The Atheism Delusion - Konstantin Kisin
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 май 2024
- My youth was infused with example after example of stuffy religious Conservatives attempting to enforce their values on the rest of society...
💥Join us on our Journey to 1 Million Subscribers💥
SPONSOR: Try Verso’s incredible longevity products and get 15% off by using code: TRIGGER at www.ver.so/trigger
Verso Scientific References:
1. www.frontiersin.org/articles/...
2. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35844...
3. www.mdpi.com/2079-7737/10/6/456”
Konstantin's Substack - www.konstantinkisin.com/p/the...
Join our exclusive TRIGGERnometry community on Locals! triggernometry.locals.com/
OR Support TRIGGERnometry Here:
Bitcoin: bc1qm6vvhduc6s3rvy8u76sllmrfpynfv94qw8p8d5
Music by: Music by: Xentric | info@xentricapc.com | www.xentricapc.com/ RUclips: @xentricapc
Buy Merch Here:
www.triggerpod.co.uk/shop/
Advertise on TRIGGERnometry:
marketing@triggerpod.co.uk
Join the Mailing List:
www.triggerpod.co.uk/#mailing...
Find TRIGGERnometry on Social Media:
/ triggerpod
/ triggerpod
/ triggerpod
About TRIGGERnometry:
Stand-up comedians Konstantin Kisin (@konstantinkisin) and Francis Foster (@francisjfoster) make sense of politics, economics, free speech, AI, drug policy and WW3 with the help of presidential advisors, renowned economists, award-winning journalists, controversial writers, leading scientists and notorious comedians.
SUBSCRIBE for more!
Atheism is a religion of haters.
Isn't "new atheism" a bit old now?
I love you guys, I know you are smart, esp Konstatin. I know he loves Hitchens. But come.... the fuck on! I have to share. Just wanted to share some thoughts I've been mulling over lately. You know, I've been diving into the works of Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, and Hirsi Ali for a while now, and they've really made me think. But here's the thing: as much as their ideas spoke to me before, it feels like the world keeps spinning, and our perspectives with it, right?
I'm not throwing shade on their insights, not at all. It's just that sometimes, you look around, and it's like seeing everything through a new lens. And that's pretty cool, isn't it? We gotta stay open to new ideas, keep evolving, keep updating how we see things based on what's going down around us.
So, yeah, just a little reminder to myself and anyone else who's on this journey of learning and growing: stay open-minded, stay curious, and keep questioning things. Who knows what fresh perspectives we might stumble upon next?
Konstantin is not gonna listen so why would I care about this comment? Really? If he does here is my point: Did you forget what you listened? The legion of points Hitchens made against Religion? You forgot all of them?? It feels like he is an atheist who hates to be one and he would do anything to make religion real. Stop it. You are embarrassing yourself.
More homework needed on what Christopher Hitchins said especially in his debates with religious academics, all here on youtube.
@@lawrencefrost9063hirsi ali is now a christian. She arrived there, I think, via an appreciation of western values and democratic societies.
2002: "If we get rid of Religion, Society will be so much more Rational."
2024: "Pregnant men"
No Sequitur any one.
One, we haven't got rid of religion, billions of people still believe.
And how many people think men can get pregnant ?
No, sorry, religion, does provide reason, rational or understanding.
I mean the religious believe in a supernatural being, that in any other context, would have you put in a institution.
Fail.
Indeed. Very good point. Another one is:
USSR 1960: The West will collapse under its own religious contradictions, the atheist USSR will thrive.
USSR 1989: Uhm, that's it folks, we're done...
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
correlation and causation?
The people who say that tend to be christian.....
It's interesting how the push to introduce intelligent design into classrooms in the UK was rejected in the 90s, and yet trans ideology has been mainstreamed in schools with no discussion whatsoever.
Is that true?
Atheists found a religion that they liked, so it was accepted without discussion. Thats all.
They're both awful.
@@graemebuchan8142yes
If only it was funny…
I’m atheist, I don’t have the void you speak of.
Me neither. There's so much mystery in the universe to be deciphered, beauty in nature to be discovered, love in friends and family to be enjoyed. There's no space or time for a void.
You will realise it one day.
@@peterbassey9668 No, I really don't think so. So much to learn, so much to do; no time or need for imaginary friends.
@@Hrochnick Please. Define evil.
@@joyfrimpong2213 Why? Are you trying to get me to use the word "moral" or "morality" so that you can say something like "how can you know what's moral, or not, what's evil or not, without a god etc. etc" Well, forget it. I don't need a book to tell me how to behave, a book which also tells me how I can keep slaves, how I should keep women seperate and below me. A book that describes an angry and jealous god that has no problem killing, or harming people for fun. I'm better than that, I'm better than your god as I know that these things are not acceptable. I don't need to be told.
KK argues that an atheistic, human created set of values is inferior to a religious created set of values. Does he not understand that all religions were created by humans? There are many claims of divine revelation, but no proofs.
There are many religions, each with their own set of values. An atheist's humanist set of values is merely one more to add to the pile. Must we take the good with the bad? Why can't we select the good stuff and leave the icky stuff on the pile?
Humanism is simply heretical Christianity, and if you can’t see that you are foolish as BHA ‘intellectuals’ all are. The West was created by Greek thought and the Jewish Bible. Everything you think, all your actions, are born out of this. What is ‘good’ is invariably Christian. To demonstrate this, go and live in Tehran.
@@dominionphilosophy3698 Ooh, possibly... go and ask Hypatia that. Post mob.
Or some of Luther's victims of rhetoric. Or, of Gregory XIII.
And the whole extended Curse of Ham... and slavery, apologetics.
Because the fruit is often, rather mixed. And other things, off the chain.
In a past Europe that often had more wars than it ever had prior, too.
And humanism also generally, has no place - for Romans 9:21.
"There are many claims of divine revelation, but no proofs." Really? Have you not read Isaac Newton's detailed examination of the divine revelation given to Daniel in (Daniel 9) which precisely predicted the timing of the Messiah's advent and the events surrounding it many hundreds of years in advance? Have you examined the many, many, many detailed and astounding prophetic revelations in typology and plain language about what the coming Messiah would do and be that are intricately woven throughout the Old Testament? Have you not read the divine revelation (Rev 13) related by the fisherman: John, friend of Jesus, who 2000 years ago revealed the characteristics of the end-time world government, its system of control, economic system and hatred of God that ANY awake person can see is being assembled before our eyes?
@@paulyd786 None of these are proofs. Isaac Newton was a nut.
Is Christian revelation the only revelation?
@@glennmitchell9107 Lols do you think I want to debate random Internet guy that thinks ISAAC NEWTON was a "nut", but they're some kind of genius? Nope.
I am a devout Christian, but Monty Python and the Life of Brian is probably the funniest movie ever made.
I do believe God has a sense of humor. He made man after all.🤣
"but"?
Yes! It's hysterical!
And don't forget Loretta!
And keep my baby in a box. Lol
I am christian, too, and this movie is a masterpiece.
You can be an atheist whilst also believing that Christianity is a social good. Believing in the latter does not mean you aren’t an atheist.
The problem is that the Theists have been pulling off a successful propaganda campaign, deeming Atheists as the source of moral decay, since day one.
Now that society is, seemingly, sinking into a moral cesspit, it's being trotted out again.
Every comments section describing some form of debauchery or political shenanigans, has always got a Guy spouting off bible verses, or lamenting the decline of Christian values, i'e., blaming it on non believers.
It's unfortunate that Kisin seems to have fallen for that line.
Exactly. I call myself a practicant non-christian.
Exactly. Atheism is not a social problem. The atheist with bad ideas and lack of morality is a problem.
I welcome my Christian peers in creating the good in the world. As long as they don’t pretend Jesus is going to fix it all any day now, we are good.
True, but being an Atheist would mean you think said religion is factually incorrect. Deriving comfort from a lie, no matter how sweet, simply does not sound appealing to a lot of people.
And yes, there are a lot of people who DO derive comfort from sweet lies, but why can't we all strive for a world where we derive the same comfort from things that are actually true instead?
Why does a religion need to contain a nonexisting god? why not create a religion, a moral codex, a guide for a good life, in short, a holy book WITHOUT a god?
First, you're assuming that the "woke" are atheists. You're discounting that the religious could also be "woke". In other words, you're advocating for religion so that the woke are curtailed, forgetting that both "wokism" and "religiosity" is a lack of critical thinking. Both are on the same side of the seesaw, whereas critical thinking is on the opposite side.
KK's hate for wokeness made him endorse the syllogistic nonsense of the alt-right. What a shame.
There are scientists at the highest level who are followers of Christ. Religion might be different things but following Christ is the most sanest.
You can't have "wokism" without _the lack or absence of belief in the existence of deities_ (i.e., *atheism* ). 💯
Christianity and "wokeness" are incompatible regardless of what a Christian might say or do. (Unlike Atheists, Christians have an authoritative source of reference, which makes this nondebatable issue. 💯) "Christian" was never synonymous with "someone who believes in Christ as Lord and Savior". Needless to say, in a secular world, there's bound to be nonbelieving Christians.
With or without religion, you'll have good people doing good things and bad people doing evil things; but to have people think of good as evil and evil as good-that takes atheism. 💯
@@robokou "Christianity and "wokeness" are incompatible regardless of what a Christian might say or do." If you're essentially saying that any "Christian" that believes in "wokism" is not a real Christian, that can be categorized under the "No true Scotsman fallacy". Google it if you're not familiar with the term. I would say that moderate Christians are a good proportion of "Christians".
*The best Christians are sometimes atheists:*
How the line between religion and atheism is thinner than you think, how the line between comedy and religion, is thinner than you think:
In 1980 I knew an 80 year old British man who faithfully went to the same church for 40 years. He was cremated, his remains are in the church garden under a rose bush now. One day I asked Lawrence about his faith in God. He said, "Oh, I thought you knew. I'm an atheist. I don't believe in God. I go to church because I just like the people, I like the teaching in the church. Good people" I think of him still from time to time now, remembering him as the best Christian I ever met....
Long ago I had a strange thought: Christopher Hitchens, had he gone into the church, Hitchens might have been one of the best Popes we ever had. Instead he bought into The Atheist Delusion. Sam Harris has an admirable intellect. He might have made a fine Cardinal in the Church. Both KK & FF had potential for career advancement if they took up the collar.
I think a stain glass window on the Triggernometry set, would not look out of place. Bill Hicks and George Carlin were funny because their humor assumed and accepted a set of moral propositions about reality, which come out of religion. Their humor came out of a realization of the failure of people, to live up to the ideals they accepted. People who did not share their morals would not think both men funny. KK & FF accepted those same moral precepts that motivated Hicks and Carlin. Comedy is about morality, or it's not funny. Comics are priests that think too much, feel too little. The line between religion and comedy is thinner than people think. Again, a Stain Glass Window behind the two, would not be inappropriate. Lawrence knew that.
In the same general sense, once you start to look into the Bible and you know a bit about evolution, the line between the wisdom in the Bible and the lessons of evolution, that line is a lot thinner than you might think. For instance Genesis 3:16 reads to me like an evolutionary deal between the sexes. Other people read it as a religious ideal encoded in religion, by men seeking God. I see that verse, as both....atheistic science coming together with religious faith. I see both as true, in a way I don't understand.
There is a line between belief and non-belief. That line is a lot thinner, than people imagine it to be.
If I were an atheist, I would be greatly dismayed to see that all the fanaticism and idiocy I thought would go away with the decline of traditional religions, instead simply manifested itself into different forms.
Nevertheless, we objectively live in a much better world now, after we destroyed the influence of religion in the West to a great extent.
Other cultures in the world are not (yet) so lucky.
And in vastly less rational fashion.
It's not religion in particular that's the source of fanaticism and idiocy it's ideology in general, communists for example are just as delusional as fundamentalists.
@@svr5423fantasy
What does atheism have to do with it? I think you mean political ideology.
As a non-believer though, how do you "trick" yourself into believing things that aren't supported by evidence? I'm not sure I understand what the solution being proposed here is.
This is no solution. But there are enemies. Atheism is an enemy of others West and those who espouse it are enemies of the West. The West was created by Christianity and Greek thought. End of.
There's plenty of evidence. You've probably only listened to sources from an anti- religious perspective.
Preserved soft tissue in dinosaur bones can't be millions of years old. Fossils that cross multiple rock layers such as the petrified trees show that the rock layers were laid down back to back, not millions of years apart. A global flood such as in the Bible would collapse the geological timeline.
Just off the top of my head. If you start with the assumption the Bible can't be true, you'll see evidence that it's wrong, and if you start with the assumption that it's true there's tons of evidence for that too.
But, you asked a personal question, so here's a more personal answer. No, don't fake it. But if you actually are open to the possibility, you could pray: "God, if you're real, I want to believe in you, but I'm gonna need some help. Please show up in my life. It's really hard to believe from where I'm sitting, so please give me a hand here."
I think this video basically boils down to "we shoudn't incentivize lack of religion, because the alternative is worse". It makes sense at a populational level, but not in the individual level.
@@daniel_brqlo thank you that makes it much clearer. I think I’d hesitate to take that approach until we’ve actually tried to teach people empirical thinking. I see every day that this is endemic even within non-believing circles. Without that skill, people will always be susceptible to believing all sorts of unsubstantiated theories.
@@daniel_brqlo The problem is that society is made of individuals not a collective hivemind. Moreover, what exactly are we incentivizing here? Are we saying, well you can believe whatever you want because that's you religious belief. Well, you can then start believing that a man can give birth. You can also believe that killing someone you don't like is fine because they are not part of your religion.
Konstantin saying the reason atheism "lost it's mojo" by not being able to provide any answers to lack of meaning etc is a weird one to me. It doesn't NEED to provide any answers on that front. That's not what atheism is about. Its simply rejecting the notion of a man in the clouds, as intelligent creator, judging us all. 🤔
That last line: "religious people have the answer... Do we?" Is terrible.
Religious people do not have THE answer. They contradict each other, oppose each other and fight each other. The same problems exist regardless of atheism.
To pin the entire hopes of humankind on 4 men to deliver us from the hypocrisy and destructive nature of religion is where you went wrong. Between them they've laid out THEIR opinions and thoughts. It's not a dogma. It's literally the opposite. They, and atheism is general, aim to free us from religious shackles, what we do after that is up to us.
He said "their answer" not "the answer"
Religions DO NOT contradict each other. That’s completely false, they disagree in fundamental aspects of their most “philosophical” aspects of their ideology. Why? Because of the implications they have in the religion itself.
And because the people ruling this institutions must justify certain practices and beliefs.
“Aim to free us from religious shackles” free you?! Free?! 😂 your new God is THE STATE my friend, and now more and more , the marriage between the state and corporations. What freedom?! 😂
In 50 years, when our society is gonna be a genderless, raceless, atheistic, materialistic, digital AI dominated metaverse postmodernist paradise , God and Religion ate gonna be way more aligned with nature and the natural order of things than any other ideology.
“Freedom” 😂😂😂😂 . By 2030 you wont be able to post anything against the “new public moral” nor drive the car you want nor eat the food you want what freedom?!
@@demonking86420 they don't have "their" answer either. They just choose to make something up and call it a day.
@@svr5423 and your evidence of them making it up is?
@@demonking86420fair enough on the "their" part. I misheard that.
It makes little difference though. Having 'their' answer is useless when their answers are all different and fundamentally oppose each other, especially when they are based on false doctrine. In fact I'd argue it's much worse than not yet having an answer at all.
The main issue is dogmatism.
It is. And this takes care of 'Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot were atheists' arguments.
@@notreallydavidHitler was a Christian
@@notreallydavid Hitler was catholic, never thrown out of the Church. But Goebbels married a divorced protestant - > "Let´s get rid of this heretic!"
Do you think dogmatism across the board is wrong?
Are there issues with the dogmatic principles of human rights that secular societies have to appeal to?
Stalin and the others just had a different set of dogmatic principles than the West did, and we paint them as wrong despite having no real religio-moral framework to justify our condemnation of their dogma.
@@teep-yt Hi. For all their faults, the western democracies permit dissent and don't engage in rule by terror, mass deportations, engineered famines and executions of supposed political enemies. Nor do they vet artworks of every kind and even scientific findings to ensure that they conformed to the prevailing political orthodoxy. Whether secular or religious in temper, totalitarian societies place humanity on a Procrustean bed and stretch or hack it to make it the right size. Open societies don't do this.
Hitchens Razor, “ what can be asserted without evidence, can also be dismissed without evidence “
And yet the man was a committed socialist. When pressed on the lack of any evidence for the effectiveness of socialism and confronted with the mountains of evidence to the contrary, the only rebuttal he could ever muster was "that wasn't real socialism." Hitchens was a complete fraud.
What is the evidence that one should believe Hitchen’s Razor? 😅
The question is, what counts as evidence. When speaking on scientific questions, the answer is pretty simple. When speaking on philosophical and/or metaphysical matters, pure scientism may not be the best option.
I've taught a class in response to each of the New Atheists and the God Delusion was perhaps the weakest among them. Much better arguments have been made for atheism. Hitchens was not particularly compelling or strong.
@@476429 as Huang Po said. The foolish reject what they see,not what they think.
The wise reject what they think,not what they see.
@@pie-eatingant6432 That's not how razors work. You don't believe in them. you either use them or not.
I think video is conflating non-religious with the “woke cult”. There are plenty of people who were into the new atheism movement and were disillusioned by the wokeness creeping in, but that doesn’t discredit it. I do agree that there is a lack of purpose in the west, but that doesn’t mean it has to be filled with religion for everyone. My family is bigger than me, my community is bigger than me, there are plenty of things bigger than me which I acknowledge, but an invisible god isn’t one of them. That gives me purpose.
It was a hell of a leap in this video to suggest that Harris/ Dawkins had any impact in the woke stuff , especially when they both renounce it themselves.
Seems like conflating 2 very different issues imo
@@frankylampard3931 you could argue they set the stage for the leftist elite to deny and shape reality because we have no religious convictions to fall back on .
@@frankylampard3931 Yep. if I had to absolutelly choose between Woke and Christiany, id'd choose the latter. But the ideal scenario would be neither.
This evil man HATES RUssia
Hates christians and pretends to be pro british
YOU westerners are just plain stupid
It is SOOOO easy to fool you
he is a zelesnky, a soros and weinstein and epstein rolled into one
you don't need to be woke in 2024 to be an atheist, but you MUST be an atheist to be woke in 2024
I've been atheist (not AN atheist) for about 30 years now. It's apparent that people, collectively, need someone to tell them what to do and how to behave. It's human nature. Religion does just that. Unfortunately it also does a lot more, but to remove religion from the masses just leaves them vulnerable to anything else that justifies their existence.
Outsource fear, greed, uncertainty and mortality to God.
Weaponize it to conquer, pillage, and exploit for resource gain
Where we remove the concept of a god in society we replaced it either with hedonism and/or authoritarian government. Then destruction of a god concept, leads to the next move to dismantle families… the only two structures that prevent governments from reaching into peoples lives and requiring 100% compliance through authoritarianism.
We could just stop believing in masses and treat everyone as adults and individuals. Religion makes people animals
I agree. We as humans seek for coping with the very fact of our mortality.
“When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”
― G.K. Chesterton
Being in doubt of God is rational. That is why it is called a belief. How ever the individual describes "God" in his inner world, it is nothing to mess around with. Religion offers a super structure towards what human beings wrestle with. Belief is unfairly called "just a belief" but it is so much more than that. "Believers" are called "lazy of intellect" and I find that is more true for those who ridicule reflection, contemplation about the given rules, checking ones ego with other religious people as "mere belief", while it is indeed effort and a never ending process of dealing with ones own faults and errors.
@@ERH-ph5gb
Vivekananda: it is better for mankind to be atheist than believe upon the authority of anybody.
Voltaire: If God did not exist it would be necessary to create one
Who is Chesterton?
I wish you wouldn't use that zoom effect on your video. I understand this effect is used to keep people from getting bored of watching a static scene, but it's annoying.
Atheism doesn't claim to substitute for a system of belief. Atheism is disbelief, nothing more. As for truth, purpose, and other matters that may puzzle the average individual, that is another matter. The absence of religion in the lives of individuals in secular society ought not to be such a difficult problem, but for too many, it is. It requires deep introspective thought, and it seems that that is too much to expect of modern Western citizens.
Atheism is disbelief, which has the requirements of faith to hold such a view. It can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt, as with a theist faith position....just saying both positions are not water-tight and that is a good thing.
@@AWT8900 that's not how it works. You don't require faith to be rooted in the scientific principle. You don't prove that something is not, you only prove that something is.
So the thousands of fictional gods in mankind's lore simply do not exist until somebody proves otherwise.
@@AWT8900 It doesn't though. Atheism is a belief in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby. It is nothing. To an atheist, the term "atheism" shouldn't NEED to exist. It's the default state or the null hypothesis. The onus is on the person making the positive claim, e.g. God exists.
@AWT8900 As the others above said-- it requires no faith to lack belief. Just because someone mentions some type of god to me does not mean I have now acquired some type of faith when I'm not convinced.
Some people arrive to atheism through deep thinking, others just want to make their parents miserable or look cool and feel special or, in fact, get indoctrinated into it via communist regimes (that are a religion of their own), etc.
But some people argue, probably correctly, that if you remove organized theism from society (specifically, the mongrelized, tame versions of christianities from western countries), then other ideologies will take their place, such as feminism, communism, LGBTQIAXYZ+-! alphabet soup religion, immigrant dcksucking, and so on. And also, you will lose the community, mental health and other beneficial aspects of religion.
The New Academia had these answers millennia ago: self-improvement through living a virtuous life. You don't need gods for that.
No single ideology is ever the problem. It only becomes problematic, if your ideology becomes the single most important part of your personality. This counts for religion, climate change protests, gender/sexuality and everything else.
"No single ideology is ever the problem." I'm pretty sure Nazism and Communism qualify. Even "part time" adherents are far more destructive than, say a full time follower of Stoicism or some form of Classical Liberalism for example.
Which in most cases, it is.
Most ideologies require blind belief….all the theistic religions require a blind belief in a deity who has never been seen and promise things after death of which no one has come back to prove. Better to take as a leader one who tells you not to believe him or other teachers without first testing out what he suggests and only following it if it is beneficial and leads to greater levels of peace than one had previously. At worst blind beliefs are very dangerous.
Cause and effect are the modus operandi in the world, not the whims of an unseen deity who, if all powerful, all compassionate and omniscient, would need to be questioned as to why he created ill, poor, stupid people who have different views and fight about them causing themselves untold misery.
Very true , I see it as narcissistically motivated
He completely skirts that Nordic societies have been largely atheist for decades before any wokism manifested there. Wokism is the effluent of America on the Anglo world, not lack of religion per se.
atheism in nordic societies rose in the 60s 70s
at the very same time they did become quite woke. The whole woeness gay-trans-womens rights stuff originated there right at the same time as many of them sadly lost their connection to God
They're secular countries, not atheist. Woke culture was magnified, reinforced and exported en masse from the US.
The atheism of nordic societies is still a pretty recent thing.
@@alan.smitheeee no more than other western countries.
Yes, but the Nordic countries have always been progressive in nature, so wokeness thrives there better and would have been easier to adopt into society.
"If God exists, I want him to tell me himself. I don't want to hear it from anybody else - and in case you're wondering, that includes you."
- Pat Condell -
God exists and He loves you.
- me (a human) -
@@AlrightDave what didn't you understand?
@@tommyvictorbuch6960 oh I understood, but your quote sounds like an appeal to restricting freedom of speech. Maybe you didn't realise that?
@@tommyvictorbuch6960 btw, your freedom of speech comes from Christian ideals.
@@AlrightDave only a moron would understand it like that.
Take your god and shove him.
Listening to this piece, Konstantin makes me think you haven’t been following the atheist religious debate over the centuries. All of these questions have been answered.
He's too busy coo-ing in Jordan Peterson's lap atm 😂😂😂
You sound like an atheist zealot - lost in cynicism.
Your cynical spirit prevents you from hearing what this man has said
As a Catholic, I'd like to say this massive coordinated push for a return to organised religion across alternative media platforms is weird as hell.
"Massively coordinated push".
Do you mean the enforced indoctrination of young minds by any chance? That us how it has been done in the past.
Does it smack of desperation?
I have seen jo such push.... if anything the direct opposite...the internet is killing religion, and good riddance
As a follower of Christ we didn't fare to well the last time catholicism ruled the world so I'm not convinced it would be anything better. Foxes Book of martyrs is a great read, a good portion of the book is about what you guys did to us throughout history for following the teachings of Scripture.
@glowmaxTube18 Voltaire said something similar, 100 years later his house was a Bible printing shop
“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.” -- Seneca.
... speaking about Rome.
As true today as it was in Rome.
@@loreman7267no, speaking in general about the human condition. So many societies replicate Rome's other attitudes and modus operandii so why not this one?
Sorry, but you're deluding yourself if you think that quote can be confined to the Roman society alone. Seneca was a very wise man and saw through much of the lies people tell themselves, as any good philosopher should. I suggest you follow his example ;)
Almost invariably quoted by people who believe themselves to be wise. However believing oneself to be wise is not necessarily an indication of wisdom.
@@lazylaurablueaddress the argument, not ad hominem attacks.
The C of E is pretty woke. Being non religious is a perfectly rational position and should be respected.
The answer is to push for critical thinking. Critical thinking would cut through both the old religions and the new.
Sure. That's what I used to think, when I was maybe 20. But once you learn more about human cognition, you'll understand that training people in thinking would result in very moderate success. Maybe just a few percent of people who already weren't critical thinkers due to their own growth and efforts could be "converted" to critical thinkers.
Humans are not rational creatures. They view the world through very faulty biases, heuristics. The brain itself is not a logical organ. The brain can hold A and not A true at the same time without any issues.
Oh dear, you have learnt nothing from the last 25 years have you. Sad. Enjoy your life, matey.
Not everyone believes in critical thinking.
Criticism (including critical thinking) is a destructive force, not a creative one. It can destroy falsehoods but it cannot generate systems or provide meaning. And those things seem to be necessary to human flourishing.
Judging by the dissenters, I’d say the need for critical thinking is absolute. There is no sign of critical thinking in many of these dogma reinforced comments.
It is so odd when people talk about "Atheist belief"... what?, it's like talking about the content of a void.
Nothing is not truly empty. Its cutting edge science.
Yeah it’s illogical at its heart. Why actively deny the existence of something? It’s like devoting your life to debunking Bigfoot
@@johngoldsworthy7135why not? If atheists believe religion is holding us back, it seems natural to oppose it. When schools are teaching falsehoods based on religious doctrine, it needs to be stopped.
Being an Atheist is to take a faith position tbf.
@@joannemoore3976 considering most of the ones I encountered were formerly of zealous fundamentalist upbringings, it seems they didn't deprogram the zeal out of themselves.
Sorry but i can't get on board with this argument. People will always lack critical thinking skills, because it is part of our nature and we aren't taught it in schools. Without religion this oftentimes causes people to latch onto harmful ideologies or movements for a sense of meaning. However, the takaway from this isn't that religion is good, it's that we need to start promoting critical thinking and a skepticism of people who claim to have all the answers. Religion promotes the opposite of that. It's very easy to have a meaningful life without god, meaning comes from the connections we have with other people and knowing we are leaving something good behind, no matter how small, for the next generation.
Not everyone is capable of that, which is Konstantin's point here. You're naive to think that there's enough of the population that could "convert" to relying on pragmatic, calculated observations about the material world to guide them through life and provide them meaning. Roughly half of the population has an IQ below 100. Many people need some sort of "spiritual" guidance whether you like it or not. You'd do well to recognize this fact and bolster the religions most compatible with western civilization (Christianity) vs the ones that are not (Islam). I say this as an atheist myself.
@@OneEightNate There are plenty of spiritual philosophies people can follow that doesn't require believing in something without any evidence or critical thought. I think buddhism and humanism are great examples. Christianity however, promotes harmful messages like blind authoritarianism.
I agree with everything except for "it's very easy". It's easy for some people, but do not overestimate how dumb everyone is. maybe they need dogma? I used to think they didn't, I knew I didn't, but looking at the world now maybe christianity and judaism are just better than islam and we should just let people do it without criticism because it's better than the alternative
@@Stumashedpotatoes I'm not opposed to some kind of spiritual guidance such as buddhism or humanism. I know people oftentimes need it. But the message from these philosophies isn't do this or you'll go to hell, it's try this and we know it will bring you peace but don't take our word for it, try it yourself. Christianity is the better of two evils, but there are far better ways to incorporate meaning into peoples lives.
@@rebekkahill4664 I agree with you but for cultural and historical reasons Christianity is what we have. Plus I think it provides a lot more moral framework than Buddhism does
Stalin was an atheist but Hitler wasn't. I'm not saying he was a Christian but he constantly talked about divine providence guiding him.
He had a Narcissist Personality Disorder with delusion features.
They were also military men. Belief in religion had nothing to do with it
I'm pretty sure we can find historical accounts of many leaders invoking "their God" to rally the troops into battle and use the diety as a reason to stay in power.
His main obstacle in Germany was indeed Christianity
@DREAMGARDENmusicclips The arguments for that are very poor. For a start, the Nazis had no problems conscripting German Christians.
One can argue that Communist USSR was atheist, but Germany? "A census in May 1939, six years into the Nazi era[1] after the annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia[2] into Germany, indicates[3] that 54% of the population considered itself Protestant, 41% considered itself Catholic, 3.5% self-identified as Gottgläubig" You don't need atheists to think the "other" is a subhuman. And being religious surely doesn't stop you either.
in that census 1.5% identified as atheist.
Does TRUTH get a say in all of this?
Apparently not. We seem to be for the enforced indoctrination of innocent and unformed minds into a cult of human sacrifice. How wonderful.
Whose TRUTH?
@@JG-qt3pn THE truth. There is only one and it doesn't belong to anyone and it doesn't stop being true when people don't believe it.
Lmao. What a non-statement. You could listen to literally any podcast, video, or anything where anyone makes a point, and then comment “does TRUTH get a say in all of this?”
It contributes nothing to the conversation.
The Truth can only be God's. Otherwise, it's a point of view
Sam Harris is not against religion per se.... it is Dogma he opposes. The evil you prescribe to atheism was also due to dogmatic beliefs.... as is the new woke religion you despise. I do not describe myself as an atheist as it tells you nothing about me. We are all atheists in the thousands of Gods we reject. I am a humanist who believes in evidence and reasoned, rational debate my observation would preclude me to think that this is also your underlying philosophy.
What’s the difference between religion and dogma?
@@km0262dogma isn’t exclusive to religion....but religion and dogma are often 2 cheeks of the same arse.
"We are all atheists in the thousands of Gods we reject" is a non-sequitur. It's like saying I am a bachelor in all women except my wife, or I am a non-scientist in all sciences except the one in which I was trained. It's a statement without meaning, coined by Dawkins because he thought it clever, but revealing how quickly his thinking becomes poor when he wanders away from the limits of biology.
Humanism has no monopoly on "reasoned, rational debate", and it suffers from the shortcoming Kisin describes here : the elevation of Man to the supreme arbiter, with no constraints on his self-centered impulses.
Religion is nothing more than a canon of language. There is no truth in it except what remains from those who have tried to change it.
@@houstonsam6163 Stephen Roberts quote, not Dawkins.
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
Don't forget that the religion you get is not necessary the religion you wished for. What could be worse and more difficult to counter than evil backed up by globally accepted religious dogma?
So basically you’re saying “I wished to have a religion that’s more weak, hippieish, forgive everyone and more in line with western secular liberal values” right?
@@intello8953 No. I do not wish for any religion at all, unless it is possible to demonstrate that any one of the 4000 or so recognized religions is not a delusion, unlike the 3999 others that we presumably could agree are... right?
@@Hemebean but you literally are saying “the religion you get is not necessary the religion you wishes for” so I’m wondering from you guys that might wish a religion what does religion need to have to be true?
@@intello8953 For a religion to be true? It would simply have to have empirical evidence. Humans have a problem in this respect, throughout history we have invented thousands of gods, spirits, mythical creatures etc. and people have dedicated their lives to these imaginary entities. We simply can't rely on hearsay or ancient books. Ask yourself, if a god wishes to be acknowledged why does he not simply present himself ?
@@Hemebean well maybe it’s all made up but personally this whole creation wasn’t by “accident” and everything else is literally pure randomness that’s for sure. But like Konstantin said even without religion or belief in the supernatural we humans will still invent or identify with any ideology and sometimes those ideologies *most of the time are secular liberal in nature* don’t care about humanity or objective morality it’s just me me me me and everything being materialistic
Okay, now tell us what we DO. Do we abandon our commitment to truth? Lie to our children?
Tell your children that no science can define thought/consciousness or understand where its origin is or how it is ‘produced’. Everything is just best guesses. This does not mean that there is a god/creator but there *is* a huge mystery. It’s my belief that we must cultivate a science of mind if we want any hope of understanding consciousness, (quite a few quantum theorists are interested in this conundrum) this would most probably look quite a lot like Buddhism. I believe there is a hypothetical place in the future where the science/religion debate will cease to be at odds as the two sides converge. 😊
@@jaspergoodall3206 Well maybe I'll do that when the Christian doctrine is "There's a huge mystery" and not "We know the exact nature of the ultimate principle and creator of the universe"
@@jaspergoodall3206 dumbest thing ive read in weeks. we may define consciousness. you could say the same thing about any god of the gaps problem at any point in history.
@@jaspergoodall3206 I agree. Unfortunately, these are fields which most people know nothing about.
Why not? If atheism is true, the commitment to truth has no value in itself. By the way you have no commitment to truth only commitment to your beliefs about truth that is an even smaller deal.
From my experience, the wokest people are not atheist though... they're spiritists who believe in souls and reincarnation
Because it's a new, ill-thought-out religion
On the contrary, spiritists and new age beliefs are rehashed ancient paganism.
The problem is you can't quantify such a connection, I've never personally seen it. Also what you count as "woke" may not be what other people do.
@@sir_john_hammond Here's a way to quantify it - it is generally accepted, that one of the colours in the pride flag stands for magic
@@sempersuffragium9951 that's interesting
Konstantin, I know this is going to sound like a one-liner gotcha, but you really need to think about this deeply.
3:03 The very fact that you had "faith in atheism" is extremely telling of the fact that you never were an atheist.
Oh my god! Listen to yourself ffs.
@@dominionphilosophy3698 Oooh, someone loves KK !
The perpetual misrepresentation of atheism as some kind of system or faith is as crass and tiresome as it is disingenuous. My first thought when I saw the title of this clip was was that KK would be attempting to widen his appeal to the religious market.
Religion at the heart of so many conflicts
There have been approximately 18.000 gods and goddesses invented by humans across the millennia. They’ve all claimed to be the “only true one”. I understand that societies somehow feel lost without religion, but knowing everything we do today, how can I be expected to just randomly pick one over the other when they’re all nonsense to me. That’s like deciding to believe the earth is flat, just because society as a whole can’t cope with the fact it’s round. Sorry, going backwards is not the way forward.
again this invented numbers of gods.india alone had more than 20000,and if you count bushes and rivers from all religions gods are millions.And round is not the term you need to use,the biblical earth was round too,it just was a circle.choose better spherical,geoidal etc,you ,like russians,have the illusion that round is an antonym to flat.
I guess you could choose based upon the culture the particular god/s create.
@@schlauspieler1991 and thats just India, what about the Egyptians? the pre-Qin Chinese? the Mesoamerican peoples? or other oral-based cultures who never found a reason to write their shit down? and another retort against the original comment(as im somewhat backing you up, schlau) is that the original comment asserts the monotheist view of "the only true one" when most of the deities he tried to sum up in that 18000 number were from polytheist cultures(e.g. even if you adhered to say, Heracles, you still pay your respects to other deity shrines when you found yourself in another place, which was rare since until a hundred or two years ago, travel was terrible and only the very wealthy could risk traveling)
Just like there have been thousands of languages. They are all describing one single , shared reality. Those 18.000 gods , respond to the same basic principle humans find important and indispensable. All those Gods are in essence, the same God
@@schlauspieler1991
All indian Gods are aspects of The Brhama (universal consciousness) . Hindus believe the universe was born from consciousness, and they are not wrong. But yall never understand the hidden knowledge and philosophical in religion because to you is just dumb fairy tales.
Is not like fairy tales like the boy who cried wolf or beauty and the beast are one of the oldest stories ever registered to date . I guess this fact is irrelevant since those are just dumb fairy tales
Religions did it to themselves - New Atheism has had a tiny role in the decline of religion in the west.
That is true, it is the rump of the decline, the shit, the detritus, the faeces.
Hitler was NOT a atheist 😂
An atheist?
@@joesouthborn2960
What
@@dodumichalcevski was he or wasn't he?
Been an atheist most of my life and this video sums up exactly where I'm at.
Your argument seems to be would should believe in one religion lest a less benign religion steps in. As Galileo said "And yet it moves", the truth is the truth, I dont give a fuck what makes you comfortable.
Yes the truth is the truth but if one is far away from the truth, perhaps better to adhere to at least the good parts of a religion ie the morality which is there in most religions. When one has no faith or beliefs it is easy to think one can just do as one wishes and if anyone else is harmed, it’s of no importance and possible that a lack of morality could set in.
@@theinngu5560 The good parts of the morality of modern Christianity come from the enlightenment and were drilled into the religion by secular forces. Everytime the culture changed, Christianity's dogma changed with i. FIrst, there were slaves, then society rejected slaves, Christianity resisted and was dragged, kicking and screaming into the brave new world, only to then immediately take credit for the eradication of slavery.
Same with verything else. Remember the vitriol Pope francis got for his decree regarding the blessing of queer couples. In a hundred years, christian priests will claim that it was only through christian love and kindness that queer people were finally accepted into society.
If we need kindness, lets create it via the truth, not by adhering to a falsehood.
@@theinngu5560 you don't need religion to have morals.
@@theinngu5560 You don't get to the truth by believing more benign lies.
@@mundolioknows6447 I used to think this. I am not so sure anymore.
It seems increasingly the case that when you develop a moral structure, you develop a religion.
Beliefs are not always answers. I’m sorry atheism let you down by not providing easy answers. Some people can take it with humility, admit they don’t know, and start using scientific thinking to reveal the underlying truth. It takes time, but most importantly, it takes valor.
I think Kostantin would disagree with the idea that 'scientific thinking' is pervasive enough to reveal all truth ( shades of truth, yes)...but, in fact rather limiting.
What atheists managed that?
i'm yet to be convinced that any religious conviction can make a person immune to becoming a genocidal psycho.
That atheist comedy was great when I was younger but then you grow up and realise it was about as sophisticated as a poop joke.
3:05 - "it was around this point that I lost my faith in atheism". And there's the problem. Atheism neither requires nor encourages faith. If you needed faith to be an atheist you weren't an atheist, you just thought you were.
Agnostic means you aren’t sure one way or the other. Atheism is “absolute certainty “ that there is no God. You cannot prove that there is no God. Cannot prove there is either. But absolute unquestioning belief in something that cannot be proven one way or the other…..is, by definition, faith. Not religious faith, but faith nonetheless.
And that's exactly the reason why he says it like this is my guess. To make one think about faith and no faith. And perhaps that faith is a human trait best to not ignore.
@@helenespaulding7562 Wrong in both cases. Being agnostic is a statement about knowledge in that we don't know if a god exists which is true about everybody. Atheism is about belief and specifically not being convinced there is a god.
@@dropYourVideo Faith is any nonsense you make up to justify an irrational belief.
KK always said atheist til 5 mins ago, it's just good business to be seen to be trying Christianity right now. look at Russell brand suddenly being born again
The only reason we have religion is because we are the only animal that understands it's own mortality. I could be wrong, cos I do have my suspicions about dolphins...
The reason why we have religion is because humans like to specialise and outsource things they can't be bothered with.
It's only "natural" to also outsource your world view and ethical principles to an organisation. Pay them resources and trust them to provide solutions that benefit you.
It's also a bad idea.
That and it's a good way to control a large population.
Damn, we dolphins have been found out, SOUND THE ALARMS, LAUNCH THE MISSILES! THE HUMANS MUST NOT KNOW ABOUT US!
Perhaps even elephants too, they have been documented seemingly mourning the bones of their dead relatives.
Don't never confuse atheism, with culturel, or political idioligies.
And yet the two go together in 2024.
@@dominionphilosophy3698 ...and yet they don't at all.
Atheists such as Sam Harris are considered the enemy of the woke mob.
@@dominionphilosophy3698 Can you flesh out your assertion?
Atheism brings about dangerous ideologies. When there is no inherent moral system, we get to come up with whatever we want. A quick look at the atheistic regimes of the 20th century show the kind of awesome things we humans come up with when we take the reins ourselves. Go read Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the Gulag Archipelago. That's a good study on what happens when atheistic ideas take over. A nice, light read....🙄
You fail to notice that culture and politics are founded on ideologies.
Foundational to communism is atheism. Foundational to the 'free' western democracy is Judeo Christian ideology.
As a Believer in Christ, In God and in the Bible and what it teaches. I am not a follower of any religion, of any men or church professing some devine knowledge, and I have met many athiests that profess and follow the Golden Rule and, I have met many Christians who are hypocrites to the faith they believe in. Lesson from me... A Belief in, or a Rejection of a Religion in no way makes you Correct or a judge of others. I'll end on this simple biblical passage when Jesus teaches to Love God and then reveales this, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" ...it really is that simple! Peace. 🙏
There are many Atheists who don't believe in this trans stuff. It barely has anything to do with God. There could very well be some religious people out there that feel trans stuff is valid, but are just not public or loud with their opinion.
Also this point 6:35 about Atheists lacking meaning in life is an extremely immature viewpoint. I've been an Atheist for over 10 years having spent the prior 22 years of life in religion. I have developed far more meaning and fulfilment from a lack of belief than with a belief. But I know one measly anecdote isn't enough. So hear is something more concrete. The meaning of life in my opinion is **Love, Friendship, Money, Health and being as a good a person as possible**. That's it. I didn't need God or religions to tell me that. In fact they actively discriminate against each other, inter-discriminate and against non-believers.
There you go, a simple God-Less meaning of life.
Well said, I feel the exact way. Not a fan of a lot of what he is saying in this video, he is way off base.
Someone once said, "Religion and Communism would be perfect if people weren't involved"
I am also an atheist, and I cant say I am any happier for it. Of course I am well aware that people are inherently decent with a moral compass, we never needed a god to know how to feel love, empathy and how to build relationships. We have been doing that long before Christianity, because these traits are inherently within us and religion has barely informed it, if anything, these traits have informed religion, not the other way around. Meaningful lives and fulfillment is more complicated, as people with depression for instance will be lacking in these feelings regardless of religion. Religion is tribalism and gives people a sense of purpose or community when it involves praying together, attending funerals or other religious gatherings, charity work and social activities, especially for older people. I used to be smug about knowing better, and derided even my own parents for believing in a higher power. Then I saw my mother die, and my father lying in hospital two years later, with pulmonary fibrosis, struggling to breathe even with oxygen. He kept looking out the window, up at the sky, like he wanted to be free, or he wanted to know what life was like again. Or he was praying. I never felt so guilty in my life, and I never wished more to pray with him. I don't believe in anything, I have few friends and a job I barely tolerate, but have to just to exist. I suffer from depression, and life feels pretty pointless and I have never felt so insignificant. I am not a fan of dogma or oppression or manipulation through religion, but I swear, I will never mock or sneer at others for believing, because if it comforts them, then who am I to judge? I wanted my dad to see my mam in heaven, knowing that there was no such thing. Sometimes it felt easier just putting all my trust in and believing in the inexplicable. Without all of that we are just passing beings who will be gone in a very short time on a small planet in a vast space of nothing. Kind of feels pointless, really.
Atheism is a BELIEF position on ONE Issue,,,, that issue being, the claim that God or Gods exist.
A person could be a gnostic Atheist , and claim to KNOW that God/Gods don't exists. Or, a person could be an agnostic Atheist,
that has seen no convincing evidence that God/Gods exist. If you are not a Theist, you are an Atheist. There is a spectrum,
as Dawkins has explained. Disbelief of assertions, regarding the existence of supernatural beings, is the default position.
@@reasonablespeculation3893
That's all very well, but the Religious types have always, successfully, associated Atheism with lack of morality.
Now that they perceive that society is in even more moral decay, they are pushing that propaganda even harder, because, one, they are intellectually lazy, and two, it's a convenient marketing tool, "look what happens when you deny God !".
It's unfortunate that Kisin didn't go down that road, rather than, seemingly, fall for that old furphy.
Trying to counter it by establishing the true definition of Atheism is a waste of time, because they don't want to lose their convenient scapegoat.
Hitler wasn’t an atheist or a Christian. I’m not sure exactly what he was. He had weird views about “Providence” and other Nazi leaders were Pagan and had mystical beliefs. Weird for sure
He frequently talked about executing a divine plan. Whatever his precise beliefs were, he seemed to have no problem using religious vernacular to sway the masses. The fact that he knew that would work to achieve his aims, and that it indeed did, should be concerning for all religious people.
He was a neo-pagan, having 'had his third eye opened', when hanging out with a group that got its start with Madam Blavatsky, a fan of Aleister Crowley.
People always forget that Germany, according to their census, was 95% CHRISTIAN at the time of WW2.
Unlike the Roman times, it seems that not many were prepared to sacrifice anything for their beliefs, lol.
Well, “Gott mit uns” ('God is with us') was printed on the belt buckles of German soldiers in WWI, WWII, and in the early years of the Bundeswehr
Easier to paint atheists as somhow morally bankrupt if you equate them to hitler.. doesn't help to point out that he organised the protistant reich church..
New Atheism? Atheism isn''t a movement it's simply an unwillingness to accept the assertion of a God without evidence, I actually zoned out halfway through this Petersonesque diatribe, the idea that we'd be no better off with or without religion is nonsense, something that sounds intelligent does not make it so.
Sheep
Indeed
Absolutely correct ❤
Perhaps it should be called anti-religionism?
This evil man HATES RUssia
Hates christians and pretends to be pro british
YOU westerners are just plain stupid
It is SOOOO easy to fool you
he is a zelesnky, a soros and weinstein and epstein rolled into one
As if the Soviet Union was atheist. It was the most religious place on Earth. They had their big old man in the sky, (Marx), their Jesus, (Lenin), their sacred relics (Lenin's embalmed body), their sacred texts (works of Marx), their high priests (Stalin etc...), their disciples (comrades) their heaven (communist utopia on earth), their hell (capitalist society), their infindels (dissidents), their blasphemers (enemies of the people).
They just called them different names under Marxist Lenninism. The structure was entirely religious ideological belief. Polar opposite to the rational scientific method of the enlightenment. Much more in common with medieval religion.
... and yet, their rhetoric is even now indistinguishable from Hitchens.
That should tell you something.
what a bunch of bollocks
@@truth_hearts_1940 How eloquent.
@@loreman7267 It tells me you are lying.
@@truth_hearts_1940Why? Because you’re a commie who needs this ideology to be true?
Religion is as bad as most political parties, faith is something different.
The Mormon belief is that Satan's rebellion was that he proposed forcing everyone to be good and to deny them agency, and that because he would save everyone (by enslaving them) that he should be God.
From that view, religious people who attempt to force their beliefs on others are, to put it mildly, not followers of God.
Instead, we see the purpose of a church to encourage and uplift its members and to do the same for its community. One of the first invitations to follow Christ in the New Testament was to "come and see" and in a great church, there's reason to want to be there.
Faith is the most useless thing in the world. Believing something without reason.
@cp37373 All knowledge requires some level of faith. We have faith that experts know what they are talking about based on their credentials because research on every topic is impossible.
We trust our own perceptions despite knowing they are subject to being fooled. We have faith studies are conducted well (in most contexts), and measurement tools work as advertised.
To say all faith is completely useless is to deny that truth is acertainable and that it exists.
@@cp37373Faith means trust, not belief without reason.
@@cp37373I’m sure you have some amount of faith that your statement is accurate. Literally everyone has some kind of faith.
More content like this! Post leaving a religious cult that I was raised in, Ive became completely irreligious, but in spite of that, my conservative political views have remained near unmoved, surprisingly. It was observing the cult left, which during my lifetime is more dogmatic and cult-like than any Christian denomination that I’m aware of…on par with the Westboro Baptist Church and fundamental Mormonism.
Konstantin says that Hitler was an atheist & seems to imply that his actions were due to this, there is some debate about H's religious views & I'm not sure that it supports the argument that this is what informed his actions. The Wikipedia page shows the range of nuance & complexity around this subject: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler
Hitler claimed that he was doing God's work by eliminating the Jews
Who can say wether he was disingenuous or not
He was certainly raised catholic
He had very close ties to the Vatican
There is evidence that religion at least had some influence
Did he ever claim to be Atheist?
The body count argument had always been silly on both sides.
Evil cannot be defined by numbers, especially when the mass casualties of the early to mid 20th century are a result of the ability to commit mass casualties that other evil men didn't have. Are the Soviets really multiple times more evil than Isis? After all, give them thousands of nuclear bombs and we'd soon see who'd end up with the biggest body count.
Also, Hitler wasn't an atheist. He believed in divine providence and the Germany that he led to commit gross atrocities was overwhelmingly still religious.
yes,soviets were much more evil than isis ,but not for ideological reasons.they were just russia dressed in red,and they still are more evil.isis didn t bomb millions if civilians in aleppo or rape kids in mariupol or bomb kids in theatres.isis didnt commit genocide in half of europe and asia.you in the west don t even imagine how evil and stupud russia in any shape is and was,irrespective of its weaponry or century.more evil than mao,hitler and isus combined with ease.
Better the devil you know than the one you don't.
I prefer the old ministers of morality in their dresses and funny hats than the new ones in theirs.
tried not believing in any devils?
While I don't believe in "devils", I do believe in thematically appropriate idioms. Although I have somewhat less faith in them now...😆
The difference is that those old Ministers of Morality, just pretended that they didn't 'like' kids.
devils we know are better than your gods,your wokes,your offended,your leftists,your trumpists,your russians.sadly those devils don t exist,cause they d be helping civilization today as proclamed enemies by the evils mentioned above.
@@alistairmurray626 I see the concept of analogies seems lost on you.
British civilised ruthlessness… perfect description of Hitchens! 😂❤
The @triggernometry crew should interview William Lane Craig @ReasonableFaithOrg "The one Christian apologist that puts the fear of God into my fellow athiests" - Sam Harris
The guy is a complete nut job!
So true...this new woke-religion that filled the vacuum-void is actually worse
Its not a new religion... Come on, when the boomers got kids, they saw their kids with rock and roll, drugs, weed, sexual liberation - every generation has its counter reaction from previous generations.
So now we are dealing with a generation that is a niche culture on the internet. People grown up in their bubbles, only seeing people who agree because the algo's put these people together, and those who disagree are blocked, and those who are not zealous enough, never go viral or become influences/popular in those circles.
Woke is just an ice berg of the internet culture. And just like most internet cultures, it lasts for about 10 years and then dies out, or gets replaced.
only because they are ruled by women.imagine those old religions if they were made and used by women, the biblical god alone is a c*nt with pms.
Stop it, woke-ism, hasn't filled any vaccuum.
Woke is just the boogey man, used by the right to dismiss any argument they don't agree with.
Spoiler alert to the religious and the atheistic among us: The story doesn't have to be literally true to move us towards wanting to be better people or to think that the world might not be such a awful place all the time. When you read 'Charlotte's Web' to your eight-year-old daughter do you remind her nightly as you close the book after each chapter, that there aren't really talking/writing spiders and that pigs don't really have happy communities of loving friends in the barn? Or do you let her drift off to sleep thinking that at least in the mind and heart of E.B. White and his millions and millions of devoted readers love, kindness, self-sacrifice are real things and worthy aspirations. The literally thinkers ruin everything on both sides, whether they be the 'that's not literally true or you can prove that exists' or the people who think every word of the Christian Bible literally happened as written. We watch movies all the time that uplift us, make aim for great things and want to truly be better than we are, stories that aren't true, didn't really happen, completely made-up, but none the less beautiful, wondrous, delightful stories that someone found in their hearts and wrote down, and thereby made the world a little better to those who listened with their souls. All the great heroes and heroines and other doers of great things believed in their visions, in their feelings, in that great things were possible and either they came from human stories or some great being beyond understanding place those visions in their minds. Nothing exists in the world created by humans but someone believed it into existence.
Yeah, the problem with your argument here is people don't start wars over nice movies or cute children's books.
@@Etcher The problem with your argument is that you don't seem to recognize that people start wars regardless of the reason. People, men in particular, like wars. The fantasize about them, the play sports and video games to simulate them. THEY LIKE THEM. Does Call of Duty have a relgious holy war as an underlying theme? No, it doesn't need one. Just the opportunity to blow off the 'enemy's' head is enough. They don't actually need a genuine reason, never have, never will. Look at all the wars the U.S. has instigated, Ukraine the most recent, to pretend to spread and protect 'democracy'. Those that want war will find a way to push it, regardless of philosophy. Their reasoning doesn't even have to make logical sense even in the most basic level. Ukraine cancelled their elections, and yet the U.S. still supports them in the name of democracy. Notice the b.s. pattern in the rhetoric of war mongers? So-called 'morality' spreading doesn't need the velvet glove over the iron fist in the guise of religion. That's what Kisin just said, or were you too wrapped up in your biased emotions to listen? P.S. The U.S. Civil war was mainly fought over tariffs that funded most of the federal government at the time, you want the real reason for every war, follow the money. Hundreds of thousands of Union soldiers did not sacrifice their lives to free the slaves nor did the Confederates die to keep the black man in chains. That's ridiculous even on it's face.
Good points. It's hilarious to hear this "argument" over and over again that one cannot know something which cannot be proven. Of course not, why would one expect a proof of God anyways?
It is a term for something incomprehensible, and the personalisation of God is an intellectual attempt to distance oneself from oneself in order to be capable of having an earnest talk. It's an act of introspection and the ability of the human mind for abstraction. It's as metaphorical as it can get. To brag about God being taken as a literal person or to brag about having heard God's voice is just self insult. Of course nobody talks to God literaly. Even a child knows that. If one finds that the literally thinkers ruin it, one has to get in touch with them and ask them intelligent questions. I do that now frequently. And what I get as response is not at all immature. What we all need is to be better able to communicate and get on the level of the other person as best as one can. If I want to get my point across I need to know how to do that. To become an excellent debater needs high skills.
@@Etcher What does your response have to do with what the user said above? If you have a counter argument that metaphorical language cannot be understood, please argue it.
@@ERH-ph5gb I thought of a great example of an inspirational story (based on truth, using actual people as character models) - 'To Kill A Mockingbird'. A powerful and influential story based an actual legal case of false accusation in a nearby town during author Harper Lee's youth. The fictional character of Atticus Finch was based Lee's idealistic father. The story is not literally true, but metaphorically and morally true. It doesn't need to be literally true to be pertinent, the message is still important, powerful, and valid. And fiction is filled to the brim with stories of 'aliens' and other types of super natural beings with amazing powers that influence humanity for the better. 'Lord of The Rings' is inspiring young people to seek out the best in themselves even now. And virtually no one thinks Middle Earth is a real place. Metaphorically it is real enough to make people want to be better.
We are now a secular state said Nicola Sturgeon and today the mental health crisis in Scotland is off the scale.
My jouirney has being the reverse my family were very religious , my father a lay preacher my mother became a methodist reverend. I considr myself now to be a reluctant athiest, I would love to have the same faith that gave my father peace during his last weeks after a diagnosis of terminal cancer. It was a true vision of a beautiful thing. I personally belive the bible to be a beautiful guide to how we should be as humans , take out the dogma and be what the bible teaches us to be. I get that sounds a little odd at best but I don't believe we need gods to be bettter people just the will to be beteer
I think it is a mistake to think that all Christians are young earth creationists. The largest Christian church, Roman Catholism has never made a definitive statement on this and allows a wide range of views. I think the new athiests completely got it wrong but were successful as there was already developing in society a strong anti Christian attitude well before they atacked it. Also strangly Dawkins produced some shows very sympathetic to Bhuddism. He is not anti religion he is just anti God.
Indeed, creationist literalism of the Bishop Ussher variety was the lowest of hanging fruit, but the so-called four horsemen held it to be universal. It is self-evident that the bible contains various modes of address, of which fictional archetypes (parables) are central to its message.
In the UK i haven't heard of any 'young earth creationists' the largest denomination is the C of E, Catholics have made a definitive statement and way back in the 1950s saying evolution is compatible with the church.
The new atheist movement was not aimed at just creationism.
Nobody claims that all xtians are YAC. That is a complete misrepresentation and misunderstanding of atheists.
Dawkins said it many times, and I agree with him:
The problem is not a god or religion, but what is true and what is not.
@@txdmsk Dawkins is making a metaphysical claim, and presenting it as a utilitarian one.
I have to respectfully disagree with you here Konstantin. Criticizing religion for the atrocities committed in its name doesn't mean religion is the ONLY evil that invokes atrocities. But, many religions, especially Christianity and Islam, claim to possess a moral high ground (much like the woke and progressives do today) while leaving behind a trail of human suffering. If I recall from following the "Four Horsemen" back then, that hypocrisy was their primary critique. Further more, and correct me if I'm wrong, but is it your point that atheists like Dawkins and Hitchens are somehow responsible for what is happening with the woke because they had no substitute for religion? I think they had one, btw. Search for truth with honesty and curiosity along with a healthy appreciation of nature in all its aspects would form a solid basis for a new way forward. But in no way do I see the rise of a new bad idea a vindication of the old bad ideas. Christianity didn't give us the prosperous times you and I have lived through. The enlightenment did. And it did so by going AGAINST the doctrines and dogma's of Christianity. Anyway, other than that, still a fan of your work and thanks for being a voice of reason in these crazy times of which I'm certain have more to do with our failing education system than with the lack of religion. ;)
Also... I think there's still a big majority of believers in the US, despite woke going ape over there.
Exactly! The alternative is secular humanism... Not a different religion.
And that is where you fail. Enlightenment good, Christianity bad. Positivist bull.
"in absence of god, we can make up whatever rule we want"
As if believers aren't constantly making up rules to justify their actions and ideas
Yeah, and I find this "in absence of god", so his existence is a volontary belief then? 🙄
Yep. Just look at the thousands of denominations and factions which came about for exactly this reason... Every case is just another power grab...
Precisely what Christianity is. It's the bible a la carte.
I started arguing against atheism 5 years ago.
Ironically, it was after hearing Dawkins mention that the Church of England could be an inoculation against more pernicious nonsense.
After hearing him say that, everything became clear and I realise how terrible I was as an atheist.
The only mistake is that you made a religion and prophets out of these men which goes directly against the whole point.
Finally!! Someone nailed it.
@@langov3 I think you missed the point mate. He's saying Kisin put too much faith into the 4 horsemen, as if it was their job to provide a moral framework and a way of life after religion.
He's saying it wasn't their aim. Their works should not be treated like holy manuscripts and they shouldn't be revered as prophets - they were just 4 atheists.
I'm an agnostic Atheist, and until I see proof of a god of some kind, I will remain so. I don't follow any religion, god-based or secular (woke). I am aware that most humans need a religion, though. I can only hope the peaceful non-authoritarian religions win out.
You don’t need evidence, you have to have faith. If you don’t have faith then God bless you my brother.
As you do not know what is the way of the wind, Or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, So you do not know the works of God who makes everything.
Ecclesiastes 11:5
If you don’t have conscious awareness of the 8 billion thoughts on this planet then your defiantly not God.
Most people can’t keep up with Jesus on the sermon on the mount; majority of people are sinners and if you find it hard to follow exactly what Jesus said; then pray and he will help you…
Most men in 2024 commit sin by looking LUSTFULLY at women on social media; and you want to criticise God when he said don’t do it over 2000 years ago (if not more I don’t believe the timeless)
“Knock and He will enter”
Same
Most humans need a religion, but not you. omphaloskepsis while pretending to have something insightful to say is a much better path.
_“I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of God. I've seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves. And goodness - what God desires - is here [points to Balian's head] and here [points to Balian's heart], and by what you decide to do every day, you will be a good man...or not.”_ - *David Thewlis as the Knight Hospitaller in the movie, Kingdom of Heaven (2005)*
I grew up in Oklahoma - Bible Belt - in the 80's & 90's.
The war on drugs and warnings on dirty lyric albums were just POLITICS 🙄
We Oklahomans were so absurdly caricatured by the media I can see why so many people began to reject Christianity. We were made out to be backward, all the while being totally normal. I have lived all over the world and Oklahoma is no different from anywhere, minus the tornadoes.
Y'all fell for propaganda.
Literally everyone i knew went to church every Sunday, but still loved Van Halen. Our cheerleading squad did routines to Madonna. Everyone tailgated for football games, went fishing, went to dance clubs & lived normal lives.
Even if my own conclusions are different, I continue to be impressed by the intellectual journey of this apparently open minded young man.
Regression is not a journey to admire.
Grifting is not a journey one admires.
This is a very weak line of argument Constantine, and disappointing. You are either convinced that there is a personal god or not, if you are than you don’t need reasons for why it might be beneficial, if you aren’t then no benefit can change that and religion becomes a complete nonsense. Think deeper about this, you clearly haven’t yet.
Agreed. KK is letting himself down here
I am afraid that you are bound to carry on missing the point of nuanced discussion if you remain 'binary' in your thinking. To say "you are either convinced that there is a personal god or not" reads as astonishinly unaware of how human beings have always looked for the meaning of life, sought to translate such 'meaning' into 'rules', then doubted their own conclusions at an individual and societal level.
Exactly true. If he is not a believer, then he should get busy creating a system of rules and their justifications that people can get behind, that he can honestly believe in. The alternative is being an elite that can push a fake narrative to the public because they are not as smart as you, which will not only ruin your credibility, it will also fail.
Well said @@MrHammoreds
"Either believe there is a personal God or not" as if it was that simple, or we ever had the minds, to truly comprehend the universe around us.
@@revel3314 but it is that simple when it comes to the topic of this video and whether one defines oneself as atheist or blames certain societies for their atrocities based on the fact their leaders defined themselves as atheist. Clearly, this video is about whether 'atheism', the lack of belief in god/s is the cause of societal problems but this has nothing to do with the truth or falsehood of atheism. Why title a video 'The atheist delusion' and bring up atrocities of atheist societies unless you're suggesting there's something fundamentally incorrect about lack of belief in god? Whether atheist societies are in more danger of leading to authoritarianism is secondary to the truth of atheism and if that was true, something atheists are entirely capable of addressing, or attempting to address, along the way.
I just don't understand why people need guidance and community so much... But I see it too. People replacing religion with wokism or sometimes some sort of personal spiritualistic blend of astrology, mindfulness, buddhism, and their favourite football team.
I don't understand why people need this so much, but it's apparent that most people do.
What is it that sets us, Atheists with our own set of moral values, who don't need any nonsense to give our lives meaning, from other people? That's what I would like to find out. I think it might have something to do with the fact that people's mental health has been on a steep decline. You need mental strength and resilience to hold on to your beliefs, even when your peers disagree with you, and even when those beliefs weren't designed to give you comfort through bad times. But even if mental health improves, there will always be people who need some sort of religion.
But the danger of creating a new religion, updated with modern Western values, is that eventually, it will expire, like old religions. Humanity evolves, and values change. That's why science is better, as it's constantly updating itself with the latest evidence. Maybe we need a self updating sort of religion. It's a tough problem to solve...
Your argument that "in the absence of god, we get to make up any rules that we want" ignores that _in the presence of [a belief in] god,_ we _still_ get to make up any rules that we want.
Exactly.
It also ignores the fact that believers are constantly bending the rules to fit their personal convenience
@@randomusername3873 and religious people are often the most judgemental, and vindictive people you've ever met..
well said
He's missing the point isn't he. The "rules of god" are just as made up as any other, and no better.
The thing is, I just don't believe in God, I just don't. I'm an atheist but I totally agree and desire the values of the west, I see their merit compared to the other alternatives and I don't wish to live like that. I grew up on the ideals of courage, truth, helping your community because it's the right and good thing to do, not for a reward in the afterlife, but because it makes your life better and more enjoyable when people can depend on you and you on them.
I don't think I need to believe in God in order to be a good person, and yes, I think that life has no objective meaning and in the end it will all be for nothing, but until that end why not find my own meaning in life by being as good as I can be? sure, I could be bad but that's just not how I was raised.
I don't know, I think that people are more than capable of finding their meaning without the need for a God but if that's what helps them wake up in the morning and be kind, good and helpful to their fellow man then I'm all for it.
I do however want to be clear that I am against anything that is anti western values and I am willing to fight and kill for the west to survive, I hope you are prepared for that as well, because something tells me we will have to fight the others soon, those who claim to follow a religion of peace but in truth, they only want blood and total control.
Agreed, the luxury of being an Atheist without being persecuted, is something worth fighting for.
You know who Christ is? You can be a Christian by claiming you’re trying to be like him. Thats it. You dont have to “believe” that praying has a porpoise, or miracles are a thing.
Have you ever asked yourself “what is God” ? What if I told you that God is your consciousness? What if I told you God is the “thing” the is in between the object , the word and the meaning or the word describing the object ?
Better yet, what if I EXPLAIN YOU the real reason people believe in God?
I think this is what we need nowadays. A Class of the Philosophy of Religion . To explain what is God or what do we mean by God because nobody reads this books directly.
“I can be a Good person without religion” what is Good ? And why is this concept of Good, a correct adjective to describe your actions?
Good only makes sense in a Moral Framework, a moral framework that stems from the concept of Grater Good. Greater Good is a trascendental idea, like God. I do X because is Bad to do Y. You’re behaving in a way that takes others into consideration.
@kant.68 why be a Christian? Christ was Jewish.
@@amaterasu22able
I was raised in a Christian nation (Spain) . Is part of my cultural identity. Thats the only reason. Plus, Im not jewish . Christianity in the other hand, is universal
@kant.68 whatever floats your boat man I'm not judging your belief as long as you don't want to force it on me. Live happily and well.
Agreed. Nature abhors a vacuum.
Tell that to space.
@@andymeier7708Very smart response...we can all see that space = nature. Atheists and Dumbness are bedfellows.
@@andymeier7708 i will
I used to be a militant atheist in my youth (I studied Zoology at university - which has evolution baked in) and I was a third/fourth gen atheist in the uk in the 90s. What I didn’t appreciate back then is that some people genuinely need something larger than themselves to believe in, and that people who do not have this need - such as my self (and probably Dawkins) are very much the odds ones out and in a minority too small to base a civilisational world view on. So now I’m far more accepting of religion as a concept, but judge each religion based on the relative good vs harm it causes. Sadly we have replaced the benign CoE Christianity with harmful wokeism and the religion of ‘peace’.
There is no such thing as a "militant atheist". You either think there's a god or there isn't. Or you can't make up your mind and do something else instead.
@@fredneecher1746 Wrong. Militant atheists are those who oppose religion and are outspoken about it. Dawkins is a perfect example. Anti-theist would be another term for it. Speaking as someone who used to be one I know the difference between a militant anti-theist atheist and a live-and-let-live atheist which is what I mellowed into. I don’t believe in any deity but I don’t begrudge those that do (so long as their beliefs do not negatively affect others.)
Militant Atheism. Does that mean you attack the religious, deface churches. Please, atheism is just a lack of belief in god. Simples, no need to dramitise it.
As for the masses, being religious, this is just a function of the religious indoctrination of minors, before they develop the capacity to reason and think for themselves. Make religion illegal under 18, and it would slowly disappear.
Also, who has replaced this so called benign Christianity with wokeism or the religion of peace.
You really lost me, wokeism isn't a religion, and what's the opposite to the religion of peace, the religion of war...oh, you actually you mean Christianity.
You make an excellent point. Above all, "very few of them are able to justify a civilised world view" - a good insight. A person I love thinks the same way and can - if they're not careful - turn into arrogance towards the individual many. It is true that when you hit rock bottom and enter the void of atheism, you can find a serene state of being. This is an extreme way to become a fearless human being. The people of the West and the whole of modern civilisation are far too soft for this. This is the reality that a hardcore atheist does not like to face. A soft atheist (for lack of a better term) would put it the way you did.
Religion biggest benefit is its rituals. In Christianity you are constantly encouraged to do better. Atheism has no objective. Skeptism or epistemology does not come from atheism but it also has to be learned.
My BIL is an atheist and a conspiracist. I just realized a few years ago that he has no understanding of the scientifc definitions of hypothesis and theory althouhg he has a masters degree (where he must of learned all this). He really believes that the "laws" of gravity is a fact while the theory of biology is just a hypothesis. He lacks basic epistemology tools. He has no understanding of probability, statistics or fallacies. He loves to watch those mistery "documentation" shows where anything is possible and all information is on equal standing.
It was necessary to overcome religious dogma to give us true meanings in life such as "evolution by natural selection". Truth is always better than manipulation no matter how well intentioned it seems on the surface. Religious morality is about reward and punishment and instils fear and guilt into the hearts of children. I know because I was one of them. Atheism is truly about liberation, a natural human condition, to be totally free. Yes it's scary but that's the price of freedom. Whatever happened to the man who said the future was "to work.... to build..." This fills the void, not religious beliefs, waiting for some fake afterlife because it was written in a book a couple of thousand years ago!
Dawkins is right - the failure of humans to enjoy life without a ‘god’ to give them responsibility does not make Richard wrong. It’s people’s inability to act property in the recognition of a deity deficit - that’s the problem, not Dawkins.
the inability to perceive outcome is still failure
I agree. Why anyone needs god to enjoy life is beyond me.
I think it goes a wee bit deeper than just enjoyment of life.
At the end of the day it doesn’t matter if he’s right, it matters that we have millions of people that can’t behave without it. Unless you have some other ideas that don’t involve genocide, religion is a tool we have that can reign in the masses.
Pointing out that some people are still the problem doesn’t fix the problem
@@jacobackley502 it has a habit of getting out of hand though.
I have spent most of my life agnostic, but after witnessing the deterioration in our society, I am, for the first time, exploring Christian faith.
DONT DO IT !!!
If you do not believe a God exists, you are an Atheist.
You can pretend otherwise, but "Belief" is spontaneous. 2+2=5 What do you Think?? exploration won't change your belief
Aren't you more interested in what's true?
People like konstatin will tell you that letting in too many Muslims has caused this deterioration.. does that mean their god is better than the one you previously weren't sure existed? What is is about the deterioration of white Christian society makes you think that there's definitely a Christian god all of a sudden?
And thats fine. I grew up without religion, and briefly became fundamentalist as I got in touch with a christian group who believed the world was 6000 years old and would believe the bible over any scientific evidence. But I got out of it - knowing more about the flaws of christianity than most do.
The best way to get out of christianity is by just reading the bible from cover to cover. You ll find god grows and learns like every literary character - making mistakes and correcting them. And ultimately the fundamental flaw in humanity is that you are born with sins, and have to atone for it. Sins originally coming from Adam and Eve cast from the garden by.... god himself. You must accept he either willingly, knowingly cursed everyone at that very moment......
Or its just a stone age story. And it does not justify the rules you must live by, prescribed by that same book.
I'm a non-believer and I'm live and let live when it comes to all ideologies religion included, the only time I have a problem with any of them is when people try to push it on me.
The answer, as it always has been, is to arm yourself, keep your head down, avoid large gatherings, and take care of yourself and your family. All the rest is pure distraction. We will always be under threat of the tyranny of those who think they know what's best for you. That will never, and has never changed, no matter what you believe.
So the argument is that you need to side with the religious people because the alternative seems worse?
Well... fuck that!
Agreed
No you don't have to do anything, not all religions are equal we're living in strange times where the totalitarianism of Islam is not just being tolerated but supported by many atheists where the openness of Christianity (particularly in the UK) is being shunned.
@@hetrodoxlysonov-wh9oo Uh? Many atheists are supporting Islam? Can you name them?
No that wasn't the argument you missed it. The point is that those doing "bad stuff" don't always belong to any particular side as it changes over time. Think for yourself is the argument.
@@flain283That pretty much was the argument. And it was weak. For a guy who supposedly values free thinking as much as he, this was disappointing. This seems to have come from Douglas Murray too. Religion reigns for thousands of years of oppression and misery, society begins turning SLIGHTLY more atheistic inside a century - ahhhh see!! There's your evidence, atheism leads to the gulag and worse, wokeness.
Konstantin really missed the mark on this one
These arguments make no sense:
1 - Criticizing and mocking religion is bad because the government can't protect us from the outcome... this basically proves why it's needed.
2 - The evils of religion go far beyond body counts made by dictators, but even if you where to use those metrics only, killings done in the name of religion or gods would be insurmountable when compared to any other kind.
3 - The woke mind virus does indeed seem to fill a vaccum left in people now a days and it basically acts like a religion itself by all means (which shows how bad religious views can be). It's worse than christianity, but as rational human beings we should strive for truth and not the "least worst lie".
I know this is a long comment and I am sure few will read it, but I do think it is important to add to this conversation or I would not have taken the time to write it.
As a Roman Catholic, and a student of World Mythology and Religions, I was never drawn to the New Atheism movement, not because of my faith, but because of their level on analysis. It is one thing to win in an argument against a creationist (who see religious texts as a historical account rather than poetry, which is how it should be viewed) The New Atheists are correct in their assertion that there is no scientific evidence for the presence of God. And yet, even when science proves without a doubt that no creator awaits us, religion did not go away.
This was not because of ignorance, or mad faith, but because humans need stories. Stories, narrative is the one thing humanity has that no other life form on this planet possesses. We need stories to build our cultures on. They are the backbone of culture, and without them, when a society stops believing in the stories that their culture is founded upon, cultures quickly crumble.
If science was all we needed, all this faith business would have stopped by the Enlightenment. But it did not. It burst forth in Romanticism which gave birth to the decadence of the West, creating the circumstances for two World Wars, the like of which this earth has never seen.
We must not forget that Nietzsche’s assertion that God is dead was not a positive declaration, but a lament for what was to come without Him. Without these stories, without the catharsis they offer, we are not able to get our own psyches in order. We need stories, archetypes, to map the road for us. No wonder pop-culture has made so many leaps and bounds now that the young have no grounding narratives to gird them in their youth.
A blueprint for a reborn atheist is Camille Paglia, who sees world religions not as a stain on our resume, but as the greatest creation we have ever mustered. Or perhaps Northrop Frye, who saw narrative itself as the backbone of human thought. C.G. Jung, Mircea Eliade, even Neitzsche these thinkers knew the dangers of parting with story.
Without stories, societies fall. We westerners must be aware that there are people in this world who believe in their own stories, and historically, the Faithful tend to win over the faithless. Yes, religion is dangerous, but not because it is religion, but because it is lead by man. Man will use any institution as an excuse to kill his enemy. So we build stories, stories that reflect the world as we think it should be. Instead of weeping over the earth’s natural cruelty, we tell a story of a better world, and bring it into being with the very force of our minds.
And so here we stand in the West, our own stories so fractured, we cannot agree on any common thread of humanity between us. All around us, religious extremists buzz, like the vandals and the huns in the late Roman Empire, which also stopped believing in the stories which made them great and terrible.
The new atheist is right, God is dead, at least in the West, though His memory lives in the corners of a few hearts here. And now, there is no one to say “help us” to. We should morn the weakened state of faith not praise it. Man is evil, Nature is neutral at best. It is only society that keeps the raw bloody world at bay, and when we destroy our stories (whether you believe in them or not) when you stop telling them, you blow out the flame of the west all the faster. The East will soon follow us in this, as it has these past few centuries. And then, in a world devoid of all meaning, then we will truly see the horrors the world has on store for us.
Konstantin, please read ‘The Constitution of Knowledge’ by Jonathan Rauch, which is an argument for structured discourse set on a foundation of free speech. It leaves space for religious practices but stresses the importance of objective knowledge to keep society’s truth-seeking healthy
Sorry Konstantin can't talk right now, Jordan Peterson is using his husk as a proxy right now. Try in a month when he recovers.
is metaphysics objective knowledge? is primitive Aristotelian logic objective knowledge?
@@mentalitydesignvideo perhaps, though I don’t know. In regard to his goal, does it matter?
That was poor. The evidence of usefulness of a religion is shaky at best aside from religious people being somewhat happier overall (big daddy watches over and gives rules to follow). Calling Stalin and Mao regimes atheist is a straight out manipulation since both were cult-like which Konstantin clearly knows as a Russian. Besides, both Russia and China had long history of violence in their "religious" periods. Hitler was clearly an occultist as well as his elites which obviously does not qualify as atheism.
I agree to Konstantin on many points, but this is not one of those.
Plus, according to the German census around the time of WW2, 95% of Germans identified as Christians.
Also, despite the Marxists trying to stamp it out for a couple of decades, Russia was majority Orthodox Christian.
So, apart from a tiny minority at the top, it was Christians who perpetuated those two atrocities, which makes relating a strong, religiously motivated 'moral code' to a safer, loving or more peaceful world, total nonsense.
'there's no evidence', because there's been no research (there are some questions researchers don't want the answer to). It's only recently we found out human beings are religious by their nature, it's the default and not a social construct. iow, people are religious, because they're people. You can cut off that part of your humanity, and maybe it works out for you. Or, maybe it doesn't.
@@Jerry-vz4ix , "religious by nature " - what does that even mean?
@@danilabezmenov3489 it means there's no 'blank slate' theorist left.
@@Jerry-vz4ix , any proper evidence to look at that would support your claim that "recently we found out human beings are religious by their nature"?
There is a “comfort” in atheism in that you aren’t accountable for anything you do. That is a powerful drug!
That's one of the few topics where I don't agree with you
The "new atheists" make sure to always stress that they care about truth, it's not about how it makes us feel or behave, it's about truth and about how a society would function if it values truth
Today's failed western societies do not value truth (although not because of classical religions but because of new woke dogmas) but that only supports their point IMO
They, the four of them are the perfect example of how to have meaning and passion without religion
“Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it.” Hitchens. But he's dead. So you should reach out to Harris and discuss your views.
It would clearly be an evisceration.
A difficult claim to verify. But I'm fairly sure they both came from the same place.
@@orangcurl No. It's quite simple really.
Ask any dolphin, monkey, wale or lion etc.
They all form complex collective societies based on cooperation with zero need for religion.
@@geneharrogate6911 so are you saying both religion and decency don't come from humans ?. So if decency is a precursor to religion, could we say religion is a product of decency ?. Personally I suspect religion is a product of emotional, intellectual and symbolic thought due to the complex language we humans have. Interestingly even the most remote and isolated human tribes found today all contain religious ideas including common archetypes.
@@orangcurl Religion / superstition, two sides of the same coin. How else do you explain lightning, earthquakes or the plague when you have no knowledge of
meteorology, seismology or epidemiology?
It's no surprise solar deities occur almost universally in all mythologies since forever.
@@geneharrogate6911 thank you for your invitation to talk the animals. Unfortunately my understanding is that none of these creatures have the complexity of language to communicate on this subject. Though I do wonder if the dolphins might have symbolic archetypes manifesting in their subconscious ?
I used to be a devout christian - I've been confirmed and used to take communion - it wasn't science that turned me away (though it certainly mad it easier), it was CHRISTIANS. 99% of the "christians" I have met have been just as hateful, bigoted and all of the other human faults as non christians. I can count on one hand the few that uphold the true tenets of Christianity - EVEN WHEN IT IS HARD or requires some sacrifice on their part, humility, forgiveness etc etc. This is the biggest reason why Christianity as a faith has been waning, too many "christians" and not enough real ACTUAL Christians.
I’m guessing it was more they were pointing out your behavior being against Christianity and you replied “don’t judge” when they were just trying to help you. Sometimes being told you’re wrong can offend you before common sense kicks in.
And if people turned you against a faith, your faith was lacking to begin with, much like your BS anecdote is.
You've met 99% of "Christians"?
Let me guess, you also turned away because you couldn't be a real "Christian"?
"Christians.. it's not fair! I could be that happy if I believed a load of rubbish" -Mark from Peep Show
@@DroneDialogues You may have just proved his point. Are you Christian?
Friedrich Nietzche :- “Once you kill the ultimate authority what could the next step be but declaring yourself the ultimate authority?”
Anyone who thinks people require religion to kill each other is dangerously ignorant and just sounds like a bitter teenager.
Cmon Kisin.... the problem with not believing in god isn't that "we get to make up whatever rules we want". Why? Because we do in fact make up whatever rules we want, but atheism forces us to use reason in order justify those rules, whereas religion allows us to say "because god" and crush all debate (and all those who oppose us)
The problem with “reason” is that it requires more “IQ” than an average person, such as yourself or myself have. Most people can’t actually “reason”, only imitate, due to the lack of intelligence required to define the required information, gather it and produce reasonable conclusions. For most people “reasoning” is no different than “believing” for religious people.
@@7hello WTF.
Attempting to claim reasoning and belief, are one and the same, based on your low opinion of the masses IQ, is obviously incorrect. They are not at all synonyms.
Believing for religious peoples, is effectively dogmatic.
Reasoning for even the lowest IQ, requires reference to more than belief.
If you tell a religious person to hate gays, because God does, they will. That's belief.
If you tell a moron to hate gays, he/she will at the very least ask why or have his/her own reason to comply. That's reasoning