Guest Makes Me Lobotomize Myself

Buy my book here! store.bookbaby...
Support me on Patreon / planetpeterson
Join Discord: / discord
Check out my podcast rss.com/podcas... or open.spotify.c...
Support me on Venmo: account.venmo....
Be sure to follow me on social media!
Instagram: / planetpeterson
TikTok: @planet_peterson

[@DorianSwain]

“they do it in back to the future” is the FUNNIEST argument i’ve ever heard

[@jettythesunfish]

The Argument from Doc Brown 😆

[@andreasplosky8516]

This is what theism does to a human mind. It liquifies it.

[@slugersoda3325]

It's so funny how he says god takes less assumptions. then makes like 5 assumptions to make God work.

[@freddan6fly]

And he didn't even mention 1) The evidence for the supernatural 2) His disprove of all other religions 3) A mind without a brain 4) Outside of spacetime makes sense. 5) All other denominations are false and his denomination is true.

[@k0lpA]

It takes less deviation from what they already believe is more like it.

[@madara211000]

"Science is not a method." Alright i laughed

[@louseveryann2181]

His "argument": With magic anything is possible.

[@jesot]

Occam's Razor, bro

[@abeminslow4085]

That's what I got from what he's saying (trying to) say

[@futurenightmares7976]

Yay! I made it into a Peterson video!

[@GunnerHeatFire]

nice

[@nj1978]

At least you have a brain that works

[@chrispysaid]

When you interrupt someone with your response before they finish their statement, that tells them you don't give a solitary damn about what they have to say. It's highly disrespectful. Don't know if you were aware of that but it is. The guest was making bad arguments, but at least let people make the argument before you cut them down.

[@DorianSwain]

congratulations, you made it to a video saying multiple times “i’m stupid and genuinely don’t even understand what you are saying or trying to explain to me, and therefore you are wrong and i’m right” which is pathetic

[@Farce13]

​@@chrispysaidthere's nothing wrong with cutting off a flawed argument at the head. The opposite end of what you say ends with getting lost in the weeds of following a flawed argument to an equally flawed conclusion. Just save time

[@TeddyLinux]

"Yeah, we have literally never observed this thing in our physical universe" "OH YEAH WELL MY GOD ACTUALLY DID THAT AND YOU DON'T KNOW HIM AND HE GOES TO ANOTHER SCHOOL" Goofy ahh

[@cwack12]

I’ve never heard so much special pleading in my life

[@Wavyy_One]

"if we did not have the human consciousness to compartmentalize time, it would all happen at the same time and never have happend in the first place" Well, that's an interesting thought I suppose

[@bllla]

Nothing can go over my head. Surely I would catch it

[@rugby05rugby]

Exactly and stop calling me Shirley.

[@lovesjersey]

This guy, in one way or another, claimed logic was a part of his argument like 12 or 15 times, and then it turns out he didn't know what the laws of logic are.

[@mojomusica]

He sounds absolutely stunned when he discovers just how uninformed and uneducated he is in the logical process. He seemed to imagine if he just said "Logically to me" then that was enough, without any further thought or examination of his statement. If he want to use logic as debating platform, it might help him to learn classical logic and it's application, as at the moment he hasn't got a clue.

[@gottfriedosterbach3907]

The strangest version of Schrodingers cat I have ever heard.

[@ghurcbghurcb]

Great, so god created the universe via bootstrap paradox. He made the universe based on the universe that he made based on the universe that he made based on the universe that he made based on the universe that he made...

[@GAm3r52]

The god of the paradox 😂

[@CeezGeez]

“i have a theory guys… gawddd!”

[@Lex_Taliones]

Indeed just wanna say 6 minutes in that the guest seems really nice and calm. I’ll update it once I’m done. Yep, all in all, he just wanted to understand and even though he couldn’t grasp it, he was willing. And I will say understanding what he was trying to say is important. And even helping him put it into words.

[@k0lpA]

Immortal married bachelor here, can confirm I don't exist, but I also I exist at the same time.

[@nicholasbanton]

My dude should be arrested for the prolonged torture and aggravated murder of logic!

[@AurorasAura4417]

this guy sounds like he's trying to argue the way a jojo's villain stand works

[@joliFR]

The title of this video is an absolute masterpiece 😭

[@freddan6fly]

Potato microphone with potato arguments. Somehow fitting.

[@ericzh9984]

"... by loons who don't understand science at all" and then in the same breath he continued to champion creationism

[@TeddyMpho]

I'm literally talking over every part of this 😂. Wow.

[@CoreyJohnsonMusician]

If god uses the future to determine the past because he exists in all times, then him doing the thing in the past effects the future, and the idea that he made a decision by taking the future into account means that god isn’t timeless, because he had to think about the future before making a decision about the past. Therefore, the past hasn’t happened yet. And if the past didn’t happen yet, the future didn’t either. Which means god doesn’t exist in either past nor future. Or any other point in time. And if god doesn’t exist during any point in time, that means he doesn’t exist. Because he would exist for 0 seconds. Aka nonexisting.

[@Big-Papa-Smurf]

"They do it in Back to The Future" 😂😂😂😂

[@Eromatics]

To your guest, if you stopped time, you would then be timeless, but you wouldn't be both yesterday and tomorrow, just RIGHT NOW forever. So timeless doesn't mean all times at once. If time stops, nothing can change or be changed

[@PunkApostate]

Very good conversation! I'm fascinated that people can't tell even after skeptics slow walk them through the logical issues with their god assumptions that they are literally just making up characteristics of a magical Being to answer unanswered questions.. MAGIC: the ultimate problem solver! 😃 great job!

[@dark_fire_ice]

Whether the Universe was created, its eternal, it's a simulation, or whatever way its existence might be described, it does not preclude any value upon decision making. How does knowing how the Universe is, help one decide what to eat for the next meal?

[@99benjohns99]

Eternal: having no beginning and no end. I don't think eternal means what he thinks it means. It doesn't mean existing at every moment in time.

[@harveybernstein9203]

So, God bootstrapped the universe into existence. Bootstrapping is the worst time travel senecio ever! And, as Eric and his guest showed, it is logically in consistent.

[@anlacombe]

Here's an impression of Mr. Burns you might find a bit... cheeky. "I'm Mr Burns blah blah blah. Do this, do that. Blah blah blah. I think I’m so big. Blah blah blah…"

[@KoRntech]

10:40 so he acknowledgea there are other gods?

[@PhilJRose]

A bachelor is someone who is a bout to be married. This person isn't up to this.

[@Algrimor]

When the theist got to the point where his back is against the wall and his argument fell apart, he was forced to throw out the law of non contradiction and say something illogical like "something can be eternal and not eternal at the same time". This is a perfect example of where an illogical argument will get you, to the point of needing to completely disregard and throw out the very laws of logic themselves, which is hilariously ironic given how illogical the theists are from the onset.

[@Detson404]

I like this guy, he made some interesting points.

[@Lespaulthrash]

God is Eren with the founding and attack titan time fucky powers.

[@displacegamer1379]

19:22 Peterson you're better than this. That's not even close to analogous. The correct analogy was if Steve Jobs before he created the iPod went into the future, seeing how he created it, then came back to the past with the knowledge of how he created it and then created it. That would be analogous. He's still the creator in both the future and the past.

[@wade4846]

Peterson is undefeated with the titles and thumbnails

[@TwoForFlinchin1]

34:18 did he forget he's a Christian? God literally is special

[@Koz6336]

That was definitely a conversation

[@k0lpA]

It doesn't make sense to exist at different times at the same time.. "at the same time" means in the same moment

[@odinson6348]

The scientific METHOD is not a... method? I don't think this dude even knows what he believes. Something being illogical just doesn't compute for him. He would go blue in the face defending the existence of a square circle. And this all got so off track as well. This caller's entire point was DECLARING that God is such and such, without any valid reason to actually think such a being does in fact exist.

[@Detson404]

I was thinking of the Terminator movies when he invoked the bootstrap paradox. Like the plasma guns used in the Future War: in some continuities, nobody seems to have invented them, their plans were transmitted back in time by Skynet to itself, and it was able to send them because it had originally learned about them from itself.

[@jozincarnate]

​ @realBreakfasttacos It's spreading brother hehe 21:14

[@FrikInCasualMode]

Occam's Razor doesn't say: "If you can't explain something, don't invent supernatural answer to plug the holes in your knowledge." - but it definitely should.

[@SGTSHOOTnMISS]

Praise be eternal Mountain Dew!

[@Farce13]

This is a classic example of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

[@displacegamer1379]

17:26 I don't even know why this is a hard question for the Christian. Under the paradigm of the Christian God, this God has access to all knowledge. How universes look is knowledge. The concept of universes is knowledge. The function of universes is knowledge. Every aspect of the universe is knowable. This means that even if God was the only being in existence, if this being had access to all knowledge, then it would be able to use this knowledge to formulate a universe. This shouldn't be hard for a Christian to explain.

[@WriteTrax]

Why would a magical being need logic? This debate was useless. 😂

[@doranku]

39:05 what when your logic is flawed? Then it is not true. Wrong, the conclusion can be true, for example by coincidence.

[@cygnustsp]

Marginals of Eras don't exist

[@Farce13]

That doesn't make it logical though. Coincidence means nothing in this context

[@doranku]

@@Farce13 it means that a conclusion can be true without valid and/or sound logic. It works for any conclusion that is true but doesn't follow from any illogical premises. P1 John is married P2 John is a bachelor C 2 is an even number

[@Farce13]

@@doranku I'm well aware, but that's exactly why they're typically disregarded

[@doranku]

@@Farce13 Watch back to the part in question: 38:40 feet tall from statements that aren't true and logic to the 38:45 rescue okay so what makes logic like can you explain to me the difference between 38:52 logic and the truth what's the fundamental difference logic is how we get to truth 38:59 oh okay okay um logic is how we get to truth 39:04 so what if your logic is flawed then it's not true oh okay okay The part in question is the truth not the path. An irrational or illogical conclusion that is true will be true regardless. The logic is false, but you can be correct for the wrong reasons.

[@mustachemac5229]

To be fair, we don't actually know if the laws of physics break down in a black hole. We probably will never know.

[@freddan6fly]

To be fair we know. Watch a Dr Becky, Anton Petrov or PBS Space Time video.

[@celiand2618]

To be fair we know they break at some point, it's on the other side of said point we have no clue.

[@freddan6fly]

@@celiand2618 There are two (perhaps 3) singularities. Matt O'Dowd made a video about this less than a year ago on PBS.

[@Farce13]

​@@freddan6flyI love Anton Petrov

[@mustachemac5229]

​@@freddan6flyNo. We don't. I am subscribed to Anton as well as other channels like his. We have some hypotheses that would suggest such a thing but we don't actually know. Perhaps you should go watch them.

[@commentary2378]

31:40 at this point, he's just piled assumption on top of assumption of things that can't be disproven in order to pile yet another assumption, to come to the conclusion that something, in this case God (his specific version of God) could exist, so that he could assume that God does exist. Surprisingly, it's very easy to just make stuff up and call it a day. Who knew?

[@commentary2378]

Also, he's not even saying what he's intending to say. At least I don't think he is. Based on what it seems he's arguing for, I'm guessing that what he means to say is that you'd be in multiple points in time at once, in different states at once, but at different times, but experiencing them both at the same time, in the way you would be if time didn't apply to you the way it wouldn't if your experience stretched over all time but was experienced concurrently. Lots and lots of assumptions there on his part, if that's what he's arguing for. Lots and lots of assumptions if he means to say what he's saying exactly the way he's saying it, too.

[@TheTruthx58]

"Retcon ability" OMG I figured out why I hate these guys! They are smug comic book nerds!

[@displacegamer1379]

29:50 can't use the word simultaneously. That's temporal.

[@TeddyMpho]

This was so hard to sit through. 😢😂

[@MarrsJ]

I'm so tired of people misunderstanding quantum particles and using that as an argument for god. Quantum particles are not *outside of time*, they quite literally interact with it and exist within the relative universe. Not only that but they don't exist in multiple places or states at the same time, they exist in a limbo where they COULD be in one state OR another, the second anything interacts with that particle, it's state and position are then determined, it didn't exist in two places at once, it's existence was simply unknown. To exist in two places at once you have to interact with two things at once, they don't do this. For example, a q-bit is a quantum bit, it doesn't exist as BOTH 1 AND 0, it exists as being potentially 1 OR 0 Also a timeless being doesn't mean they aren't bound by time, it means they don't exist within it and can't interact with time in the way we do, meaning god can't be in 2 places in time at once because he can't be in a place in time at all

[@abeminslow4085]

What an interesting fellow.

[@bradleygee3773]

What platform does Planet go live on?

[@ottomaddoxx5360]

At one point he's arguing that a timeless deity can see all of time at once. I've heard apologists try to compare it to someone in the third dimension seeing all of a thing that exists in 2 dimensions. One issue is that it creates a predetermined universe. If he's timeless, he's also not changing the outcome of events in time. I guess it's neat of god to make a world in which I do exactly all the things he determined I would do at creation. Thanks?

[@k0lpA]

That wouldn't be too bad if he didn't then punish you for not doing what he wanted while knowing exactly what you would do

[@gryph01]

So, this guy is a pantheist then? A creationist argument adds several questions to a claim.... 1. Did this creator alway exist? 2. Where does this creator exist? 3. Who created the creator? 4. Where does the creator's creator exist. .... Occam razor thinking fails

[@youarevictoria4981]

You are going to have a problem charging that iPod in the past.

[@optimus_rhymes6955]

This dude can’t be real.

[@frigidpt4]

This guy's voice sounded like Matt Powel

[@Nubifier]

It took 30 mins to bring up quantum stuff. Gotta love theists appropriating terms they don't understand.

[@freddan6fly]

Quantum, Quantum, Frequency, Frequency, therefore god.

[@Farce13]

​@@freddan6flydon't forget: logic

[@freddan6fly]

@@Farce13 U R right. Quantum Frequency Logic therefore god.

[@websufs]

​@@freddan6flyYou forgot the term energy and using the word logic without understanding what logic is.

[@Shrike-Valeo]

So much for occams razor

[@user-sc5rc1mb6n]

That something is not the Christian god but the pink elephant

[@williamcozart8158]

38:32 Petersonbot shut down

[@togborne]

Hi Jordan.

[@benjaminjenkins2384]

Oh man, yknow what, i forgive you for the bad ai take, putting up with this shit is something i couldnt wish on anybody

[@LaurentMertz-dr3ww]

How on Spanky All Mighty's holy buttcheeks can he think that his explanations of a fysical but non- fysical mind that made the universe out of nothing but also out of himself, is more simple than " before the big bang, the universe was in a different state, period". Ockhams razor, and out✂️

[@rmelzhim6033]

After all the horrors I've listened to across your channel and other shows like the atheist experience, this is one of the most painful things I've ever listened to. The guy was an absolutely nonsensical mess.

[@IanHaupt-v8v]

If you are timeless then no where do you exist in time Case closed. No God, not one, does exist, ever. If a god is supernatural then at no point does he exist in nature, again case closed. Have fun with that believers

[@ThatGuy-ot1gt]

Ugh... I hate the "the universe is god" argument.

[@zackgaming6137]

Som criticism for planet Peterson, please ask the obvious questions. How do you know that? Can you demonstrate that? Push harder on these questions too please. And keep on the look out for logical fallacies, the guest already violated Occam’s razor and none of you said anything. Thank you keep up the great work :)

[@cygnustsp]

Surprised KZbin hasn't made a stink about the thumbnail

[@themaninblack5777]

I would love to see you debate Andrew Wilson. Peterson vs BPF would be some epic content

[@jaymikesmovienites3452]

His use of the word belief while saying things related to science bothers me

[@k0lpA]

they always do that.. and yes it's annoying

[@Coldtrojan]

The theist here is making really poor arguments but imo Peterson and the other guest were making some pretty bad arguments too, and it could've been picked apart better. Especially following an inductive argument, if you've only ever seen white swans that doesn't mean there are only white swans. It's a point generally used to point out that your personal experience doesn't always equate to reality. Especially because other people may have seen other coloured swans. Maybe I'm missing the point of why that's being used, but I don't think that's entirely on me. Just because we've not seen anything come from nothing doesn't mean that's wrong. That's not a good argument. You could just be ignorant of something and be wrong about it because you've personally not seen it happen. Bad argument.

[@kevinandrewbryan6623]

Pregnant Virginia = married bachelor = #$^@

[@djmccarty7054]

These creationists are getting worse by the second. I think hes the worst one iver heard. Delusional, disingenuous. Just silly.

[@gryph01]

Oof! This guy ia developing philosophical theories based on science fiction novels and movies

[@andreasplosky8516]

The guy is not a pantheist. He is a fantasist.

[@CalinoFG]

How does this dud goes through life😳!

[@Th3MrJ3st3r]

Is it just me or did this guy change his argument multiple times in this video and if so, did anyone keep count.

[@IdentityCrisis1581]

Just another god of the gaps argument. I can't understand how something can happen without something making it happen, therefore god made it happen. He's missing the point that just because something is logical does not mean that it is actually real. Yes while it is logical that if a being exists in a state where it experiences past present and future all at once, then it would percieve itself as being in it's past present and future states simultaneously. That fits logically, that if something exists in multiple states at once it would perciece itself as all of those states at once even if those states are contradicory to one another. But that does not prove the existence of anything that actually has those properties. Even in quantum physics we have not found anything that exists in multiple locations of time. Entangled particles is not one particle in multiple places. It is still two particles who's spin direction will always be oposite of each other even if they are too far apart to interact with one another. A particle in superimposition is in multiple spin states at once. But that is not the same thing as existing and not existing at the same time, nor is it existing in multiple time frames at the same time. We don't fully understand quantum interactions yet. But saying god is that interaction is still just another god of the gaps argument. I'm glad he didn't go into quantum physics too far because he was already starting out on the wrong foot with that one. Theoretical physicists face this all the time. Mathematically there are many things supported by the math working to allow it. But that is still not proof that it exists. The mathematics that allows for the existence of black holes was done before black holes were observed to actually exist. At the same time while the mathematics allowing for time travel to be possible also exists. It has never been proven or observed that it is actually possible. Just because the math works out doesn't mean that it is part of reality. The same thing applies to logical statements. Just because it passes logical scrutiny does not mean it is real. "Anything is possible, just not probable."

[@admiralsham4615]

I believe in the Christian God of the Bible ... the 4th dimensional neotheological bible, church of the quantum IJesus edition. Look, I smoke a lotta weed ... but those right there are some bongwater thoughts.

[@mr-oso-8055]

Real bottom of the barrel here lately. Are you rounding these guys out of the riverbed. The people making the arguments easiest to debunk. Are the people least able to participate in a way to make this not feel like abusing people not able to survive on there own. I'd feel sorry for them. If they weren't so confident about bulls$$$t

[@LUMIN69]

I've watched many of your videos, but only the first 10 minutes of them. The logical queue depth of these guests arguments are almost always incredibly low. Like seriously I've seen toddlers engage in more complex thinking; these videos hurt to watch past 10 minutes.

[@Rev-bb9ej]

Clickbate thumbnail!

[@zacharyberridge7239]

That's not how you spell bait.

[@ronaldcarr5686]

Where is this 'Bate'? Does he own a hotel?

[@thegreatshamalamadingdong9788]

Lmao click master bate(s)

[@lemmyhead8578]

Stop being a douchebag.

[@freddan6fly]

You forgot the "s" You are _Norman Bates_ you are just a normal _guy_