I prefer to say that they use it because they want to remain simple and ignorant rather than make their mind hurt from excessive knowledge. Learning that 2+2=4 proved to much for ken in this case :p
"God exists, but I can't measure him or demonstrate him; you just have to believe he's there" = Wackadoodle 101 First cause? Well then what caused the first cause? = Wackadoodle 102 Ken is about to earn his degree! I'm so happy for him.
Sure you haven't just seen a brain in a jar? Because that brain is without mind as it has no biological machinery to keep it alive to actually think :p
"There just HAS to be..." a disembodied mind with an endemic nature, or an unjustified 'first cause'...and he laughs nervously when not accepted blindly. Ignorance cubed.
+Kevin Craighead -- Exactly, It's all SUBJECTIVE... Not Objective. (Logic, reasoning, naming, language, classifications, etc...) It think this is the biggest problem with the religious mind. They think they live in a FULLY objective world. (Defined by their God.) To blow their mind you introduce "Etymology". If you watch the beginning. Matt actually says in Spanish it would be "Dos". Matt was going to touch on the subject but he got interrupted.
Paul Cotton If its full of shit then you can't take the piss out of him! As even an atheist must know the scientific fact, that you cannot take the piss out of shit. End of world view science lesson for the day.
That was Matt's greatest line I loved it > "Here's is a jar full of nothing and this is a jar full of absolutely nothing and youre done." That was a good laugh!
By 6:55 or so, even Tracie is holding her chin in her hand, with eyes glazing over, as this foolish caller struggles to make a coherent statement. Matt has been bored from the start.
dogless10 so many calls come from people like this. they are so horribly schooled and developed they can barely talk. just shows why a real education is important. not just for knowledge but the ability to really think critically.
zool201975 Well said. Religion was created and propagated by people like this. I guess we free thinkers should consider ourselves "blessed" that we know where to find these people on any given Sunday.
+zool201975 and the ironic thing is even some of those you may consider intelligent and critical thinkers can still fall for ridiculous claims. i was reading an article a few years back how some doctors and lawyers and such others we deem intelligent were falling into those Nigerian e-mail scams. now around 30 years back i had taken an i.q. test where i was scored at 110 which is around avg or slightly higher but i don't consider myself being highly intelligent,i still could see thru a scam of someone telling me if i gave them a small amount of money i could get money left to me by some rich Nigerian guy who recently died.
hellshade2 Ben carson is a fine example of that aswell. He might be a neuro surgeon but fuck in anything else he is almost a blistering idiot in perpetual ignorance. In some cases it makes me wonder if in such fields critical thinking is always a necessity.
The trouble is people like Ken don't really think about what they believe and why they believe it until TAE points out that it's logically flawed. I hope he comes to his senses.
Except in this case I don't even think Ken believed what he was saying. It's pretty clear the thing he believed is "there is a god, and it's the one I've chosen," and he was just bolting on any slick sounding arguments he could find to make that assertion seem viable. He doesn't care one whit about first causes and prime movers and what have you, or he would have actually done some goddamn research before calling in, instead of falling back on "that's just the way it is!" whenever he was questioned. Frankly, if the atheist experience didn't exist, if nobody was around to question his god at all, I don't think Ken would have ventured into this kind of argument at all.
I find it hilarious how Theists can't wrap their brains around theories that don't include "god" as part or it's mechanism. To them, it's always implied that; This is how it works, because god.
I don't normally laugh at stuff like this, but at 9:00 I really lost all control and laughed so hard. "This is a jar or nothing and *this* is a jar of *absolute* nothing!".
Would Ken accept it if we said what he does? “How do you know God does not exist?” “Well, the same way we can know 2+2=4, that’s just how it is, God just doesn’t exist, guys...”
The last example is fucking hilarious. Thanks for uploading this video and laying bare, for all to hear, how ignorant these people really are and try to be. I’ve learned a lot from and about the religious, over the years. This is thanks to people like you.
" if someone is going to tell me that god exist, in objective reality, outside of their head, then they need to be able to demonstrate that, or else they are castrating the word exist" hahaha, damn Tracie, that was perfect!
I like the 2+2 idea. Tracie handles it correctly as a 'model'. Math is essentially abstract. Look up Godel and also Georg Cantor who created set theory.
Back in the day my buddies and I used to sit around talking about shit like this. Can't even begin to count how many times we blew each other's mind over the simplest concepts. We'd sit there for hours sounding like a bunch of Kens. But then, the buzz would start to wear off and we'd realize just how fucking stoned we all were.
Having once been a christian, i feel like people call in "knowing" they are right, and just hope to stumble on to you saying "damn you got me there, must be god" which DOES happen when you talk with other christians. The mental cop out occurs very quickly.
"you'll believe that someone walked across water, turned water into wine and that someone spent 3 days in the stomach of a giant fish....but evolution just blows your mind".....great quote.
@MentalSentinel She'll stop picking up the jars when he stops using terminology he doesn't understand. I'm sympathetic to Tracie here who usually has the patience of the proverbial saint, but his blunt assertions like, "Logically there just has to be a first cause" dressed up with misused expressions, is really pushing it.
or do you walk around in life thinking that you don't know what is and isn't real???....🔥🔥🔥🔥👏👏👏👏 Can you tell if there is a chair in a room????? what is a disembodied mind??? Have you ever seen a mind without a brain???? Tracie can be a ghostwriter!!!
Ken is following the Platonic ideals, which was stolen by early christians. Plato claimed that ideal forms like circles existed in the heavens, but he made that idea up without observation or testing. Plato was smart but he and Aristotle were pre-scientific thinkers and thus got some things wrong. The christians never changed their Platonic model when it was dismissed by modern thinkers.
2+2=4 isnt just the way it is. It is a symbol that we as humans agreed to to give a value, just like red is the name or label that we gave to a certain hue. It can change as the language changes or if everyone agrees to change the label.
Exactly. So if cups exist, even though something could change them in a way which would cause us to no longer call it "cup", then countries exist, even though something may change to a point that we no longer consider the USA to be the USA anymore. So, either cups don't exist because the matter they consist of can cease to function as a cup, and thus stop being a cup, or nations DO exist as long as the parts (land/people) exist, even though they can stop being that nation.
@Chaaarge Let me try this analogy; you walk into large warehouse, the lights are on and the temperature is just right. On the shelves are many different items clock, microwave, computer etc. On the floor are cars of all types: sport, SUV, 4 door etc. In the air there are small model airplanes and helicopters flying. At what point do you say "I wonder if an Intelligent Designer is at work?" Why do we assume that small and large complex biological living systems are exempt from Intelligent Design?
@semajgnik But the question they're asking is: How do you know that? Ancient Greeks thought the gods live atop Mount Olympus. We've climbed the mountain, no gods. Ancient people used to think that heaven was up in the clouds. We have airplanes now. No gods up there. So, the modern concept of god has shifted to, "he exists outside of nature." The more we learn about reality, the farther away we push god, so that he becomes impossible to touch.
Ken, if you're reading this, maybe a good place to start is to have a good long hard think about your position, write it down, and then call in and bounce your thoughts off the hosts.
Relativity doesn't state anything about the beginning of the universe, except that all of the equations break down into infinities, which denotes the incompleteness of Relativity Theory. The same occurs with black holes. We do not know enough.
@Chaaarge A recent 15 year science project was completed by J. Craig Venter Institute; they were able to back-engineer a simple bacteria. It took 17 scientists (one former Nobel Prize winner) and supercomputer to assemble the DNA structure. They couldn't get it to spontaneously come alive (abiogenesis), but were able to use a host cell. This is the ONLY science project so far, that engineered a simple life form and was also able to reproduce. Wouldn't we call this an Intelligent Design project?
I actually use month/day/year when dating things for myself. It was just the way my teachers had me do it in school and it was a habit that stuck. But I get your point. When in doubt, use abbreviations (Nov.) for the month and all four digits for the year (2012).
I love it when people call up and say things like: "it's very simple..." then demonstrate that they are completely unable to form a coherent explanation of what they believe. To summarize the part of big bang theory that Ken is missing: We don't know what existed prior to the singularity. In fact, we're not entirely certain what conditions were like prior to a short time *after* the singularity. But there are several hypothesis, none of which state that the universe came from nothing.
It still exists. Just because the name I use to describe a cup is just a conceptual symbol, and my cat won't understand that does not mean that it does not exist. The USA is both a defined land mass, and a collection of people bound by certain laws and often traditions. It demonstrably exists. It is land and people, both of which exist in the physical world. Just as the concept of a cup has no physical existence, while the item itself does.
2 + 2 = 4 does not exist outside the mind but as a concept inside the mind. This concept just happens to be universal in all minds because it conceptualizes consistent behaviors outside the mind. That is what Tracy and Matt should have told the caller.
The Peano Postulate is not relevant to this discussion. The whole point was the all mathematics, like language, is a logical model used to describe reality as we see it. We could devise a math where 2+2=5, but that would not accurately reflect reality and thus would be useless. The formulas, axioms and postulates which make up math are all part of the model, and the point was that math is just a model, so 2+2=4 because that's what we see in reality, and we constructed our model to describe that.
actually the idea of a 'cup' is inherent in its form. it exists as both material and (as long as it holds water) as a utilitarian object INDEPENDENTLY from humans, unlike a country. a chimp could find a cup, and use it. when it is smashed it is no longer a cup - not because the idea of it vanishes, but because its complex form has ended. a state is like any esoteric idea we might have. it only 'exists' in the realm of the imagination, for as long as we care. it is not like a cup.
"Well you can't prove..." *proves it* "Well, no, you see, I meant..." *provides explanation to the next point* "Well, no, you see, it's like what I first said..." (proceeding to go back to the first thing that was already addressed) It's so frustrating to try to get people to think.
It is an experiment. You have 2 puppies in one box and 2 puppies in another box, then you count all the puppies and you have 4. That's because non of the puppies disappeared and non got created. That has been the human experience for centuries and that's how they defined it. How do you prove it?
these two should host a national atheist show on a major tv network. I'm sure the networks would never go for it but if they did it would be a top show as they are perfect together
but the difference is that a cup doesn't cease to exist if welded to a car. its 'cupness' might disappear, but as material, it still exists! there is an obvious difference between physical things that are composed of atoms, and things that are only ever ideas, like the USA, (or 'Christianity' etc etc) that are not really composed of anything but thoughts. even if you put a wood fence around 'the USA' all you would have created, objectively, was a fence. and that is really just some wood.
PART 2 - I do agree that there is a difference between conceptual things and material things, and some things are a combination of both. Love is purely conceptual. The USA is not - it is a combination of concepts, people,and land. Remove any of those things and it ceases to be the USA, but this is true of nearly anything.
@jsamari I disagree. I think a lot of emphasis is put on concrete amounts. When my little brother was a child, the teacher would always show him sets of items and ask him to count them for homework. However, she reminds him that very big numbers are too tedious to picture visually. That's where multiplication and exponential growth come in. It takes a big stretch of the imagination in the wrong direction for people to think numbers are more than quantities of objects.
There are lots of implications about an alternative approach, beyond the materialsit one, that are relevant for a discussion on "existence" which stem from ground research in many fields of science, such as cosmology and quantum physics. You remind me of late Einstein, who didn't want to accept Heisenberg's Uncertainty, due to it's implications.
I still don't get why people compare different truths to math problems like 2+2=4. It is just a product of humans defining words. It is not like 2+2=4 in all cases. It is so only in some mathematical linear spaces but not all. Every mathematician could define a linear space where 2+2 is not 4. Math works because it is so well defined. Many thing in reality is not (or they are but people don't use the same definitions).
Captain Cook The normal vector space is bound by a number of definitions (if you are more interested check linear algebra classes all over the internet or universities) and those definitions is the why 2 + 2 = 4 in normal vector space. Now if any of the defintions are changed the result may vary greatly (like 2 + 2 = 0 for example). There are many cases where it is reasonable to use other vector spaces than the normal vector space to solve a problem.
@punnet2 This is a nonsensical statement. One is quantified by its singularity and has no component of size to be its reference. Therefore, two is merely a word attached to the concept of having 2 ones. For instance 1 hair is still one and one elephant is still one regardless of its size. These are simply words that represent concepts of wholeness which requires no need for an intelligent designer.
Wherein lies the difference? A cup is cup because we designate it a cup, not a blagalmesser. The USA is a physical place that exists and we have designated that the USA. No place is different. Even an island which you referenced earlier, is connected to the rest of the world, we simply choose to designate it as separate because the water makes travel to it more difficult to us. I doubt a fish would take the same view. If I weld a metal cup to a car dose that connection end its existence?
The parameter of what is considered natural is what exists or we will find to exist in our universe. Something isn't supernatural because we don't understand it, something is supernatural when it defies the laws of physics. No, we can't explain everything yet, but that fact doesn't presuppose a supernatural (i.e., MAGIC) explanation.
monotreme, is just a term used to classify it. it defy's nature because its of it's many different classification of creatures in one. ( reptile,amphibian,mammal). the bumble is a one of a kind, with an unnatural ability to physically fly.scientists have proven it to be areodynamically impossible for it to fly. oscillation? can you tell me how this changes the fact of it's wing size and beats per second in regards to wing loading...? or can we reproduce this in a lab?
Things like logical absolutes and numbers are descriptive concepts that relate to identifiable phenomena in the real world. They describe the properties of the observable universe, not dictate those properties. They are constructed by humans, and are categorically no different than scientific theories such as gravity.
ken seems to not realize things concerning material objects. material objects are given descriptions just as those objects are given a numeral value in regards to how many there are of that material object.if people cannot agree on these things there cannot be trade and even simple conversation about what things are. even though there are different languages out there it can still be determined what those languages are and can be learned and numerical values still are in place. i may not have explained this eloquently but it is part of kens premise that he seems to not understand.
Insanity is accepting as true things like virgin births of human universe creating deities while saying the fact of evolution is just too over the top for you to believe.
Well that is still a subject of investigation isn't it. The theory that come closest to explaining the presence of the universe (at least for me based on my limited knowledge of the topic) is the big-bang theory which assumes a beginning. Or at least as far as it it relevant to us since we cannot look back beyond the big bang and all laws of nature break-up in the big-bang singularity. Plus it is pretty awesome to try to find out what is going on (instead of simply assuming).
Its true. We were told at the office never to ring the Catholic priests on Wednesdays cause they'd all be pissed and we wouldn't be able to get a sane word out of any of them. True!
"Are you able to tell if something exists or if it doesn't?" Sadly, for most people, I think the answer is no.
Believers use "logically" as a substitute for "mentally simple and comfortable."
+Tighe Crovetti
True that!
I prefer to say that they use it because they want to remain simple and ignorant rather than make their mind hurt from excessive knowledge. Learning that 2+2=4 proved to much for ken in this case :p
Ken is definitely one of Gods "special" children.
VERY special ! ....................
Q: When is a door not a door?
A: When it's ajar!
+Slinky Malinki and???
Q: When is a car not a car?
A: When it turns into a driveway!
its still a door, an action doesnt change the object itself o.O
Did you hear about the magician walking down the street that turned into a doorway?
@Xarai... yer a buzzkill....
Pure comedy. Love it. The caller was so out gunned intellectually. I'm continually amazed by how little people have thought stuff through.
Tracie is so fucking awesome.
"God exists, but I can't measure him or demonstrate him; you just have to believe he's there" = Wackadoodle 101
First cause? Well then what caused the first cause? = Wackadoodle 102
Ken is about to earn his degree! I'm so happy for him.
The cause of the First Cause existed "outside of time" therefore it was after the First Cause. Sort of like Star Wars prequels.
The Depak is strong in this one.
+Larry Dunn LOL!
+Larry Dunn Deepak = dumbshit
Cosmic soup !
I've seen a Brain without a mind.
Sure you haven't just seen a brain in a jar? Because that brain is without mind as it has no biological machinery to keep it alive to actually think :p
Brain in a Jar. Now on sale at Tesco find them next to the Pickled gherkins and onions.
ON A LOOONG TRIP ..................
Tracie: "Why does there have to be a First Cause?"
Ken: "Because I made up that rule and the universe must obey the rules I make up." ;)
They need to have Ken on at least once a month. Listening to him fumble around gives me endless entertainment.
"There just HAS to be..." a disembodied mind with an endemic nature, or an unjustified 'first cause'...and he laughs nervously when not accepted blindly.
Ignorance cubed.
Ken just got done watching a William Lane Craig debate lol
Two plus two could equal eight, if eight was the word we used to mean four.
***** Makes sense to me...I think.
+Kevin Craighead --
Exactly, It's all SUBJECTIVE... Not Objective.
(Logic, reasoning, naming, language, classifications, etc...)
It think this is the biggest problem with the religious mind.
They think they live in a FULLY objective world.
(Defined by their God.)
To blow their mind you introduce "Etymology".
If you watch the beginning. Matt actually says in Spanish it would be "Dos".
Matt was going to touch on the subject but he got interrupted.
Or just we would use a differently defined linear space (mathematical) as a 'standard' space were 2+2=8.
Kevin Craighead, that’s fantastic. Perfectly said too
Ken's head is full of absolutely nothing.
Atheist Extremist If not full at all
Paul Cotton If its full of shit then you can't take the piss out of him! As even an atheist must know the scientific fact, that you cannot take the piss out of shit. End of world view science lesson for the day.
I dare say there is a fair bit of dry weed in there.
6chhelipilot I agree!
6chhelipilot . Wrong! His head is full of shit!
That was Matt's greatest line I loved it > "Here's is a jar full of nothing and this is a jar full of absolutely nothing and youre done." That was a good laugh!
Ken can't logic
Ron G . Ken can’t!
4:09 “How do you define existence?”
“How do I define god?”
How is it even possible to listen so poorly?
By 6:55 or so, even Tracie is holding her chin in her hand, with eyes glazing over, as this foolish caller struggles to make a coherent statement. Matt has been bored from the start.
dogless10 so many calls come from people like this. they are so horribly schooled and developed they can barely talk. just shows why a real education is important. not just for knowledge but the ability to really think critically.
zool201975 Well said. Religion was created and propagated by people like this. I guess we free thinkers should consider ourselves "blessed" that we know where to find these people on any given Sunday.
They seem far too nice
+zool201975 and the ironic thing is even some of those you may consider intelligent and critical thinkers can still fall for ridiculous claims. i was reading an article a few years back how some doctors and lawyers and such others we deem intelligent were falling into those Nigerian e-mail scams. now around 30 years back i had taken an i.q. test where i was scored at 110 which is around avg or slightly higher but i don't consider myself being highly intelligent,i still could see thru a scam of someone telling me if i gave them a small amount of money i could get money left to me by some rich Nigerian guy who recently died.
hellshade2
Ben carson is a fine example of that aswell.
He might be a neuro surgeon but fuck in anything else he is almost a blistering idiot in perpetual ignorance.
In some cases it makes me wonder if in such fields critical thinking is always a necessity.
The trouble is people like Ken don't really think about what they believe and why they believe it until TAE points out that it's logically flawed.
I hope he comes to his senses.
Except in this case I don't even think Ken believed what he was saying. It's pretty clear the thing he believed is "there is a god, and it's the one I've chosen," and he was just bolting on any slick sounding arguments he could find to make that assertion seem viable. He doesn't care one whit about first causes and prime movers and what have you, or he would have actually done some goddamn research before calling in, instead of falling back on "that's just the way it is!" whenever he was questioned.
Frankly, if the atheist experience didn't exist, if nobody was around to question his god at all, I don't think Ken would have ventured into this kind of argument at all.
"Well it's very simple"
It was not very simple
Ken knew in the first minute that he was utterly unprepared to be a part of this discussion.
Drugs are bad, m'kay.
I expected an intelligent caller when I read the title and this nitwit is what I get? This Ken guy does not understand what Tracy was trying to say.
I find it hilarious how Theists can't wrap their brains around theories that don't include "god" as part or it's mechanism.
To them, it's always implied that; This is how it works, because god.
I don't normally laugh at stuff like this, but at 9:00 I really lost all control and laughed so hard. "This is a jar or nothing and *this* is a jar of *absolute* nothing!".
Would Ken accept it if we said what he does? “How do you know God does not exist?” “Well, the same way we can know 2+2=4, that’s just how it is, God just doesn’t exist, guys...”
Yes Ken they do understand what logic is, it"s a shame you don't.
The last example is fucking hilarious. Thanks for uploading this video and laying bare, for all to hear, how ignorant these people really are and try to be. I’ve learned a lot from and about the religious, over the years. This is thanks to people like you.
" if someone is going to tell me that god exist, in objective reality, outside of their head, then they need to be able to demonstrate that, or else they are castrating the word exist" hahaha, damn Tracie, that was perfect!
The opening sequence is just.....the most "logical bit of awesomeness" I've ever heard, and I want it to be my goddamn ringtone Matt!
Humans made mathematics to describe our reality and they work.
I like the 2+2 idea. Tracie handles it correctly as a 'model'. Math is essentially abstract. Look up Godel and also Georg Cantor who created set theory.
the editing at the end is awesome haha "you're done" - static shot and zoom - music plays
good job
Back in the day my buddies and I used to sit around talking about shit like this. Can't even begin to count how many times we blew each other's mind over the simplest concepts. We'd sit there for hours sounding like a bunch of Kens. But then, the buzz would start to wear off and we'd realize just how fucking stoned we all were.
Having once been a christian, i feel like people call in "knowing" they are right, and just hope to stumble on to you saying "damn you got me there, must be god" which DOES happen when you talk with other christians. The mental cop out occurs very quickly.
Poor, poor Ken.
"Do you believe in the existence of numbers?"
Sigh....
Ken has a disembodied mind!
LOL.
"you'll believe that someone walked across water, turned water into wine and that someone spent 3 days in the stomach of a giant fish....but evolution just blows your mind".....great quote.
@MentalSentinel
She'll stop picking up the jars when he stops using terminology he doesn't understand. I'm sympathetic to Tracie here who usually has the patience of the proverbial saint, but his blunt assertions like, "Logically there just has to be a first cause" dressed up with misused expressions, is really pushing it.
Dude sounds like Ceasar (mount sanai guy)
I love his “oh great” periodically lol it makes him kind of endearing. He seems like a good guy that’s just lost.
or do you walk around in life thinking that you don't know what is and isn't real???....🔥🔥🔥🔥👏👏👏👏
Can you tell if there is a chair in a room?????
what is a disembodied mind???
Have you ever seen a mind without a brain????
Tracie can be a ghostwriter!!!
Ken is following the Platonic ideals, which was stolen by early christians. Plato claimed that ideal forms like circles existed in the heavens, but he made that idea up without observation or testing. Plato was smart but he and Aristotle were pre-scientific thinkers and thus got some things wrong. The christians never changed their Platonic model when it was dismissed by modern thinkers.
jesus must have been Canadian,sure he walked on water,it was winter and the lake was frozen lol
2+2=4 isnt just the way it is. It is a symbol that we as humans agreed to to give a value, just like red is the name or label that we gave to a certain hue. It can change as the language changes or if everyone agrees to change the label.
What was the "first cause" of god? None? Then the "first cause" argument is flawed.
Exactly. So if cups exist, even though something could change them in a way which would cause us to no longer call it "cup", then countries exist, even though something may change to a point that we no longer consider the USA to be the USA anymore. So, either cups don't exist because the matter they consist of can cease to function as a cup, and thus stop being a cup, or nations DO exist as long as the parts (land/people) exist, even though they can stop being that nation.
@Chaaarge Let me try this analogy; you walk into large warehouse, the lights are on and the temperature is just right. On the shelves are many different items clock, microwave, computer etc. On the floor are cars of all types: sport, SUV, 4 door etc. In the air there are small model airplanes and helicopters flying. At what point do you say "I wonder if an Intelligent Designer is at work?" Why do we assume that small and large complex biological living systems are exempt from Intelligent Design?
@semajgnik
But the question they're asking is: How do you know that?
Ancient Greeks thought the gods live atop Mount Olympus. We've climbed the mountain, no gods. Ancient people used to think that heaven was up in the clouds. We have airplanes now. No gods up there. So, the modern concept of god has shifted to, "he exists outside of nature." The more we learn about reality, the farther away we push god, so that he becomes impossible to touch.
Ken, if you're reading this, maybe a good place to start is to have a good long hard think about your position, write it down, and then call in and bounce your thoughts off the hosts.
Is this Caesar?
Relativity doesn't state anything about the beginning of the universe, except that all of the equations break down into infinities, which denotes the incompleteness of Relativity Theory. The same occurs with black holes. We do not know enough.
That was one awesome intro!
And now that i've watched it... Very awesome outro too!
@Chaaarge A recent 15 year science project was completed by J. Craig Venter Institute; they were able to back-engineer a simple bacteria. It took 17 scientists (one former Nobel Prize winner) and supercomputer to assemble the DNA structure. They couldn't get it to spontaneously come alive (abiogenesis), but were able to use a host cell. This is the ONLY science project so far, that engineered a simple life form and was also able to reproduce. Wouldn't we call this an Intelligent Design project?
2+2=4 - THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!
AntareFY Ken believes that he really can see five.
You win my internet at least.
numbers are actually best thought of as adjectives we use to quantitatively explore our universe ^^
I actually use month/day/year when dating things for myself. It was just the way my teachers had me do it in school and it was a habit that stuck. But I get your point. When in doubt, use abbreviations (Nov.) for the month and all four digits for the year (2012).
I don't think Ken knows what Logical Absolutes are lol he's just using the phrase because it sounds smart or something.
That was a mental ass-whooping.
I love it when people call up and say things like: "it's very simple..." then demonstrate that they are completely unable to form a coherent explanation of what they believe.
To summarize the part of big bang theory that Ken is missing: We don't know what existed prior to the singularity. In fact, we're not entirely certain what conditions were like prior to a short time *after* the singularity. But there are several hypothesis, none of which state that the universe came from nothing.
It still exists. Just because the name I use to describe a cup is just a conceptual symbol, and my cat won't understand that does not mean that it does not exist. The USA is both a defined land mass, and a collection of people bound by certain laws and often traditions. It demonstrably exists. It is land and people, both of which exist in the physical world. Just as the concept of a cup has no physical existence, while the item itself does.
2 + 2 = 4 does not exist outside the mind but as a concept inside the mind. This concept just happens to be universal in all minds because it conceptualizes consistent behaviors outside the mind. That is what Tracy and Matt should have told the caller.
Bless his uneducated little heart.....
The Peano Postulate is not relevant to this discussion. The whole point was the all mathematics, like language, is a logical model used to describe reality as we see it. We could devise a math where 2+2=5, but that would not accurately reflect reality and thus would be useless. The formulas, axioms and postulates which make up math are all part of the model, and the point was that math is just a model, so 2+2=4 because that's what we see in reality, and we constructed our model to describe that.
actually the idea of a 'cup' is inherent in its form. it exists as both material and (as long as it holds water) as a utilitarian object INDEPENDENTLY from humans, unlike a country. a chimp could find a cup, and use it. when it is smashed it is no longer a cup - not because the idea of it vanishes, but because its complex form has ended.
a state is like any esoteric idea we might have. it only 'exists' in the realm of the imagination, for as long as we care.
it is not like a cup.
"Well you can't prove..."
*proves it*
"Well, no, you see, I meant..."
*provides explanation to the next point*
"Well, no, you see, it's like what I first said..." (proceeding to go back to the first thing that was already addressed)
It's so frustrating to try to get people to think.
Ken has been smoking a humongous joint... he slurs beyond comprehension.
I was literally just thinking this.
I was thinking booze, but grass works too.
Weed doesn’t make one slur.
Some people define god into existence but this guy DESCRIBES him into existence.
Technically, yes.
It is an experiment. You have 2 puppies in one box and 2 puppies in another box, then you count all the puppies and you have 4. That's because non of the puppies disappeared and non got created. That has been the human experience for centuries and that's how they defined it. How do you prove it?
these two should host a national atheist show on a major tv network. I'm sure the networks would never go for it but if they did it would be a top show as they are perfect together
The jar is NOT a dog? You lost me there.
but the difference is that a cup doesn't cease to exist if welded to a car. its 'cupness' might disappear, but as material, it still exists!
there is an obvious difference between physical things that are composed of atoms, and things that are only ever ideas, like the USA, (or 'Christianity' etc etc) that are not really composed of anything but thoughts.
even if you put a wood fence around 'the USA' all you would have created, objectively, was a fence. and that is really just some wood.
PART 2 - I do agree that there is a difference between conceptual things and material things, and some things are a combination of both. Love is purely conceptual. The USA is not - it is a combination of concepts, people,and land. Remove any of those things and it ceases to be the USA, but this is true of nearly anything.
Ken goes cross-eyed when he looks at Magritte's painting of a pipe that says : "This is not a pipe"...
Teach Arts in Schools!
@jsamari I disagree. I think a lot of emphasis is put on concrete amounts. When my little brother was a child, the teacher would always show him sets of items and ask him to count them for homework. However, she reminds him that very big numbers are too tedious to picture visually. That's where multiplication and exponential growth come in. It takes a big stretch of the imagination in the wrong direction for people to think numbers are more than quantities of objects.
It sounded like Tracy was asserting that a mind could only exist if a brain existed. I may have misunderstood her, but that is how it sounded
4everalive1 have you seen a mind without a brain?
6:46 Matt - "You have one minute, cos we're running out of time and I've got other callers..."
Ken - "Uh...oh...great..." Class...LOL
Basically Ken is saying 2+2=4, therefore god.
There are lots of implications about an alternative approach, beyond the materialsit one, that are relevant for a discussion on "existence" which stem from ground research in many fields of science, such as cosmology and quantum physics.
You remind me of late Einstein, who didn't want to accept Heisenberg's Uncertainty, due to it's implications.
I still don't get why people compare different truths to math problems like 2+2=4. It is just a product of humans defining words. It is not like 2+2=4 in all cases. It is so only in some mathematical linear spaces but not all. Every mathematician could define a linear space where 2+2 is not 4. Math works because it is so well defined. Many thing in reality is not (or they are but people don't use the same definitions).
+RanEncounter Well said.
can you explain what you mean, how can 2+2 equal something
+Captain Cook other than four.
Captain Cook
The normal vector space is bound by a number of definitions (if you are more interested check linear algebra classes all over the internet or universities) and those definitions is the why 2 + 2 = 4 in normal vector space.
Now if any of the defintions are changed the result may vary greatly (like 2 + 2 = 0 for example). There are many cases where it is reasonable to use other vector spaces than the normal vector space to solve a problem.
So its just making 2 = something else
Oh this is from the “drunk theist caller” era
That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Present evidence of minds without brains and you will have a point.
@punnet2 This is a nonsensical statement. One is quantified by its singularity and has no component of size to be its reference. Therefore, two is merely a word attached to the concept of having 2 ones. For instance 1 hair is still one and one elephant is still one regardless of its size. These are simply words that represent concepts of wholeness which requires no need for an intelligent designer.
Tracie thinks the story of Jonah is absolutely impossible but she just ate him alive.
Wherein lies the difference? A cup is cup because we designate it a cup, not a blagalmesser. The USA is a physical place that exists and we have designated that the USA. No place is different. Even an island which you referenced earlier, is connected to the rest of the world, we simply choose to designate it as separate because the water makes travel to it more difficult to us. I doubt a fish would take the same view. If I weld a metal cup to a car dose that connection end its existence?
2+2=5 for extremely large values of 2 {2.41,2.59}
"Well that's very simple ....... uh ....... well you take something ... ok, ok, ..... uh ...... well let me just ...... further.... uh explain"
His 'argument' reeks of desperation
Yeah, Tracie. I'd love to have a long conversation with her.
I am sure you dream of giving her a real mouthful?
+Sean Coffman Not neccesarily. I've spoken to many extremely intelligent women who are about as alluring as a school bus fire.
The parameter of what is considered natural is what exists or we will find to exist in our universe. Something isn't supernatural because we don't understand it, something is supernatural when it defies the laws of physics. No, we can't explain everything yet, but that fact doesn't presuppose a supernatural (i.e., MAGIC) explanation.
monotreme, is just a term used to classify it. it defy's nature because its of it's many different classification of creatures in one. ( reptile,amphibian,mammal).
the bumble is a one of a kind, with an unnatural ability to physically fly.scientists have proven it to be areodynamically impossible for it to fly. oscillation? can you tell me how this changes the fact of it's wing size and beats per second in regards to wing loading...? or can we reproduce this in a lab?
Tracie - "How do you define existence?" _______ Ken - "How do I define god?"
Ken's speed limit is 20 .... Life is more than a challenge for Ken.
Things like logical absolutes and numbers are descriptive concepts that relate to identifiable phenomena in the real world. They describe the properties of the observable universe, not dictate those properties. They are constructed by humans, and are categorically no different than scientific theories such as gravity.
This man needs to lay off the hallucinogens.
Bad acid in Santa Barbara apparently.
ken seems to not realize things concerning material objects. material objects are given descriptions just as those objects are given a numeral value in regards to how many there are of that material object.if people cannot agree on these things there cannot be trade and even simple conversation about what things are. even though there are different languages out there it can still be determined what those languages are and can be learned and numerical values still are in place. i may not have explained this eloquently but it is part of kens premise that he seems to not understand.
Insanity is accepting as true things like virgin births of human universe creating deities while saying the fact of evolution is just too over the top for you to believe.
Well that is still a subject of investigation isn't it.
The theory that come closest to explaining the presence of the universe (at least for me based on my limited knowledge of the topic) is the big-bang theory which assumes a beginning. Or at least as far as it it relevant to us since we cannot look back beyond the big bang and all laws of nature break-up in the big-bang singularity.
Plus it is pretty awesome to try to find out what is going on (instead of simply assuming).
As soon as he said the words "First Cause" I knew it was the same Ken.
Its true. We were told at the office never to ring the Catholic priests on Wednesdays cause they'd all be pissed and we wouldn't be able to get a sane word out of any of them. True!