1. says

    I am a relatively new atheist (about a year, I guess) and am even newer at calling myself an atheist. I have been binge-listening to your show and have really been amazed at how terrible the arguments from theists have been. It’s been eye-opening. Anyway, I have started a blog recently to tell about my experience as a former Southern Baptist and how my deconversion began. I would appreciate any thoughts or criticism from anyone who wants to read it or just discuss. I hope it might be helpful to others who have struggled with fundamentalist beliefs.

  2. John David Balla says

    Matt’s bullshit detector was doing overtime today. The more I watch these episodes the easier it is to detect the tactics. One of the most common, which was on display today by almost all callers, was the use of subterfuge, what I’m now going to call the “Peterson Substrate” approach whereby speculation is speculated upon, then placed delicately into allegorical wrappers for immediate consumption. Translation: mental masturbation.

    Truth be told. I was once a big fan of Jung for his ability to make sense out of multi-layered abstractions. It’s very easy, at least it was for me, to fall in love with the artistry of the process, but as Matt succinctly pointed out, what’s really going on is multi-tiered speculation. BTW. Peterson telegraphs his message every time with “It’s complicated.” Sounds like a profile on a dating site!

  3. paxoll says

    I agree with John, seeing the show over and over you see the subterfuge that callers are engaged in. The trick is, and I think Matt does it well, is you can’t respond based on the implied fallacies you detect or anticipate. You have to respond to what they say, you can’t, as some hosts are wont to do, attack motivations or expected path the argument MIGHT take. Peterson’s word salad approach to preaching makes it really hard to simply argue against his words and not the obvious inferences his rabid fans take from his sermons. Probably why Matts discussion is one of the few times Peterson has seemed to utterly fail in spreading his gospel.

  4. Killian Jones says

    The idea is not subterfuge, it is to burn up time to close the show down. If one theist can time waste for half the show then the job is done. This technique has been repeated time and time again. First state that you have proof, then waffle on for as long as possible. Then when finally cornered, turn and ask a question, which the hosts will then try to answer. Result 50% of showtime burned up. I keep asking myself when the hosts will sit down and ask themselves what can be done to keep the show on topic and shut down time wasters. Why allow one or two people to dominate and destroy the show? Short answer is money. Now that the show is profitable just churn out crap every week. I pray (yes pray) that they get a clue. I’ve given up watching the show live, soon I’ll just not bother. This week same as the last. This week same as the last.

  5. Monocle Smile says

    @Killian (aka Scot Frost)
    Troll elsewhere, fuckface.
    Mods, please ban this asshole.

  6. jonathansisko says

    For the last caller, I think it was Mack or Matt. Check out street epistemology. It is a good way to have discussions. It might be useful to consider. Anthony Magnabosco has a YouTube channel with lots of conversations, he also teaches people how to use it.

  7. says

    @Killian as a former theist, I disagree profoundly. Listening to the “finest” arguments that the religious can muster being systematically dismantled was highly effective at helping me see the absence of substance at the heart of faith based belief.

  8. says

    one of my many randomly rotating email sigs:

    “no one is completely worthless. they can always be used as a bad example.”

  9. says

    I’d have a few questions for finger-clicking star man. For starters, why did they all go out at once? Remove the stars and the light is still going to reach us – the sun would then go out in 9 minutes, followed by Proxima Centauri in four years. The nature of this ‘miracle’ more sugggests that some unseen barrier has been placed between myself and the stars, which as this is occurring -presumably – at night, would not be especially difficult. A silent umbrella painted entirely black, combined with a group of willing stooges to reinforce the illusion, gets me to a possible answer long before I have to invoke godlike powers.

  10. Theisntist says

    The second caller said he posted proof of God on TAE’s Facebook page. I watched the start of the video and found this nugget: based on the frequency of supernova explosions and the number of them observed in our Galaxy, that the milky way is 6,500 years old, just like the bible says! The rest that I saw was mostly variations of the fine tuning argument.

    So as stupid as the caller sounded, I assure you that his source material is even stupider.

  11. John David Balla says

    Despite the trolling and time wasters — they still do provide benefit to the audience, especially those who are on-the-fence — TAE could benefit from a disciplined policy that apparently was in place some time ago, that the theist call is to: 1) state what they believe and, 2) why they believe it. I would recommend implementing this hypothesis for one show, that doing so would provide greater “on-topic” substance and would greatly reduce time-wasters. I see no downside to testing this hypothesis.

  12. anti religion says

    I have yet to hear a Christian say why he or she believes in a God and then give a specific example of how a God revealed himself to him or her either through a specific prayer of theirs that was answered or through a near death experience. I would prefer that die hard Christians never call the show again. I think the show is better for those who already have doubts about their religion and need a support group. Die hard Christians will never convince anyone that a God is real.

  13. Longtime Listener says

    Am I the only one getting commercials before the podcast??

    I’ve been listening for years, and just in the last couple months, I’ve been getting commercials before the beginning of the podcast. This week came with the same annoying “Beauty Brands” commercial three times in a row.

  14. paxoll says

    @anti religion
    Thats not the purpose of the show. The purpose of the show is to demonstrate to the audience the rationalizations people use for their belief, and why those rationalizations are wrong. The problem is that most religious people call in do not want the real reason for their belief to be demonstrated as irrational so instead they pick whatever lame argument they learned in church that they found convincing. A few callers will actually use their real reasons for their beliefs, and those are usually really interesting and good conversations.

  15. t90bb says

    Ive come to realize that most theist calls follow distinct patters and fall into categories… …one of these is the “time waster”////…

    They generally call with the claim they have “proof” of something. They will chat on things that barely relate. When asked to refocus and get to the point they will assure the hosts that “they are getting there”. This request to focus may happen four, sometimes even five times. Finally the host has enough and makes a final attempt to provide the proof…..and then the tap dance begins. Such is the life of most theists. Overpromise and Underdeliver!

    Theist…”I can provide proof that God exists!”
    Atheist..”okay, please do”
    Theist..”but first I want to tell you how much I enjoy the show”
    Atheist…”thanks!, proof?”
    Theist…”ok yes, by the way that first caller,,,,,,”
    Atheist…”now your proof?”
    Theist…”but that first caller……”
    Atheist….”It says here you have proof for God”
    Theist…”absolutely, I am getting to that”
    Atheist…”good, lets hear it”
    Theist…”ok…but what type of evidence would you consider?”
    Atheist…”well lets start with ANY evidence”
    Theist….”Good, because God cant be measured or detected by science”
    Atheist…”Well it says here you have proof. Do you??
    Atheist….”What is it?? We are 10 minutes in and we are all still waiting.”
    Theist…”well….its a cumulative case”
    Atheist…”well, we are kind of pressed for time so can you give us your best parts of your cumulative case”
    Theist..”thats kind of hard”
    Atheist…”well you called the show and said you had proof that God exists that you were willing to present”
    Theist…”I said I had proof”
    Atheist…”so you have nothing to present?”
    Theist…”well, umm….let me ask you this. Do you have proof God does not exist?”

    I think weve heard tons of variations of this, no?

  16. GumB. says

    Michael demonstrates how easily people can latch onto a tangent. He took a whole half an hour to build up to basically saying that the value we place on our particular collection of atoms somehow proves there’s something special inside of us (presumably, I assume, some sort of soul or magical specialness that proves some god made humans different with a little something extra in there beyond just a [sarcasm]collection of recycled dinosaur pee atoms.[/sarcasm])

    It doesn’t demonstrate what he thought at all. All it demonstrates is that we place an arbitrary and subjective higher value on our own collection of atoms over other collections of the same (or similar) atoms.

    I do that too when I see a really old tree that defied the odds and happened to live to a really old age, instead of falling off the cliff when the cliff collapsed like the trees over there, or got cut down for a road expansion like the trees over there, or sprouted in too dry a spot, or grew in too shady a spot, etc, etc. I look at that old tree and admire the fact that it’s lived for hundreds and hundreds of years and say, “hey, leave that old tree alone! Let it live some more, it’s cool!” I’ve personally assigned a higher value to it is all I’ve done there. I’ve just chosen to place a high value on the old tree, but the whole value I place on it’s atoms is really just my own subjective opinion based on my own subjective criteria that I made up in my head. It’s a choice I made.

    It’s similar to throwing back the big fish and only taking the smaller pan fries when fishing in a creek. The older fish is displaying the dominant genes in the creek, and some people don’t want to deplete the stream of the dominant genes, which weakens the gene pool of the fish in the stream. So, some place a high value on returning older (larger) fish to the stream. However, to a trophy fisherman, they might want the big fish. They’ve used a different set of subjective criteria to assign a different value to the large fish, leading to a completely different outcome.

    It’s arbitrary. The high value we place on human arrangements of atoms over a microphone’s arrangements of similar atoms, is just a reflection of the higher value we subjectively place on human arrangements of atoms over a microphone’s arrangements of similar atoms. Nothing more. It doesn’t demonstrate a soul, or specialness, or god. Michael just got stuck on a tangent.

    He also, at one point, did that thing where he implied “you can believe what you want, and I can believe what I want, and there’s no harm, right?” Except there is harm, because these groups like to legislate their goofy views onto other people’s behavior, and we can demonstrate them doing that through many different examples. I have no idea why people like Michael always compartmentalize that demonstrable fact when they make the “so what do you care what I want to believe” argument.

    Michael taking half an hour of droning on getting around to his atomic zinger, was ridiculous. The big build up supported nothing regarding his atom argument. He should’ve just made his “super special collection of atoms” assertion right away and just been done with it. For the love of godlessness, what the actual non hell? 🙁

  17. PAT PEZZI says

    That Michael caller sounded a Muslim apologist. I’ve heard others in the UK who had more or less the same argument. Only difference they didn’t pretend to be Christians.

  18. says

    The thing that has helped me, my wife and my kids about listening to the theist callers is that their arguments are always so empty and vacuous. If I had heard one theist caller give a compelling argument I might feel differently, but the cumulative effect is to remove all doubt that anyone can produce a rational reason to believe.

  19. Monocle Smile says

    Michael reminds me of the people who think they’re “too smart for school” as an excuse for poor performance. There’s been a number of these callers recently…people who have an inaccurate and superficial understanding of difficult subjects, but pretend to be the foremost expert.

    Tl;dr: do your fucking homework before calling in.

  20. Monocle Smile says

    I’ll try to work “trickfuck” into a sentence this week.
    Catholic woomeisters are extra annoying. Shroud of Turin, the skin piece with 23 chromosomes, the bodies of the saints, the crying statue…these people are some of the most gullible fucks on the planet.

  21. Björn Camitz says

    That last call is what makes this show imo. But with out the previous theist callers, as a viewer, that last call wouldn’t be as poignant. AXP, for the love of humanity. Please don’t change anything you do…

  22. Geoffrey says

    Hi, this is my first comment ^^ I really like the show but there is something that troubles me :

    I don’t understand why there is a need to appeal to morality, I have never heard a definition that could be understand or existing or usefull.
    Why not just explain and reason on things without talking about mortality but about deeper things to which morality is the product like empathi, planification, etc…

    With this you trade good and right by will, which is much more “human” and is more concrete.

  23. StonedRanger says

    Killian, the show has no control over what the caller is going to say until they actually start to say it. I understand your frustration, because Ive been tuned in to the show for around ten years and have watched most of the older shows, and the theists have nothing new. But the purpose of the show isn’t for the atheist viewers (for the most part) its for the theist viewers and those who are on the fence about their religion. There is no better argument, don’t you see that? If they hang up on every theist caller who does this, pretty soon they wont have a show because only atheists will call in. This is about showing theists that their arguments are not only bad, but they show that most theists haven’t spent one hour of their life thinking about what they believe and why they believe it. I find the show to be repetitive too, and i don’t watch it live either just so i can fast forward if i want to. But i still find the show enjoyable. If you think its boring and time wastey for you, how do you think the hosts must feel after having done this for a decade or more for some of them? I dunno, if you feel that each week you must come here and denigrate the show and its hosts who are doing this for free, then that’s your right i guess. But you are being just as boring and time wastey as those callers you bitch about each week, because your story never changes either. Be the change you want to see my friend. Otherwise its just another case of the pot calling the kettle black.

  24. t90bb says

    24. Bijorn,,

    I agree. I know I was overcome with shame, guilt and confusion when I started to allow myself to honestly question my beliefs as a Theist. Its a difficult process for most of us without the complications of external pressures. My heart goes out to him. Wish him the very best. I know for me…as difficult as it was…it was worth it. Today as a non believer I walk stronger and more free than I thought possible. What a relief to no longer have to make excuses and play mental gymnastics to make the “God thing” work..
    The way things work for me is I try my best to be the best version of me possible. I try to keep my motives grounded and help others as much as I can, all while trying to have fun in the process. If a reasonable God actually exists…how could he ask for more? If an unreasonable God exists (such as the Abrahamic)….fuck Him. LOL

  25. StonedRanger says

    Sam (first caller) Happiness comes from within. It will never come from an external source no matter what anyone tells you. You sound very young and you have a long life ahead of you. It is silly to live for a promise of something to come after you die that you have no way of knowing its true or not, when you should be living for the here and now. Live a long and happy life, you only get one.

  26. max says

    Sad to hear that Matt and Beth Presswood are getting a divorce 🙁 His FB post about the “worst day I can remember” scared me. However, I do think it was very cool of Matt to open himself up to Mac in Charlotte like that.

  27. Ray Smith says

    I don’t know why theists continue to call in when Matt is on. Matt has an extremely short fuse and no patience. He continues to be rude and condescending week after week. I agree that all of the theist callers today had pitiful arguments, but you don’t have to treat them like scum. If I talked the way Matt does to people I disagree with on my job, I would be fired. And it is clear to me that there is some sort of delay because all of the theist callers seemed to not hear Matt and kept on talking. Then Matt blows his top. I have learned very much from Matt, but I’m getting weary of his rude behavior. I sincerely hope he can learn to control his temper.

  28. Simon & Mrs Wendy Hosking says

    #4 Killian Jones

    One thing we all need to keep in mind is that as viewers we can’t see who is waiting on hold. If there are only 3 Theists (including the one you’re speaking to) then it makes sense to give them plenty of airtime. No one wants to hear Atheists on this show.
    Also I think it’s important to give Theists plenty of airtime just to show they’ve had ample opportunity to demonstrate their arguments. This show is so different to most call in shows where the caller gets about 15 seconds. If you can’t get your point across in this show then you’re taking way too long and you need to make it more succinct – or more likely you need to know what your point actually is.

    – Simon (the opinions expressed here may not be shared by Mrs Wendy)

  29. Chan Kobun, the Ghost Who Waddles says

    Killian: Go fuck yourself until you form a singularity.
    Ray: Your tone-policing is duly noted and cheerfully ignored. Matt is not an employee of this show. Tae fuck.
    Longtime: It’s not just you. But they have to pay for the podcast somehow.

    And can we please get a moratorium on Peterson acolytes, PLEASE? Listening to the secondhand word vomit of a disingenuous fascist cast-off from imageboard culture is infuriating.

  30. John Hensler says

    I just watched the call with Mac from Charlotte, and I hear the feeling of being an outsider, and not having a real support system for his atheism. I think this is a tough issue for all atheist, but particularly for black atheist.

    To that point, I have a friend who’s goal is to bring reason to his community through comedy and thoughtful discussion, and I would like to invite Mac to hit him up on Facebook, so he can have some sense of an atheist community within the black community. Being around people who think like us is one thing, but sometimes we need to be around people who look like and understand our perspective as well.

    I don’t want to just put my dudes name out there, but if there’s some way he could get in touch with me, and I could get him in touch with my friend.

    Love you guys!

  31. Manny Corpus says

    “Mods, please ban this asshole.”

    Surely you’re the one they would ban if they were inclined to do that sort of thing. Grow up and learn that some people have different opinions.

  32. Manny Corpus says

    “I don’t know why theists continue to call in when Matt is on.”

    Ignorance is not a virtue.

    “Matt has an extremely short fuse and no patience.”

    You have very poor perception and/or are completely lacking in intellectual honesty.

    “He continues to be rude and condescending week after week.”

    Not nearly as much as is warranted.

    “I agree that all of the theist callers today had pitiful arguments”

    So you’re not a *complete* fool.

    “but you don’t have to treat them like scum.”

    You do if you lack free will.

    “If I talked the way Matt does to people I disagree with on my job, I would be fired. ”

    And this is relevant how?

    I’m too lazy to fisk the rest of your inane comments.

  33. Simon & Mrs Wendy Hosking says

    #31 – SAWhowhatnow

    Matt announced it on his Facebook page. Assuming Matt wouldn’t mind me reposting this (he did mention it on the show and the post is public)
    June 27:

    “Beth Presswood and I would like to take a moment to clarify some recent posts you’ve seen from each of us.
    We are in the process of getting divorced.
    Important notes:
    1. We’re remaining friends and there’s no reason or expectation for others to ‘pick’ or ‘side with’ either of us.
    2. I will remain in Austin, while she will be moving to Houston over the next few months.
    3. Beyond this announcement, we don’t plan to address the specifics publicly.
    We appreciate the support of friends and family, especially over the next few months, and would ask that you respect boundaries and focus more on the positives – a step which we’re taking, as well.
    We both wish only the best for each other and it has become clear that what is best for us is to end this part of our lives and move on to the next one.
    Thank you.”

    – Simon (the opinions expressed here may not be shared by Mrs Wendy)

  34. DrC says

    Michael – this was a hopeless bunch of rubbish. His attempts to use physics is yet another example of someone who has read something, gained a little knowledge, read further rubbish and then regurgitated it without any understanding. His ref to the dual slit experiment was full of rubbish and his ideas about what it means was also rubbish – he has no serious understanding this this experiment! Hopeless.
    James – Awful and quite tedious comments from him. Talking about UFOs was a complete waste of time and whatever point he was trying to make was lost in his stupid attempts to make ridiculous links!!
    The fact that James thinks that he has evidence of the supernatural just shows how misguided he is.
    Michael – I think Michael was very sad because he is massively misguided and deluded. He slowly built up a construct to try to explain the existence of god, but did not understand that what he was saying had no relevance to the concept of a god. He referred a number of times to being a scientist and this may be true, but what kind of scientist? His reference to being a scientist fell apart somewhat as he shows his misunderstanding of the scientific method and this was also very sad. His comments about breaking objects and linking this to killing people was truly pathetic … and we are back to him being sad again … sad because he is deluded.

  35. DanDare2050 says

    I love this show and watch it religiously (set myself up for a quote mine there).
    I fast forward through chunks.
    But the show is the hosts, the callers and the theist audience. All else is extra. Its dynamic is one of attracting theists like flies to a lamp and letting them wreck themselves on a hard surface.
    And Matt isn’t rude, and he is not impatient in his behaviour. He is firm, clear and gauges time. He does cut things early sometimes but has worked on getting it about right.
    They tried the street epistemology approach a few times. I don’t think its effective in this medium because of the time constraints.

  36. Joe Credit says

    I’m sure that this is probably not the place for this, so I hope it gets to somebody who will answer my questions.
    I have been a non-believer for more than fifty years, since I was a student in a catholic high school.

    Since then, I get an uncomfortable feeling when I am at a public function and prayer breaks out. It’s not because I feel guilty because I don’t share their belief, but I sort of resent that they are making the occasion an opportunity to proselytize at worst or alienate people with my convictions.

    Usually, I just stare into space and say nothing. What do you do?

  37. Java says

    I’d love having a conversation with Mac. I’m in the Charlotte, NC area, and totally understand how it feels being the isolated atheist.

    As far as Killian Jones’ comment, I understand where that sentiment is coming from, but I think this is truly the best that theists can offer. They have weak arguments intended to demonstrate that “a God” exists, and far, far weaker arguments that further seek to demonstrate the veracity of their religion of choice. They never seem to realize that even if the first were granted, the second would not follow.

  38. Justin Bonaparte says

    Mac in Charlotte (last caller on the show), get in touch, would love to talk. I’m in CLT and your story is nearly identical to mine.

  39. Raz says

    Hi all
    A somewhat random, tangential, off-topic question comes to mind:
    How do I watch the show live? I generally wait till youtube notifies me of the new episode, but this typically happens loooooong after the show’s done and dusted. It never occurred to me until just now that I might be able to watch it live along with all those others who do. How might one go about doing such?



  40. Monocle Smile says

    Whenever I get notifications, it’s always when the show first starts airing, not when it finishes. You can watch it live just like you can watch any old recorded show. Just go to the YouTube page when they’re scheduled to start streaming and you can find that day’s episode.

  41. Oz 3 says

    A radio host had a show where the rule was you only get to ask one question. So, those not knowing that rule, or not hearing it would call in, they’d hear “Hi, Bob in Chicago, you’re on the air, what’s your question?”, they’d reply “Hi, how’s it going?”. He’d say “I’m fine, let’s got to Chris in Oakland….” He’d do the same with “Am I on the air?” Hilarious. I didn’t hear it this week, but I wish it was in place for callers who start with “We can all agree…”, or “Would you agree…..”.

  42. StonedRanger says

    Oz3 If that’s all that radio show had to offer i wouldn’t have listened. It isn’t funny, or hilarious, its just stupid. Any call in host who is that big a dick is not interested in having a conversation with his/her callers, they are just interested in being a jerk for ratings. Most any conservative radio talk show will give you the same. TAE is interested in having a conversation with its callers and im sure if they resorted to that sort of crap, the show wouldn’t have lasted more than 20 years. I feel sorry for people like you who aren’t interested in listening to what people have to say or who know what the purpose of the show is. I bet you love the you tube comment sections too, huh? The day that TAE takes on those tactics will be the day i stop watching it, but i don’t see that happening.

  43. Oz 3 says

    “If that’s all that radio show had to offer”
    It wasn’t.
    “i wouldn’t have listened”
    Nor would I.
    “It isn’t funny”
    Subjective criteria
    “I feel sorry for people like you who aren’t interested in listening to what people have to say or who know what the purpose of the show is.”
    You have no qualifications AT ALL to determine what I’m *like*, nor whether I’m interested in listening to what people have to say. And I don’t believe that you feel the least bit *sorry*.
    For someone who I believe is claiming to understand the purpose of this show, you’ve jumped to a lot of conclusions absent any evidence.

  44. Racquel D Rone says

    Omg!!! I started binge watching Darkmatter2525 when I was first deconverting!! I really understand Mac! I’m an African American atheist and I’m totally surrounded by programmed Christians. I also was pushed over the edge by reading the Bible. I realized it was nonsense. Then I started binge watching Hugo and Jake’s bible study. Finding the humor has really helped me to enjoy this transition. I couldn’t stomach having to fake it.

  45. sayamything says

    Jordan Peterson is an interesting fellow. Not in the sense that he says anything interesting, but in the sense that he has been promoted to me on multiple occasions as intelligent, articulate, and capable of thinking outside of the box. But every time I see him talk, he dashes “articulate” into the ground to the point I can’t tell if he’s intelligent or not, and him thinking outside the box seems less outside the box and more babbling incoherently about old folk wisdom and occasionally taking a shot at trans people or political correctness or something.

    But the most interesting thing is exactly what occurred on this show: that someone needed to speak for this incredibly intelligent and articulate mind. Talk Heathen even had a guy who started down the road of Peterson Apologetics (Apetersongetics? Too clunky), because those other JP fans were crazy and he knew what JP really meant. Ignoring the TH thing, the caller who talked with Matt about Peterson basically affirmed that he never even actually got to his point. I mean, to be fair to Peterson, the caller was both inferring what his point was and being charitable in assuming he even had one, but still.

    Why do so many great speakers need interpreters to communicate in their native tongue?

  46. Monocle Smile says

    A big part of me thinks that a chunk of Peterson fans like having a public figure who both hates identity politics (and appears to resent the minority segments like trans people) and isn’t a slobbering neanderthal. So they try to find ways to rehabilitate all the other garbage he spouts to make him appear authoritative.

  47. The Wild Monk says

    What are the mathematical equations or formulas for getting from atoms to thoughts, feelings, desires, and free will?

    And what are the mathematical equations or formulas proving thoughts can be reduced to atoms?

    Or as the Yi Jing says, to have the material, the immaterial (mind) must also coexist.

    Meditation is one way of showing the immaterial world exists.

  48. The Wild Monk says

    !:01.10 Dillihunty… “It’s called a brain and empathy.”

    LMAO. A brain is just atoms (protons, electrons, neutrons)
    LMAO. Empathy is a human construct. How would an atheist demonstrate a brain (atoms) can formulate empathy? They can’t. They can’t provide the formula, because things like thoughts, feelings, desire, and self-reflection are properties of something immaterial an lie outside the realm of science.
    Meditation will tell you the mind exists, and HAS to exist in order for the material to exist. Morality and empathy are tied to the IMMATERIAL. Science can’t demonstrate that because it only deals with the material.

  49. Nathan says

    The Wild Monk

    What is the equation or formulas to get from meditation to the immaterial world? Answer this or go away.

  50. Monocle Smile says

    @The Wild Troll
    Free will doesn’t really exist.
    Fuck the Yi Jing.
    Meditation isn’t magical.

  51. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    Or as the Yi Jing says, to have the material, the immaterial (mind) must also coexist.

    That seems patently false to me. A universe without humans, without life at all, would be material, and it would be without minds.

    Meditation is one way of showing the immaterial world exists.

    Depends on what you mean.

  52. Theisntist says

    Wild monk “How would an atheist demonstrate a brain (atoms) can formulate empathy? They can’t. ”

    Actually they can, it’s called mirror neurons. Look it up.

  53. sayamything says

    @Monocle Smile thing is, Peterson’s heavily into identity politics and has been pretty quick to play the persecution card, specifically against men. “Identity politics” is one of those terms where it’s only really called out when people who aren’t in the majority and/or in power do it. Peterson’s quick to play to the insecurities of a male base who feels they’ve lost something because women can say no, or because there’s actual backlash to being a dick to minority groups. Well, usually. Reportedly, Speaker Paul Ryuan just called out the alt-right as “white identity politics,” so it can happen. And from the weirdest places.

    Usually, though, it’s the equivalent of US Christians getting upset that Starbucks doesn’t have a Christmas cup, or that someone dare say “Happy Holidays.” They feel attacked the moment something not concordant with their identity shows up, and they will make a huge deal out of it. But if you mention you’re an atheist, or do anything to indicate it, you’ll probably get the same”identity politics” screed. At the very least, I usually get told that I’m making a big deal out of it. By the same people who angrily huff about the so-called “War on Christmas” that’s so done even Fox News has largely dropped it.

    Of course, this is mostly because “identity politics” is still just politics, and we use “politics” as a dirty word to smear the things we don’t care about. Being a Christian is never political, being an atheist is always political.

  54. says

    Empathy is a human construct. How would an atheist demonstrate a brain (atoms) can formulate empathy?

    I wonder, how do you define “empathy” in the absence of action? Could you point to an instance of empathy that doesn’t involve any brains?

    It sounds to me like you’re talking about some kind of platonic ideal, rather than the simple facts of how people treat each other.

    They can’t. They can’t provide the formula, because things like thoughts, feelings, desire, and self-reflection are properties of something immaterial an lie outside the realm of science.

    That’s a claim. You should back it up.
    You might also try to explain, if my feelings are not a result of the physical brain, why does alcohol enhance certain feelings?

    Meditation will tell you the mind exists, and HAS to exist in order for the material to exist.

    You needed to meditate to really that the mind exists? And why does the mind have to exist for the material to exist? If they’re separate, why couldn’t the material just exist on its own? Also, how exactly does meditation “tell” you this? What experience did you have and how does that lead to your conclusion?

  55. StonedRanger says

    Oz3 – All I can do is respond to what you say. You didn’t say what the rest of the show was about with the exception of the host cutting people off and how you found it hilarious. That isn’t funny in my book. Any talk show that only gives you one question isn’t interested in having a conversation. And one that gives you one opportunity to ask one and then doesn’t give you an honest opportunity to ask what you called about is just being an asshole. The fact that you would listen to that sort of show says a lot about you whether you realize it or not. Birds of a feather I guess. I may have no qualifications to judge you as a person, but going by what you said is all i had. If you presented yourself poorly, its not my fault.

  56. StonedRanger says

    Oz3 As to your comment about my not finding treating people shitty to be not funny, what does subjective criteria mean? Things are funny or they aren’t. If you find treating people badly to be funny then you have more problems than im qualified to help with, its true. But Im not here to pretend to be a qualified anything. Im just responding to what you’ve said. You’re the one who thinks being shitty to people is funny, not me. Perhaps you could explain just why you think treating people shitty is a good thing or why its funny. Since the show is about having a conversation, perhaps you would like to have one?

  57. Monocle Smile says

    I misspoke. When I said “hates identity politics” I really meant “Is a dick to intersectional folks under the guise of hating identity politics.”

  58. AgnosticThinker says

    Matt is losing his touch. The caller James got Matt to admit that a profound event that defies the laws of known science adds credibility to the existence of an intelligent agent(God). Then we see Matt claiming that even though it adds credibilty, such evidence doesn’t really exists in reality. So Matt challenged James to provide the evidence, and when James was going through a list of them, Matt immediately ended the call. This shows that Matt didn’t want his own audience to hear the evidence. For an agnostic like me, I believe Matt clearly got owned by that caller. We can see he got rattled and triggered by James. It was funny to watch.

  59. Apal Andonov says

    I have a question, and I don’t know where else to ask it, so:
    I noticed the debate with most heavy-authority theist figures revolve around “you cannot create something from nothing“, so we have an agent behind “intelligent design“; let’s call it god.
    So far so good, let’s say it is so – god exists.
    what about this god – this is not god that sent his son from a virgin to die as a criminal; this is not god that disapproves condoms, homosexuality, … or other sins, not imposing morals;
    if this God-Creator exist, my question is : So What ???
    that god doesn’t affect our lives in any way;
    does Universe affect our lives – Yes;
    does Nature affect our lives – Yes;
    does the indifferent creator affect our lives – No;
    so why should we pray; why should we believe in afterlife; why should we believe in hell;

    again my question is : if God-Creator exist, So What ???

  60. StonedRanger says

    Agnostic thinker It shows that Matt was tired of arguing about hypotheticals. The shroud of turin, our lady of Fatima, none of these things have been proved to be what they are supposed to be. The shroud of turin was declared a fake back in the 13th century. No one is fooled by it. Our lady of Fatima was about the sun going out. How come it wasn’t witnessed by anyone who was not in the crowd of one Mexican town? If the sun went out, don’t you think the whole world would notice? That’s why Matt hung up on the guy, his evidence of miracles is not evidence. If you think Matt got owned by this guy, you simply did not understand what was being said. I doubt very seriously anyone else saw this call in that manner.

  61. EnlightenmentLiberal says

    To Apal Andonov
    I have a roughly similar position. I don’t think I have anything to add.

  62. Monocle Smile says

    Not only did Matt not actually admit what you claim, but the caller was able to get out “Miracle of Fatima, Shroud of Turin” before being cut off, which should set off even the lousiest of bullshit detectors.

    Given the language in AgnosticThinker’s post and the dishonest accusations, I’m leaning towards “troll.”

    @Manny Corpus
    Killian Jones’ entire history on this blog consists solely of constant bitching about the show and the hosts. Also, it’s not a great look to wander in and defend a troll.

  63. wbhauck says

    The “tic tac” UFO video is simply an unexplained object. Eventually, we’ll figure it out. It might be aliens. Or it might be something more mundane. For instance, anyone remember the flying rod phenomenon?

    “Flying Rods” also called “Skyfish” were nothing more than moths filmed with standard shutter speeds.

  64. prrudman says

    The hypothetical clicking of fingers to make the stars vanish actually has a real world counter.

    Christopher Columbus knew that a lunar eclipse was going to happen and used that knowledge to scare local tribes people into helping him. Obviously it wasn’t god or any kind of magic but it appeared that way to people who didn’t know any better.

    It is a pretty perfect example of the finger clicker and why it doesn’t mean he is God. All it proves is something happened that needs to be investigated.

  65. Dawid Chemloul says

    I just watched the episode, the guy that talks about stars disappearing makes a fun point and maybe should learn a little bit about ancient Egypt. Where Faro made Sun disappear and reappear. Dos that prove to him that Horus is real? Too bad that hosts didn’t point that out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *