely certain about anything, but apparently God is even more certain than our own selves
@@stupidtreehugger Then they still do not believe. You can't not hold one of the two possibilities. It's either one or the other.
@@stupidtreehugger no....the question is do u believe or not believe? u either believe or u dont..u cant half believe because that is not belief..
Brad is painful to listen to.
Lars Hader troll
BRAD IS THE MOST BETA MALE I'VE EVER HEARD
He sounds kinda cute
Men with vocal fry and even women are weak. It’s a submissive tendency.
@@dylancoleman1921 His vocal fry is KILLING ME.
I have a friend like this. Awishy-washy conversationalist that enjoys get into debates with people simply see and hear people get frustrated. My friend will not admit he is a passive sadist. This shit giggles because he enjoys being annoying. Some boys grow up being like this little worm. He doesn't give a shit about Matt and Tracie's point of view. It's a high of having the upper hand in a social exchange. At least believing he does.
Yes. He's an A.S.S.H.O.L.E. And people claim Matt does not show constraint.
He doesn't understand why he isn't impressing them with his listening disability
I've found that a good ass-kicking usually straightens out those types and improves their attitude.
Why are you still friends with him?
So true!
Wow! The abundance of intellectual dishonesty from Ol Brad here is mind blowing! I don't understand how people can feel no shame when arguing so dishonestly. This is on a whole other level beyond willful ignorance but I don't even know what to call it.
I think Brad, because I've seen guys like him, just likes to push buttons. He enjoys aggravating people. Simple people enjoy simple things.
I would call it a mighty powerfull case of cognitive dissonance.
So dishonest, that "Andrew" has to go by different names
Good rule of thumb: if you're on the same side of any argument as Brad, you are probably on the wrong side.
This kid is a perfect illustration of the old adage that the fastest road to atheism is Christian apologetics.
Brad was Andrew last time, & still talking the same school boy dribble.
*drivel
Andy Clockwise THOU SHALT NOT LIE,Brad,or Andrew, or whoever thr FUCK YOU are today.
This person has called numerous times under different names and spews the same material. He can't get away from his squeaky voice.
@@kevinholloway9307 👍
I hate his voice.
“how do I do that?”
Brad that’s what atheists are asking
🥸
At 0:35 you can hear him laugh. He’s a troll.
@David Parry Lmao
Just because he laughed doesn't mean he's a troll.
I believe his determination was to make Matt cuss and then laughed when he did get him to cuss. Very childlike.
Could be nervous laughter
You concern me
Brad: "I have evidence for God."
Proceeds to ask a bunch of questions.
Present your evidence first Brad, then we will answer your questions.
I love when Matt wrecks their premises with logic. He is sorely missed.
You know you can watch him elsewhere, right?
He asks the same opening Question every single time
Brad can't listen because he knows how paper thin his beliefs are.
This is so amusing ! Love your comebacks and logic . Makes me feel there is still hope for humanity !
"Philosophy is the talk on a cereal box; religion is the smile on a dog."
--Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians
This is Matt at his absolute, and polite, brilliant best.
This caller is why teachers drink.
I think they also drink because the parents and administration of the schools they work at constantly take the side of the little shitheads that act like assholes, instead of supporting the teacher
There is a planet with an atmosphere that is predominately nitrogen - it's called Earth.
See! She was right after all when saying such a planet is possible!
Tho granted, us as humans are very opinionated about earth existing. With us living on it and all.
@@SWTobito0702 1
I particularly like the call where Brad / Andrew / Josh started playing video games in the last few minutes. Matt has a high tolerance level for froot loops!
We argue with each other whether GOD exists yet God will not come to the aid of the believer when he argues god exists. Why?
Test of faith, that's why. Christianity in particular is centred on faith which is seen to be the greatest virtue.
Its funny how in even society in general its seen as a virtue. But all its really saying is "I'll believe just about anything based on no evidence what so ever" Ha! How is that a virtue!?
Because a figment of someone's imagination can't manifest in reality.
D1 I totally agree man.
dave carter thanks for that correction. “Atheism all the way, I say”.
Truest statement the caller made: "I don't have infinite knowledge."
You don't say.
Infinite? I think he should start with _any_ knowledge. Lol
Oh my god I almost split my side laughing! Matt is just so patient but you can hear it in his voice when he's turned the corner and hit the switch. LOLOLOLOL!!!
I love it when Matt FINALLY gets tired. I laughed my ass off when, at around 14 minutes, the guy is trying to present another tired arguesertion and Matt asks "You wanna put money on it"? Too funny.
You can literally hear him giggling under his breath when he says "how about faith tho".... gotta admit that's a pretty funny line
100% troll
Or TRYING ....................
@@ralfhaggstrom9862 Actually he made some other calls asking this very same question.
OK, but NOT very bright .....................@@Julian0101
@@ralfhaggstrom9862 I agree
PatRibsey a troll would require some level of intelligence... I think this guy just doesn’t comprehend
"Can you give me an example of something that caused itself to exist?"
No, now where did your God come from, and prove it.
Faith is the absence of information
Faith is believing despite the absence of information.
@@justsomeguy8385 and that's exactly the problem because I can take anything based on faith
Faith is negation of intellectual integrity and honesty, and pretending to know shit you do not or cannot know, or certainly demonstrate.
But then indoctrination can and does have people believing and convincing themselves of all manner of horseshit. Convincing people faith is a good or positive thing is reprehensible and insidious.
It is way past time we stopped doing this in schools and educational establishments.
@Zachary Stewart
No, not faith. I have confidence that tomorrow will exist, based on a lifetime of experience of each day being followed by another day. Confidence based on experience and evidence is completely different from faith based on no experience and no evidence whatsoever.
@Zachary
What evidence? What REAL evidence have you for the truth of your religion?
No, I said evidence, not "argument". If you don't know the difference, don't try to fake it.
Brad just received his William Lane Craig kit in the mail. ✉️
New drinking game: every time this dork says, "OK, so", take a drink. You'll be unconscious by the time the video ends.
I'll have liver damage by the time this video ends. 😂😂😂😂
Mike
Or, if water you'd surely drown.
99 bottle of jack on the wall... zero
I died and now I have evidence of god. Jk.
Thank you, it’s 10 am and I’m trashed now
So did Brad, Andrew, or Josh finally give up on selling "his god" or did the screeners eventually blackball him?
One would think after several, the screeners would be able to figure out what his angle is and detect it easily in spite of shifting numbers or such (lots of money to waste for just doing sophomoric apologetics)
And Alex.
I think he hit puberty, discovered girls, turned off his computer and went outside
People think these callers are funny. I completely disagree. let's not forget the past and what happens when religion has all the power.
Say goodbye to your freedom forever.
Welcome to your worst nightmare.
It's safer for him to be on the phone than outside
I doubt he has basic traffic awareness.
The best way is discourse and ridicule - If when someone says they believe in a god, always try to start with a laugh, and then say "Why?" - in those countries where it wont get you killed.
@@jonovens7974
This is absolutely *not* the best way to engage with theists if you have any interest in getting through to them.
@@FirstnameLastname-bn4gv There is no best way. And it helps to ridicule the whole concept before having to argue reality over fantasy with someone who won't really listen.
It takes most believers as short a time as possible explaining why they believe (personal experience + bible, or just bible).
Then they will run through everything they have been told is wrong with...well everything we know and can prove to be true....because it shows the fantasy as what it is.
If an adult said they believed in santa or fairies or bigfoot - they get ridiculed. Why should the religious (who have even more ridiculous claims) get taken seriously ?
@@jonovens7974
I disagree. There are more and less effective ways of communicating with theists.
If you ridicule them, they’ll only double down. If you sincerely want them to re-examine their beliefs in a productive manner, I suggest trying a softer approach.
Believe it or not, it is possible.
12:22
"You've got a minute and a half."
*The video has 20 minutes left*
"Oh no no, nobody tell 'im..."
I thought this too
Colin Robinson would be proud of this caller
This argument reminds me of the scene in the holy grail when their trying to see if it’s a witch or not.
"Andrew" always starts off the call the same way. You'd think that if he was sincere he'd get it by now.
Logical arguments are not evidence. Lmao. Why is hard for him to get this. Also, there is no point in talking about a god that does not manifest in reality. This is because there is no distinction between one that does not manifest in reality and one that does not exist.
LOL, yeah. It wouldn't be quite as head shakingly pitiful and sad if the arguments were actually logical or stood up to the slightest scrutiny. But they very VERY rarely do. When on the very odd occasion they tend to be more than ridiculous, spurious assertion and bullshit, they never actually seem to be connected or connectible to a deity with more than wishful thinking and a fair tailwind.
I'm going to have to contend with your claim that logical arguments/proofs are not evidence. In fact, if you can prove a claim by logical deduction, that is the strongest possible evidence for its truth, since its truth is necessary. The problem is that claims that can be proved with logic are few and far between because there just isn't enough constraint in pure logic most of the time. That's where empirical/a posteriori evidence comes into play.
The question of God is one of those places where there just hasn't been a sound deductive proof of existence presented, despite plenty of attempts. And because of how the concept of God is often defined as invisible and transcendent of physics, there isn't much way to gather empirical evidence for the concept either. So it ends up with no evidentiary basis to stand on at all.
He tried to present his argument on another call. The hosts said to skip it and to present evidence. He was totally stumped and took a hissy fit.
Obvious troll is obvious.
*ding*
I have my doubts; his impotent consternation seemed too sincere to be a troll
Nice Sins reference
@@ryanhazel7992 I agree. I hate it when people shout out "Troll!" Just because they disagree with you. Too many assholes on RUclips.
@James Hodson I'm really hesitant to use any stereotype. I just wish people were more polite and friendly with each other.
Matt is a bit different because he is a character. His positions are all honest. But aside from the justified frustration of people calling in unprepared, he has to make it fun to watch. And setting aside his harshness, I really is an impressive feat of academic ability.
I'm "literally" an expert in philosophy. And even I have a hard time keeping up with him.
Brad sounds as if he’s about 12 years old. I wonder if his mama knows he’s calling strangers?
He really does sound quite young, sheltered and naive doesn't he.
Poor kid will doubtless have his eyes opened somewhat when he gets out into the world and standing on his own two plates of meat.
I wonder if he's being or was homeschooled. Though I don't doubt he has spent time in church.
Joseph Dodd he's a troll
R B remove the "r" and an "l" and add an "O" after the first "O". There you go.
Thanks Brad/Andrew/Josh/Alex... I now have ear cancer.
Amazed at how many ppl don’t realise that Brad is a prank
Really love how Matt handles this...
Brilliant.
Whenever you present evidence by starting with "if" , your credibility instantly takes a nosedive.
All religion is based on argument. Nothing can be argued into existence.
God this is such an awesome segment that showcases how well tracee and Matt worked together. Her analogies are bar none the absolute best I’ve ever heard in regards of logical explanations.
It will never be this good again.
04:46 I just finished ignoring every point from that video - Andrew, Ron, Alex, ect ect.
"I have evidence for existence of god"
"Which god?"
dead :'D
Just for fun, I checked the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It clearly includes Matt’s definition (“atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists.“) as one of the options. Brad is wrong when he claims that Matt “redefines” it.
This is one of the best calls ever, I listen to it every now and again for shits and giggles 😂
me too
Christians make me feel like I am smarter than Albert Einstein. Thanks God for Christians!
My favorite part of this whole episode is that the producers put the callers name as "Brad" in the title.
He has THAT voice, very recognizable
In the very excellent movie, Defending Your Life (97% Tomatometer), Brad would be considered a "Little Brain."
I’m just going to keep posting on every comments page that I miss Tracy. Love Matt! Miss Tracy! 😩
It’s so sad seeing him sift through information to find things that don’t 110% rule out god (in his mind) and then use that as evidence. The indoctrination is strong with this one.
Brad is to hesitant in presenting his so called argument god exists because he knows he doesn’t have one.
Whenever he cuts them off with the question of which god, it's hella funny. And he maintains a straight face every time he does it, too. LOL
This young man is very confused.
That is not so bad. Maybe he started thinking after the call.
Dont waste time with asshole oops I get it he needs an education
He is just a troll.
@@jonammons5882 Doubtful. He seems quite confused.
It's about how hard you're trying that matters most
This guy must be a race car driver, because he seems to have mastered the art of going in circles.
Brad is worse than a flat earther.
Why?
We demonstrated the possibility of black holes long before they were demonstrated to actually exist.
I used to believe that a belief in a god was the result of plain, old, ordinary ignorance. But my belief has now "evolved" to believing that a belief in a god is the result of deep and abiding stupidity.
I guess the major issue in such conversation is that to understand how we use the notion of the null hypothesis, one has to first live a life in which 'God' is not a phenomenon one believes he experiences on an ordinary basis. This is a testament to the power of indoctrination and community rituals, the two fundamentals of any religion.
This is also why people like Brad cannot fathom Matt's line of thinking, whereas any person who grew up an atheist, and any person who began skeptical inquiry about one's religion, can. In other words, if one doesn't even consider the underpinnings of one's beliefs - asking oneself how is it that one believes X, and _why_ one believes X - there is no practical way for them to realise that they had as yet no satisfactory reason to believe X according to their own standards of evidence.
I swear i've heard this little kid with 15 different names over time
I thought same, I've deja vu about this voice🤔
"I accepted those are the only two possibilities but that doesn't mean that you have to accept one of those"
😲🤦♂️🤯💥
The likelihood of ANY 13 card deal from a deck of 52 cards is EXACTLY the same - and each deal is incredibly UNLIKELY - therefore God is responsible ALL card deals.
He never helps me when I play poker though. Maybe I need more faith?
That's what someone who is squirming in a pool of desperation looks like who wants there to be a god against all the available evidence and reasoning. "Please let me have my delusion - allow me this fallacy so that I can believe - lie to me so that I can continue to lie to myself."
Try the Brad beer challenge: have a drink every time he says "OK"...
at around 3:28 you can hear his brain expload, small one, so just a "pop"
I hope that guy knew how disrespectful he was being by not answering direct questions. I don't think he had any respect at all for Matt.
Apologists don't tend to have respect for their opponents in a discussion, because many are working under a presumption they have to reinforce with arguments like epistemological uncertainty or metaphysical speculation
@@ToHoldNothing he doesn't want to answer any questions because his goal is to trick his debate partner into agreeing to a premise he necessarily has to prove for his deduction to be ultimately right. If he was coming into the conversation with the intention to seek truth, he wouldn't need to try to manipulate someone into agreeing with him
@@elohellol8481 Leading questions, I believe? Or question begging, either way fallacious logic
Intellectual humility is not a virtue at all when it comes to advancing ideological and dogmatic truths, like the idea that faith is a virtue, that faith being the type that persists in belief because of confirmation bias rather than evidentiary standards that are remotely objective
@@ToHoldNothing maybe we are talking past each other a bit here. I'm saying if one goes into a debate with intent to solely "trick" someone into agreeing with them, intellectual honesty goes out of the door at that point.
@@elohellol8481 Agreed: it's more about rhetoric than logic with those kinds of people, you're trying to convince someone without actually giving substantive arguments, only ways to make them appear to agree with you by being deceptive, effectively.
Awesome need to share
Brad is the kind of thinker that would not accept possible physical explanations of the existence of our Universe as promulgated by chemistry, physics, cosmology and philosophy, but would accept the metaphysical existence of a sentient god because he looked down in his bowl of Alphabets and saw a "g" an "o" and a "d" floating in close proximity to each other in the milk.
I feel so connected to the non-connected (Not connected to religion of any sort). Matt handles these calls so well.
I love that you can insert the word Dragon into any theist argument in place of God and it still makes the same amount of sense, cause, well Dragons are cool.
I'm going to redefine stupid and just call it brad.
A puddle of water becomes sentient and says "wow look at how I perfectly fit into every crevice of this hole" -the fine tuning argument
Why won't you accept my apologetics. It's not fair. Let me fumble through another argument while trying to avoid saying anything.
If you watch the first few seconds of each Brad/Andrew/Josh/etc video he always asks "why don't you believe?" as his first question.
Why does Brad not believe all the other creation myths from around world?
How many universes am I holding up?
In my experience, people who respond to a statement with "interesting", are saying they didn't understand the statement., but they think they have successfully fooled someone into thinking they are intelligent. It never works.
And when he answers with "ok let me ask you a question" is also a super dishonest disengaging non answer dodge.
Holy cow, this caller is really tap dancing the issue using sandals, one of them with a thong ripped out.
Holy hell this was frustrating. That guy took 10 minutes just stating his first premise. I feel like this call was a week long.
Good ol' Brad/Andrew/etc, one of my favorite smart-dumb callers.
0:18 the hosts were like “ah man not that pseudo-philosophical bullshitter again” lol
“We might be able to find a planet with an atmosphere that’s primarily nitrogen”
Earth? 😂 (not a theist btw)
Yep... I was thinking the same thing. 70-80% if I remember correctly (72% stands out in my mind, but not sure).
I think she was talking about finding an Earth-like exoplanet.
Brad/Alex/Andrew/Josh (I think that covers all the names that he's ever used in past shows I saw) was always trying get his "gotcha" moment on the show. I found his attempts to be dishonest, pathetic, and eventually saw them as what they truly were: A brave person who was selflessly showing us how the Dunning-Kruger effect works. Thank you, Brad/Alex/Andrew/Josh. You truly are quite the philosophizor and probably could have bested So-crates. Bravo.
22:53 nicely and succinctly explained for about a minute, and this caller after that doesn't really acknowledge that he gets that. Still.
(I do not believe God exists) does not equal or lead to necessarily (I believe no God exists).
How difficult is that to comprehend exactly?
At least Brad tried to put two of his brain cells together to understand basic logic theory. He [Brad] just showed me that I need to study more to not be like him and actually understand philosophical debates and discussions
14:05 Matt enters analysis mode, Christians everywhere quake in fear.
Not at all. Matt frequently talks over callers, hangs up on them without cause or for disingenuous reasons and often tries to frame questions to block the supernatural as a possible answer and when the caller gets around this with logic he will get flustered and angry and often curse and get insulting and rude. Brad did a great job of answering his questions, stating his case, (when he was able to before being cut off) and staying on point up until the end. Brad, nor any Christian should be afraid of the "wisdom" of this world which is foolishness in the eyes of God almighty. May God bless you to know Him through His Son Jesus Christ!
Proverbs 29:25 “The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe.”
2 Timothy 1:7 “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.”
@@braydynniewiadomski5454 Why do you believe in a god that you cannot show to exist?
@@braydynniewiadomski5454 "Brad did a great job of answering his questions, stating his case" Brad did and accomplished nothing at all. Fool.
People like Brad only prove the amazing & Godly amount of patience, understanding & tolerance Matt has for those who do not know what they do.
If your going to call in wanting to debate Matt who knows his stuff & heard it all already, an obvious pro at what he does make sure not to belittle his intelligence & make sure to call in with a strong “new” argument to present to him at the least an argument that’s challenging & interesting.
don’t expect him to entertain your poor attempt & lack of an argument & when he shuts it down don’t expect him to think of an argument for you Brad.
His juvenile understanding of making & presenting an arguable case only makes your faith & belief in God unsure & from a place of ignorance.
You know, I think I can speak for everyone when I say we all just want to know the truth regarding the question of a God existing. So... Why don't we all agree to put religion on hold for now and push science as hard as we can to see where it takes us? I'm sure, in our pursuit of knowledge of how the universe works, we'll eventually find something, either positive or negative, regarding the existence of an extra-planar being. Until then, we should stop judging, excluding, hating, and killing people we don't understand or agree with. Let's face it: it doesn't matter if God exists because we effect each other's lives far more directly than any supposed God. We need to start taking care of each other and this planet we are fortunate enough to live on.
Because there are a significant number of theists not raping and murdering other people at the moment because they think heaven exists.
Not everyone cares about the truth regarding the question of a God existing. For some people, this is a non-issue.
I don't think a god personally vested in humanity is possible
If you want to say , oh gravity or quantum fluctuations are actually god fine , but a personal god that cares about humanity and judges humanity was disproven decades ago by mobile phones and GPS
3:24
- The existence of god
- Which god?
¡pop! 💥 Brain explodes