Consciousness = God? | Thomas - Georgia | Atheist Experience 23.15

[@bigkid3571]

While completely disagreeing with this caller I think he should be acknowledged for his willingness to concede his point and reconsider. So often that is not present and in it's absence stands a gulf that we are never able to cross. Having an open mind will eventually lead you to truth I hooe

[@GreenLulz]

Never before have I seen someone this unreasonable be so reasonable

[@JamesRichardWiley]

I enjoy the righteous batshit crazy callers the most. The utterly confused are disappointing.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

It may be the skeptic in me but I doubt that he really conceded and reformatted. I hope I'm wrong

[@Toocoolforunclesam]

Some people refuse to even evaluate themselves to the point where it makes them angry.

[@Kiros37100]

@@TheTruthKiwi That's not skepticism, that's cynicism.

[@johnmead9012]

Best caller I've seen on here so far. Bravo.

[@markdwolf3198]

What a perfect caller, polite, educated, willing to rethink his stance on things, too bad more theists aren't this way, but I guess if they were we wouldn't have this wonderful show.

[@JamesR1701]

I wouldn't say he was educated. He was obviously reading from a script and displayed a distinct lack of rational thought. That he conceded his point at the end is only evidence that he is willing to accept that he's wrong.

[@justsam7919]

Definitely not very educated lmao

[@ericscaillet2232]

@@justsam7919 thing is how would you know by this short interaction dealing with a specific topic, he could be a master mechanic besides we have not established what constitute and defines an educated person.

[@justsam7919]

@@ericscaillet2232 taken from what he was saying he didn't sound in the least bit educated in the topics discussed. He could be the best mechanic in the world for all we know, but he demonstrates poor understanding of what was discussed in this video.

[@GlossRabban]

"I think I am special, and without God I will not be special. Therefore god must be real"

[@badgerbush3556]

You make it sound stupid.... haxhabaha

[@r.scottmacleod4564]

The self declared chosen ones!...roflmao

[@GlossRabban]

@@badgerbush3556 Nahh, I make it sound as it is :D

[@badgerbush3556]

It is said that men may not be the dreams of the Gods, but rather that the Gods are the dreams of men. -Carl Sagan

[@ralfhaggstrom9862]

Because it IS ...............@@badgerbush3556

[@kikimo57]

Thomas has called in several times already. I love his non agressive approach but darn he's having a real hard time shaking of that religious brain washing. It will take a bit cognitive dissonance before he slowly sheds the bad religion.

[@chrisccc22]

@billy0 90 I was just going to type the same message. Matt also handles him well as a result and it's a perfect example of good discussion.

[@ralfhaggstrom9862]

Yep, there seems to be a Rainy Night in-side hes head, in Georgia ..................

[@montaguesummers]

That time the caller argued with Matt for 10 minutes and didn't get it, but then Don Baker talked for 30 seconds and the caller conceded the point. We're in the upside down now.

[@EhrenCG]

But what Don said made no sense... we don't know exactly when a specific atom will decay, therefore it can't be predetermined?

[@GreenLulz]

15:21 Don was incorrect on this point. Right now, the only thing we can say about determinism in regards to the quantum realm is that we know we don't know. The lack of data in regards to the causal rate of decay in atoms is not evidence against determinism. Even if we were able to restrict the functionality of our cosmos to the quantum realm in this way (we can't know this), we still wouldn't know if our existence was predetermined. The quantum realm is fundamentally mysterious and we must remain agnostic as to its ultimate implications until we have more evidence.

[@paulnielsen7612]

Hahaha

[@EhrenCG]

​@Samsung McKone Well, I was talking about the idea of focusing in on literally one atom and when it decays, not the collective trend of a huge group of decaying atoms.

[@jaymiddleton1782]

Samsung McKone the point is we don’t understand the mechanism behind nuclear decay. We know about half life, and every X years a radio active material will lose half its radioactive atoms. But we don’t know which ones, nor why. So if you were hypothetically label one atom in a radioactive compound with an X, and for the sake of argument let’s say the compound has a half life of one year, then each year you could check for X. It might be there the next year, it might not be. It might disappear in a year or ten, we don’t know why or how.

[@sanmigueltv]

Thomas is an awesome listener and I like the way he thinks. I learned a lot because of Thomas.

[@origins7298]

Nice guy! It would be cool if all believers were as receptive to feedback and willing to say yeah let me think about it. He seems like a philosophical guy who just enjoys thinking about things

[@DenyThisFlesh]

People like him are the ones that might actually get it at some point. Most believers aren't open-minded enough to even concede the way he did here.

[@sydneydinks]

"I don't agree with your first point" ..."OK, so moving on to my second point" :/

[@PTJ2008]

That was nice that Matt turned the call into a teaching moment. I tell my young ones that knowing how to think will get you further than most anything else.

[@colinross3755]

Nice one, teach them how to think not what to think 👍

[@xxXthekevXxx]

So sad to see Thomas lost all his reasoning faculties to his religion... “If you’re a black Christian you have a real short memory” - Chris Rock

[@gomezmaidelyn4658]

Kevin Benoit There’s a lot of black christians (observation)

[@lufhopespeacefully2037]

have u read quran kevo

[@ericscaillet2232]

@phosphorescent wave wouldn't that hold true for most sinners...😒

[@ringo666]

@@gomezmaidelyn4658 a lot of that comes from a deep reverence for slave ancestors. My 2nd wife is black, and she's talked about her freed slave ancestor "grandma Luveenie" in a way that's almost worshipful.

[@ringo666]

@@lufhopespeacefully2037 another waste of paper.

[@charleswoodruff9013]

I appreciate the caller's attempt at logic and Matt calmly addressing him. I love it when Matt verbally kicks ass and takes names, but this was refreshing.

[@FilK79]

Thomas is actually a very honest and sincere person. He is really debating without dishonesty and seems to be a person trully interested in finding the truth. In that sense he gets all my respect, and makes me think he is the kind of theists really necessary for this show, the ones that find real honest arguments and tries to confirm them without any tricks. I really apreciate this kind of callers and I find this discussions extremelly productive.

[@andrewlockett4569]

So what, he's still borderline delusional though. Whether he's polite and courteous doesn't in any way correct his preposterous current stance.

[@swolejeezy2603]

Also Thomas if you ever read this, please keep asking questions! It’s a sign that you’re on the right path that

[@GEORGIABOY23]

To Heaven

[@AP-yx9de]

I actually kind of liked this caller, he was respectful and was decently well spoken(actually made sense when he was talking). Some wacky apologetics, but at least he seemed to realize that by the end of the call.

[@Toocoolforunclesam]

Yeah he was nice logical kinda, reasonable.

[@lufhopespeacefully2037]

have u read quran

[@chrisccc22]

@Kevin HM8404 If you are an atheist Kevin, you are not on my team. They both deserve great credit for the exchange of ideas and conversation. So the kid has been brainwashed by religion. He needs understanding and compassion. Matt gave him both and the kid showed great respect. You are so wrong.

[@chrisccc22]

@Kevin HM8404 Sorry man I just don't look at these theist like they are crazy. I see them as people with an illness. It's not their fault. 8 out of 10 people with deep religious believes were indoctrinated. They need serious deprogramming. It's better to cheer them on instead of egging them on. Treat them like brothers.

[@whiskeybrown262]

Things I thought Theists Never said: "I'll concede that point" Please call back Thomas!

[@rekunta]

I like this caller. He’s obviously searching for answers and seems to be willing to listen and keep an open mind. He sounds a bit slow, but he’s no less a thinker in spite of that.

[@Tehz1359]

This was one of the best theists I've ever heard. Although he still committed a big argument from ignorance fallacy by jumping to the god conclusion, He still tried to give a half way decent argument. This guy sounds like he could be convinced that his religion might not be right. which is good because that means he is open minded and can think for himself.

[@TheDizzleHawke]

If I didn't know better, I would think this was Deepak Chopra calling in.

[@bowlsallbroken]

@THE PEOPLE SING Well, you see the quantum paradigm of the emotional color spectrum manifests joy when you open your heart chakra to a healing energy transformation 🤣

[@TheDizzleHawke]

bowlsallbroken Now it all makes sense!😂

[@marcioamaral7511]

@ConfusionFusion Best comeback ever written

[@JerryInGeorgia]

Chicken soup, anyone?

[@TheDizzleHawke]

Beware of woo speak.

[@AkoSiFrance]

Matt: "Do you have actual evidence for this? Caller: (2-3 seconds silence) Ahh....

[@EricLing64]

I sort of don't mean to be insulting, but I don't think these kinds of callers could make themselves sound dumber if they tried. "My nonsensical word salad is god because I don't know what im talking about. "

[@AC-gb7do]

One can lead a great life without the baggage of an imaginary friend and false hope that there is something after you die.

[@rationalmartian]

Yes, they sure could manage it with a little practice. Some apologetic training would have them sounding way dumber in short order, and disingenuous and dishonest too boot. Go and listen to some supposedly educated, learned theologians and apologists. It is incredible both that human beings can manage to convince themselves of such utter baseless nonsense and stultifying cack, and that other human beings can listen to that and be in some way convinced or cooled into accepting and going along with such plain bullshit. As EVERYONE of them very clearly sees and understands when they hear or read the cobblers of any competing religion. They will laugh, scoff and deride the obviously invented fantasy trash in the competing religious stories. Yet turn around genuinely indignant if some patently fantastic made up tosh from thier own stories are so much s doubted. Seriously. HOW, do educated, sober, adult individuals, with a shred of dignity and intellectual honesty look themself in the mirror and admit this to themselves? This is a question I'm often asking myself when I meet otherwise intelligent, decent, honest, forthright people of all colours creeds and walks of life. I AM convinced that there would be MUCH less of it, if it were not for the indoctrination of naive, gullible children, when they are at thier most vulnerable and receptive. Old men mainly, making up often frightening stories, to put the fear of an imaginary god into them whilst still virtually babies. What a disgraceful practice. How does someone do this and live with themselves?Or rather how WOULD any reasonable, decent person possibly manage to do this if it were not or religion? Just as it is with genital mutilation. How could any reasonable, educated modern adult possibly argue in it's favour, in the absence of appeals to tradition and religious belief.

[@paulnielsen7612]

Great talk. Loved hearing from both sides. Great points and respectable dialogue. Sounded like you guys left the caller with a few things to think about.

[@staticxtract3023]

Guy had some pretty good questions at the beginning.

[@davidewersphotography1013]

another god of the gaps argument

[@tedgrant2]

He doesn't know what "evidence" means. He thinks that his belief is all that's required.

[@Kaspen82]

This caller is the smartest caller I’ve heard on this show.

[@Kaspen82]

Which caller do you think is smarter?

[@Kaspen82]

Are you familiar with Annaka and Sam Harris?

[@Kaspen82]

You should read his work on consciousness and think real hard about this

[@Kaspen82]

gowd sake I never said it was. I said they’re taking a lot of this callers’ ideas seriously. This caller is the smartest because he uses interesting ideas tons of secular scientists take seriously. If you think other callers have more interesting ideas I’d like to hear them.

[@stevencorey7623]

@@Kaspen82 who are you arguing with? Lol all I see is the four comments of you arguing with someone

[@TheResoluteHawk]

7:53 It is my belief that this Big Bang is the result of the most recent intervention from God in our universe...…. Matt: So do you have any actual evidence for this belief? -5 second pause- Thomas: UHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...…..Let me tell you....a little more. Priceless. It's a simple question. Yes or no. Yet this person fails to produce the basics for a rational argument.

[@reasonablespeculation3893]

Thomas needed to start reading from his script again.. Matt's interruption made him lose his place.

[@HighStakesDanny]

One of the best callers ever. For that type of conversation. I do like the ones that get everyone up and going on about this or that in a bit of an uproar but this caller was great. He should call back and try again

[@NameBrandClique]

That was one of thr best calls I've ever heard

[@supreme84x]

5:40 or around that mark: the problem with that definition is that it would mean God was not conscious until after he created something beyond himself. So if there was only God before the universe, then God would not have consciousness before it was created.

[@serioushamster]

If anyone is wondering Newtons 3rd Law, "equal and opposite reaction" does not necessarily apply at the quantum level. So it is not a universal truth.

[@Dr.Goodlove]

Newton's 3rd law is a formulation of conservation of momentum, which is true for all physics (including quantum physics) as long as space is translationally invariant. To the best of our scientific research, space is translationally invariant, ie. physics is the same here as it is there.

[@heather48771]

"Even saying 'nothing' turns it into 'something'." This is exactly how I've been viewing this argument, but could never put words to it. Thank you.

[@ringo666]

I like that, too. Matt has discussed the something from nothing idea christians present as an argument for their god. He's said that something from nothing isn't testable (correct), and thus doesn't go to the logical negation in your understanding of it. Nothingness (a clearer term) has no properties at all, no height/weight/depth, no temperature, no space, not even for a single photon. And just thinking and talking about it as a concept DESTROYS it. Based on that, I'm willing to accept that something CANNOT come from nothing, even though it's untestable/unfalsifiable. But the universe we live in didn't come from nothing -- it came from the singularity that existed in the Planck time, which is impossible to trace before that. Being impossible to trace, we cannot call it "something", so (going by the philosopher David Hume), it's labeled "nothing".

[@Virtualblueart]

Not to be nasty, but this caller's intonation reminded me of the old Droopy cartoons.

[@JerryInGeorgia]

Droopy... Droopy... I'm trying to remember it. It almost rings a bell but... I'm not sure. It does remind me of Ricochet Rabbit's deputy, though.

[@countroshculla]

You know what? That makes me mad :D

[@5jerry1]

~ I was thinking the "shrimp" guy from Forrest Gump.

[@jesuschrist-alphaomega]

Ok that was a decent an respectful education that young man just received.

[@CorrectionUnknown]

and*

[@ericscaillet2232]

@@CorrectionUnknown ... and ? ,well and is dna backwards,anything else 😒

[@kevinanton2261]

"Oh, well, would you agree ... " continues reading whatever drivel he has in front of him.

[@HarryShagnasty-sc9zd]

At least he came prepared.

[@Lrr_Of_Omikron]

You can tell by his first question that he was reading off a script. Couldn't wait for Matt to get him off it.

[@HarryShagnasty-sc9zd]

Some people find it difficult talking in public so he came prepared to express his thoughts the best way possible. Nothing to criticize.

[@elmolewis9123]

This guy seems to be reading notes for a checker game but finds himself in the middle of a chess match.

[@Alwaysdoubt100]

Consciousness is a product of the brain function. Matt is right, it can come from matter if the matter is the brain, but it will not arise from a rock. It has not always existed before the existence of brains.

[@ConcealedCourier]

Bad apologetics; go get a refund.

[@ojasbhagavath5484]

Good one. Lol.

[@badgerbush3556]

Ha jokes on you, they never paid hahahahabAaAAAAAA

[@rowdeo8968]

I think Thomas the caller is a very well spoken polite guy.

[@ealisxganmor802]

"Thats a law of physics" ~guy~ "okay" *keeps talking*

[@MattPryze]

You missed the point he was trying (and failing) to make which was that if the universe is deterministic, then consciousness existing was determined at the "start". Consciousness was ALWAYS determined to exist. Etc etc

[@sarcipious3]

Even if that is the fact. We will never know if consciousness was planned or just the result of nature taken its course.

[@chuckm1961]

They almost always miss the point the caller is making. Matt yells, Matt corrects them for every trivial error in speaking, Matt yells some more, Matt hangs up.

[@ringo666]

Determinism is no more legitimate than solipsism as a worldview. It is in fact unfalsifiable, because it posits the idea of a "do-over" situation. We cannot "do over" existence. Determinism gets more play in discussion because it's explored by representatives of the science world as opposed to the lunatic fringe.

[@JerryInGeorgia]

Pretty good call, but this thing about consciousness always existing from the beginning and everything being totally predetermined, how all matter would come together, that's crazy. But it still was a good thing for the caller to suggest. He just kind of pressed it for too long). The caller was... was cool, and the call was dealt with well by Matt and Don. Winners all around except the caller didn't get to God.

[@howardchance9779]

Are you suggesting that Consciousness is eternal? Infinite? And therefore somehow connected to a deity?

[@Skyee_AK]

This is how theists should be but most of them are ignorant, stuckup , close minded people. I liked this thomas guy :D

[@Doppe1ganger]

Consciousness really isn't that difficult to comprehend, it's just a relative complex mechanic. The more something evolves, the more likely it is to complexify mechanics it has that give it an edge over other lifeforms. That's all there is to it. I mean, it is obvious that brains evolved, if consciousness always existed, why start off with a small brain that barely has any if at all.

[@wantwithout]

Yeah it baffles my mind that people dont realize how simple of an idea it is. We dont 100% know every aspect of it but it's pretty obvious its a complicated system of individual process that all come together in the brain to give us an awareness of what's around us and what we can do. Its shown easily when people have issues or conditions with their brain and part of their "consciousness" is removed or changed

[@Doppe1ganger]

@@wantwithout Exactly, or when you take drugs and the way you perceive things changes.

[@poikkiki]

The thing is that there is a proven correlation between brain activity and consciousness, but we don't understand how consciousness arises or how it works. Correlation doesn't imply causality and many modern neuroscientists would agree that we have barely scratched the surface of our understanding about consciousness.

[@Doppe1ganger]

@@msn769 Generally speaking yes? You doubt that a large brain is more likely to develop what we call conciousness? I don't know why blue whales have such large brains, maybe they need a lot of processing power for whatever they do. Or maybe it's brain is large but not very complex. Or maybe, a blue whale is a lot more conscious than we think.

[@Doppe1ganger]

@@msn769 How is it arbitrary, the larger the brain is the more neurons it can fire, the more complex processes it can make. It's no different than a computer, and i realise that old computers are big and bulky, but if everything is equal than the larger the computer is the faster it can go or more it can do. Conciousness just means that you are aware of what is going on around you, and that you can reflect on it, coupled with probably an awareness of self. It's not magical, but weird to think about nonetheless.

[@starfishsystems]

Let me guess before this plays out. Consciousness is mysterious, therefore god I could be wrong, but damn this shit tends to be predictable!

[@reparter1327]

Thomas sounds a little like Mike Tyson

[@ericscaillet2232]

You have a good ear,and it could be for all we know😉

[@PeaceArt1]

This is Gman's friend, Evangelist Ken.

[@fuscinula]

He said: "My God is all knowing" I heard: "My God is he annoying"

[@HegemonicMarxism]

I heard:"My god is all annoying".

[@howardchance9779]

Thats funny...

[@庫倫亞利克]

One minute into the call and I already know how the conversation will spiral down. And I'm proven right. Am I a prophet now?

[@donaldmartinez7428]

Hes called alot already.. as soon as I heard his voice I knew..

[@庫倫亞利克]

@@donaldmartinez7428 Surprising that you can tell. So many years of listening, and I can still only recognize a few especially braindead ones (Hamish, Ruben, etc.)

[@figureeight2167]

@@donaldmartinez7428 He has never called before, at least he says he has not in the blog of this episode. If you think he has called before, then let me know what episode of what show?

[@travisriordan9514]

I don’t recognize him as a repeat caller. You should be able to tell where most of these calls are going anyway.. love the show, not tired of it, but they are all (almost all) completely predictable. Nevertheless, yes, you are a prophet

[@jeffreybird6202]

If this guy spent money on a college education, he should try to get his money back.

[@jeffreybird6202]

@Nat Turner The Gat Burner you can try, but you will fail ,like every other Christian has.

[@jeffreybird6202]

@Nat Turner The Gat Burner I'm always baffled when I see a man of color standing up for the bible, considering the fact that slavery was the most horrific thing done to your ancestors, but yet it is condoned in that shitty little book called the bible.

[@ricardovonkrypton8908]

He could probably just play them this call.

[@tedgrant2]

There is an idea that "consciousness" comes from God. But nobody thinks that "forgetfulness" comes from God. But I seem to remember having both faculties.

[@Heathen.Deity.]

This is a blindingly obvious case of a caller who has read something that he doesn’t understand, just assumed it fits his argument and viewpoint perfectly, but then can’t argue it successfully when challenged. Learn it before you spew it Tom.

[@gratefulapostate3123]

The word "predetermined" is too slippery. When Matt says "predetermined", he means it could not have occurred differently, due to immutable natural forces. But when the caller hears the word "predetermined", he means determined in advance by a conscious agent.

[@LB-wv4qe]

I couldn't let myself waste much time with this caller. If I were talking to him on the street, within 10 minutes I would have told him excuse me but I have to get to somewhere else very soon. I feel sorry for his confusion.

[@jaymiddleton1782]

0:14 “Oh, hello.” Oddworld, anyone?

[@fuzzspanden]

"all o' ya!"

[@cwdor]

Hay Matt, your doing a great job for Jahovah, keep up the good work.

[@DeterministicOne]

Don said something like - there are events that are not predictable and therefore uncaused. One cannot demonstrate that an event did not have a cause.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

God is consciousness. A cockroach is conscious. Therefore a cockroach is God. I rest my case.

[@philipinchina]

I get the feeling that he has just learnt or is reading a series of phrases which he barely understands.

[@xxXthekevXxx]

“I don’t understand how it exists, therefore GOD HAD TO HAVE MADE IT” ❌❌❌ They get it wrong and use the god of the gaps fallacy every time.

[@derekjones8944]

As if you never thought like that before...lol

[@xxXthekevXxx]

derek jones the goal is to identify fallacies in your thinking and eliminate them. As Matt Dillahunty often states, I’d like to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible.

[@Chad-bx5ukTherearenocountries]

Thanks God for allowing me to regain consciousness multiple times from street war brawls.

[@nox3335]

It's a fun exercise to think what the universe looked like before there was a conscious agent to view it though.

[@scrogfpv7443]

I tend to lean towards consciousness being an illusion

[@PeterKristl]

If everything is deterministic, then everything wil happen exactly the same way if we rewind time. That means conscience is determistic too (if not things will happen differently) and ultimately it is just an illusion. We think we decide but there is a single universe scenario.

[@xasancle]

All conversations seem to be a debate between imagination & reality.

[@PigRipperLAW]

Technically Request: Could you please make your show OLED tv friendly? - just use more cut a-ways or close ups or sometimes remove the static parts of the screen

[@basildraws]

This was a great call. It’s nice to hear a respectful, intelligent conversation. @Don. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of the quantum realm and what statistics are. The position or spin or charge or field, or any characteristic of a quantum particle are NOT statistical. They are statistical only insofar as our ability to measure or observe them. Quantum particles/fields/etc. do have ACTUAL positions, fields, charges, etc., but we’re unable to determine or observe them without altering them. We use statistics/probability to be able to work with them effectively without interacting with them physically. The math, the statistics, are descriptive, not definitional, not prescriptive. That’s not to say there does not exist some mechanic that introduces some form of randomness. Quantum mechanics may be non-deterministic, but we likely can NOT ever have evidence of that. At best we can only observe that it is probabilistic, since we are stuck with using statistical methods to build our models of quantum behavior. That doesn’t mean that each and every particle/field/etc doesn’t have a real/fixed/determined position/spic/charge/etc.

[@hyweltthomas]

There's no such thing as time; it's just a human invention to make sense of stuff.

[@hplovehandle]

Or is it caused by the second law of thermodynamics. As everything moves from order to entropy, to chaos, is time the cause of this or is time caused by this?

[@hyweltthomas]

@@hplovehandle I don't believe time is related to the move to entropy; that's just stuff happening. (IMHO)

[@jasonbladzinski5336]

Im not sure that the Universe isnt clockwork. It might just be. If we could fully understand each mechanism and interaction, then we could probably know every outcome. The problem lies with the sheer amount of forces, factors, fluctuations, that we can not really predict or account for at any given moment.

[@huckthatdish]

We should stop telling kids that Newton’s law is every action has an equal and opposite reaction. While it’s easy to remember, action is a nebulous concept people like this guy seem to consistently misunderstand. An object experiencing a net force exerts a net force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. If you aren’t talking about forces, Newton’s third law has nothing to do with it

[@Multi1628]

~ Whether it is the typical word salad, or one of many scripts we keep hearing callers repeat, the only truth in these videos is still coming only from The Atheist Experience. Thank you, Matt and Don as always. Cheers, DAVEDJ ~

[@Fraterchaoraterchaos]

"every action requires an equal and opposite reaction" is not really talking about something like the universe, it's talking about things like a ball rolling and striking another ball. Yes, it applies in some ways to larger systems, but it would also require a closed, or possibly isolated system, not an open one. We do not know if the universe is an open system or not.

[@voxpotens9770]

No offense hosts, but I must agree with the caller: We ARE made of that stuff that came out of the Big Bang, I.e. Star remnant. Doesn't therefore us to god, but is true. Also, please let the callers make their point without so much interruption. Thomas was kind and and accepting and I actually wanted to hear what he had to say. He is the best...Christian...ever!! 😀

[@redmed10]

For some people the thought that their god exists gets them through their day. Non believers are able to accept we dont know a lot of things but can still live their lives.

[@tedgrant2]

Very small children do not realise that some objects in the environment are conscious. The theory of mind develops between the age of 1 and 2 for most people. There are people who never develop the theory. We regard this as a fault in the brain.

[@phataton8206]

Closest to a win by any caller I’ve seen.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

I say that consciousness is proof of Magical Universe creating Pixies.

[@Waltham1892]

As a Magical Universe Creating Pixie, I can tell you we've got nothing to do with it...

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

@@Waltham1892 That's exactly what I expect a Magical Universe creating Pixie say

[@lufhopespeacefully2037]

have u read quran ,all the best crazy

[@balsammcvinegar9996]

I remember my first beer.... If physics could prove "God", I'd be a believer.

[@lufhopespeacefully2037]

have u read quran beso

[@tedgrant2]

Doctors often prescribe oxygen to patients that have trouble breathing. Without this, they think the patient will lose consciousness or die. But they don't know the power of faith (Matthew 17:20)

[@togycdog]

This hurts to listen to. One of his most reused line in his spiel is Newton’s 3rd law of “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”. As a undergrad in physics we know this to be not true in regards to electrodynamics, while only really applying to macroscopic classical mechanics. A simple education tears down the “basis” of his argument, although it didn’t really need much of me to do that

[@carlsmyth7198]

I think there is a connection here, both consciousness and God's are both products of the mind.

[@KonradZielinski]

Conciousness is a process, It is not an object. Processes don't exist in and of themselves, they are things that happen. But are always underpinned by something physical.

[@kayomholt-montague7661]

AAArrgh!! My brain hurts when listening to the caller.

[@ericscaillet2232]

Yes he does have that gift somewhat 😒

[@chaithanyag9779]

The caller is clearly following a form of Hindu principles. Hindu culture is not about believing and its always about seeking and trying to figure things out primary through self observation. Ideas are debated over the thousands or years very similar to how this show is run. observe, define, debate , reassess, refine and repeat. GOD was only an abstract entity and not always a focus or important. It's about body and mind and how one can transcend to become a better self. It tries to observe and define theories that includes all living and non living things. Beauty of it is that it was most scientific approach that world had achieved thousands of years ago. This culture sees every spec in this universe as connected and deserving equal respect and consideration. It welcomes ideas and always encourages to question. I am glad that I was born into this culture that allowed my mind to stay open and flourish.

[@patrick_on_here9914]

Conscienceness

[@VestigialHead]

I wonder if any of these callers actually think they will be able to prove what they claim? Have they not listened to the thousands of people who have come before and completely failed to even slightly prove anything supernatural, mystical or evangelical. Not once have the callers provided any proof. Why does each caller think they have the answer when they are proposing the same garbage?

[@SaffronGold]

We don’t remember before we were born just like we don’t remember when we were toddlers or babies. You may have a memory but no one remembers everything of there younger years. Maybe déjà vu is something we remember subtly of a previous life experience. What do you think of the loop theory? Could that be the same way?

[@docwobbles]

I remember many things from when I was "a todder". BAM.

[@5jerry1]

~ ~ Their, not there.

[@ericscaillet2232]

@@docwobbles hiiihaaawd...ditto

[@sarcipious3]

You don't remember before you were born because you didn't exist. Just like when you die.

[@w.c.orielly9059]

How can we possibly know if rocks are or arent concious? They may not be able to communicate with us but they may communicate with each other... We dont "know" this... We can assume it with a hi degree of certainty but we cannot know it for sure until we are able to know what a rock is thinking... Or even IF a rock is thinking

[@Tenly2009]

“There’s no such thing as what happened before Time” - @Matt - I wish you guys would stop saying that.... in this same conversation you acknowledge that our universe is just the “local representation” of the universe and that there could be some sort of multiverse. In exactly the same sense, our “Time” is just our local representation of time. There could definitely be a “Cosmic Time” that we are currently unaware of, so we can absolutely, positively, definitely discuss (conceptually) events that happened *BEFORE* the Big Bang although we wouldn’t be able to put any kind of number on it or conceive of “how long” the time span actually was in cosmic terms. In fact, on a Cosmic time scale, it’s possible our universes entire existence (that we measure as nearly 14 billion years) has only taken up a single “hour” on the cosmic clock (which obviously wouldn’t be measured in “hours” but I hope you get my point). You’re obviously a pretty smart guy. I don’t understand how you don’t “get” that... you seem to be saying that our Time is the only Time that is possible - but in the same breath, you admit that our Universe may *not* be the only one that exists. Also - Tracy’s take on “Nothing” is also wrong. She shuts down any conversation in which a caller wants to discuss “nothing” because - she states that it’s not possible for “nothing” to exist. But it is possible in the same way what it’s possible for “0 bananas” to exist or for “infinity”. “Absolutely nothing” may not be an “actual” thing, but it is definitely a useful concept as is 0 and infinity. The crazy thing is that if she gave the callers 10 more seconds, they would give her something she could dispute/shut down logically - without seeming overly dismissive. These are really the only 2 complaints I have with the show - and if my reasons (as outlined above) are invalid - then you guys should explain how and why you are right and I am wrong in a future episode - because I guarantee that I’m not the only viewer that thinks you’re misunderstanding these two things.

[@viasevenvai]

It’s easy to tell if your house is haunted, it’s not!

[@SaffronGold]

I say this in a positive light. Don’t take it the wrong way. I believe your channel exhibits a subconscious desire for proof because you want to believe and looking yourself. With that said I enjoy your channel though I believe myself.

[@phant0mwolf421]

That's the whole point of his show. Provide proof, or get schooled. To this day, we have yet to have any real demonstrable proof.

[@SaffronGold]

AntiFaith if science is the end all be all in proving the existence, think of it like dark matter which is theorized to exist due to scientific understanding but no proof of it, then take the Big Bang...what was before it, then take the simple saying everything starts from something. Nothing just is there. If someone can fully reject the thought of creator, they might as well reject antimatter. Science is currently limited I would think in our basic understanding. Those limitations may in fact hinder humanity from exploring different roads in science they say do not or cannot exist. I don’t know. Nobody does but everything is possible in this universe we cannot even understand 1% of.

[@magnatcleo2043]

It's not subconscious at all. They ask the callers for evidence directly.

[@charlestownsend9280]

Matter doesn't have sentience. So? A wire in a computer can't register information, does that mean that a computer can't register information?

[@nuffflavor]

Finally, a caller with organized logic. I will give him props just for that. My gosh, he even listens and comprehends questions b4 answering... he has to be an Atheist ! 😅😁

[@darrenwallace6161]

Desperately trying to stick to the script

[@JohnSmith-ms4xd]

16:40 i dont think "consciousness always existed" implies "there has to be some consciousness that always existed" - i understand that that's not what matt said, but im wondering whether he meant that because of how he follows it up. what it would imply is "at every point in time (including all the ones before those in our universe, if any), some consciousness existed", but it would tell us nothing about how many consciousnesses there were before or how long each of those existed; it would be consistent with that conclusion for example if at any such point in time one such consciousness existed, but every second the current one vanishes and a new one pops into existence, or if there's always a couple trillion of them and every second the oldest of them vanishes (ties being broken randomly) and a new one pops into existence, or whatever other schedule of arbitrarily many consciousnesses with finite lifetimes you can come up with

[@FourDeuce01]

Theists can't prove any gods exist so they try to define them into existence. Still failing after all these years.

[@nancygaldamez6596]

K sooooooooooo I really like Thomas’s connections haha...

[@yourroyalhighness7662]

The caller’s voice reminded me of the way Michael Jackson sounded or of how Mike Tyson sounds when he talks.

[@geraldammons5520]

Caller is misusing Newton's laws of motion.

[@larryfulkerson4505]

there is no reason consciousness can't exist in silicon chips. the substrate has nothing to do with the process.