Has Vimoh's Atheism been Debunked?

[@shreyajsatdeve]

Rejecting privilege is really tough bro...kudos to you

[@RitikXchauhan]

What privilege?

[@VishalYadav00003]

​@@RitikXchauhanbeing a so called sawarna or upper caste person

[@tanmayrahangdale8983]

I mean by adding agnostic he wants to be humble about human limitations.

[@Naruto-oj8qs]

No he want to be live in most defendable position Theist Atheist Agnostic All are different term with different meaning If you choose one atleast stay there😅

[@anmol12790]

A new guy came in market named prpjectsatyaloka he introduced him as agnostic but he is very critical when someone discuss about hinduism

[@Redtigerr]

Is that Carl Sagan in your background?

[@redblueblur6321]

Yes

[@DDRational_]

Yup!

[@Redtigerr]

@@DDRational_ oh nice !

[@damn7637]

Is that quote on evidence???

[@redblueblur6321]

@@damn7637 yes "Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence"

[@mukulsakpal5035]

I truly don't understand how people go on living their lives but don't even once questions why we use words. Words are like a tag given to a certain meaning or understanding or a concept. When I say I follow Indian constitution, a certain person might understand that I am willing to follow every law written in that specific book. But my own believes cannot be written by a different councils, yes I do refer these philosophical and religious books to improve my OWN BELIEF. If I want to explain my belief to a person in a word than, I first would need to write a book that includes what I believe in every scenario of life. Which would constantly be updated every second I think. You made such a quality video, though short but precise. but I could still find people in the comment section missing the whole point. Let me know if I got it wright or wrong. lol

[@Naruto-oj8qs]

Words have meaning that's we have so many different words Religious Dharma Theist Atheist Agnostic If you have made a word your identity, then at least defend it properly. Whenever an atheist gets trapped in arguments, he immediately takes up an agnostic position. If a theist tells you that God exists 100 percent, similarly an atheist says that God does not exist 100 percent. Neither of them has any proof to prove it completely. But they are trying. The agnostic says he does not know. Hence, this position is easy to defend. An agnostic can ask for proof from both the people. Hence, these newly-made atheists use contradictory terms like agnostic atheist.

[@shyamagrawal8375]

Vimoh should know that the current academic definition has also changed. Earlier when philosophy was dominated by theologians and then atheism meant "a belief that there are no gods". Now the dictionary and academic definition has also changed to "a lack of belief in god". The philosophers who keep on bringing the obselete definition are just theologians. So Vimoh is wrong. His position is also coherent with the current academic definition of atheism.

[@NoToWokesOrReligious]

He is not an honest person..

[@humanityfirst1417]

Congratulations brother for the 30k🎉

[@jprakash7245]

I feel more connected to this channel than 'Dope' 😀, cause of the cool desi channel name!✌️DD Rational

[@zaphodbeeble]

Wow!! Calling out ad hominen while indulging in exactly that. Calling out strawman argument while doing exactly that. E.g says point of words is to have a common understanding i.e objectivity..then says words have to be understood by usage. Usage is subjective u cannot assure that both parties r talking about same thing. This will only work in echo chambers. Personally i think this guy lacks depth, is just a bunch of keywords

[@TurdBoi666]

Ratio

[@zaphodbeeble]

Says for me rejection of religion is about rejection of "privilege " suspends all evidence based rationality in favor of emotional position.. what a loser

[@Nik-mx3fm]

Wholly Trinity Collab 🙌

[@nabanath313]

Your just being bias towards vimoh bcz there is someone who have little more knowledge regarding theism or atheism who actually studied those subjects. I also watch vimohs vdos. But its doesn't I'll defend everything he said. You are defending for no reason.

[@nothing29717]

Some people might call themselves "Hindu" agnostic/atheist to belong to the community without taking pride in the Hindu identity. First of all, reducing Hinduism to only the caste system is extremely reductionist, in my opinion. Hinduism includes the caste system but also encompasses many other aspects. These kinds of people (Hindu agnostic/atheist) are conscious of its negatives. They reject the negatives and embrace the positives. That is how culture evolves and changes.

[@thomascromwell6840]

Yeah, the positives being a part of the majority and avoiding the violence that is committed against minorities. There are no other positives to a faith that considers one superior to the other. It's like those people who consider themselves Christian atheists. They neither believe in the divinity of Christ nor are they followers of his teachings. They are essentially White Europeans who clad themselves in the garb of identity and tie their fate to that of the reigning religion.

[@nothing29717]

​@@thomascromwell6840 People like you actively seek conflict and don't want positive changes. And by the way, Hindu atheism is not contradictory. There are certain philosophical traditions in Hinduism that don't require an explicit belief in God.

[@himanshusingh6988]

​@@nothing29717 can u plz define hindu??

[@nothing29717]

​@@himanshusingh6988 Everyone has a different understanding of Hinduism. For me, it is a set of philosophies and procedures.

[@Lawaipande]

​@@himanshusingh6988 Agnostic Hindu are the people who see their religion as a Culture, Tradition or a community rather than a Truth While holding Agnostic belief.

[@misoailuro]

I would add some more arguments : ( i'm not from the backgroud of academics of philosophy, everything i will argue, i'll argue from the understanding i have ) 1. It is rather an etymological description of atheism when they say " it's a firm assertion that god doesn't exist " but if we look closely its about denying what characteristics of God was set out. Instance : Agnostism , etymologically may be interpretated as " Assertion that we cant know " but some / many agnostics understand it as " we don't know for now " 2. descriptions in academics are study of already existing philosophies. So , Everytime one says " As Academically this therefore this " lacks to understand the fact that philosophy is continuous conversation and it changes over time and the description of ideas within it also changes. You can't just say academy understands this in this way and hence your position is this. 3. I saw one Guy pointing out about " True dichotomy " i don't know much about it so anyone wants to describe. I'll be grateful.

[@zealpanchal7224]

who are we talking about? can anyone tell me?

[@dattatreyadas]

I think Bhargava Joshi from projectsatyaloka

[@naveens696]

Completely agree.

[@pushkardo]

I am an adamant atheist. I am so adamant that even if in the future the existence of god is scientifically proved, I’d still adamantly deny its existence because of the wide spread mess spread in the name of religion and god, I deny to believe its existence. Ever.

[@ayobvklxvah]

yey new vid!

[@mangakhoon4517go]

Seeing you after a long time!

[@benjiewhorf7473]

I've watched your video and the dude who claimed to have debunk Vimoh. It appears that you Vimoh lack the understanding of first order logic, philosophy and linguistics. In the video which the guy uses as a reference Vimoh claims his position to be "an actual philosophical position". No academic papers in the philosophy religion mentions the term 'agnostic atheism'. So, you saying that we should use denotation of the words as we use it real life conversations but Vimoh appears to he using it from an academic way or pseudo academic way, to be more precise. Atheism and agnosticism make two very different knowledge claims. Etymologically, they're different as well. If you claim to subscribe to either of those concepts, make sure you know the definitions well. Gaining a little understanding of philosophy, set theory and formal logic wouldn't hurt. Think of it like this - You're an Indian citizen and if someone asks you to define what's Indian cititzen and you say, "A human being who lacks the passport Europe and Middle Eastern countries." That definition is imprecise. By that definition, a someone who has an Uzbek passport will also be an Indian. If you say that "A human being who possesses the Indian passport and does not possess passport of any other country is an Indian citizen", then, your definition is very precise and doesn't leave room for ambiguities. While talking about concepts, especially philosophical ones and making claims, it's necessary to be as precise as possible so as to make sure there's no room for ambiguities. If Vimoh claims that he lacks belief in the claim that god exists, then, he should call himself an agnostic and that's perfectly fine. There's no reason to tack atheist at the end. I think that's what the guy you're referring to tried to point out. Also, it's ridiculous that you reject Hinduism because of only the bad things it has done while turning a blind eye to the contributions it had made in various disciplines, sometimes even rivalling the Greeks. You're just CHERRY PICKING the bad things and making hasty generalisations. Please get rid of your negative bias as it can impede your journey to be rational. I have nothing against you or Vimoh. Let rationality prevail. Have a great day. Peace!

[@shazeel4u]

every sane person should ask their friends to subscribe to Vimoh, rational world and this dude. Only way to create a rational temperament in this country which has gone to dogs.

[@AnudeepVaradaBza]

Wow. Very well put.

[@Kalyani-y2t]

Very well countered!

[@Hobuca_Official]

Now you're just being toxic If there is a hindu or muslim, whosoever is living their life peacefully & follow their traditions & they feel proud about themselves, what's the problem? & If there's something wrong about a religion then it should be corrected & solved, you can be anything in this country but well you've starred disrespecting. We can learn many things from religion too! Just you've to open your eyes

[@Dannydecosta74]

There is a reason why these guys are called woke

[@madeinandhra12-rk5mw]

Proud of this proud of that are mostly very loosely used terminology - that is how I feel about it.

[@S-S793]

Bravo, this is the point that so called Hindu nastiks (like Kushal Mehra) don't get

[@14debanjan]

Eh, what is the point, BTW ? Because Hindu culture has a few bad elements, throw away the whole culture in the name of rejecting priviledge ? First, this has nothing to do with belief in God or gods. Second, each and every culture would have some good and some bad things. And human species cannot live in a culture-less society, not possible, nope. So what's the what's the point anyway, kindly explain.🙂

[@Zomboid67]

Sir Can you make a video on po*n consumption?? I have seen many athiest in foreign supports po*n consumption and call it normal as human nature Can you debunk those guys

[@samara_dragon]

It is human nature 😭 It's so much in human nature hindus wrote literatures on it .

[@Zomboid67]

@@samara_dragon Kama Sutra 😂

[@samara_dragon]

@@Zomboid67 it's not just on smex tho, "kama" literally means pleasure. Pleasure does not comes from only smex.

[@samara_dragon]

@@Zomboid67 plus look up the temple of Khajuraho, marvelous artitechture and a depiction of secsual liberty. I love the details.

[@samara_dragon]

@@Zomboid67 look up the temple of khajuraho, and immense masterpiece of smacksual liberty. The details are beautiful. Our ancestors were indeed made up of something else.

[@rithwikrajasekhara1524]

idk why , but when ever I watch DD Rational the Malgudi days theme plays in my head kzbin.info/www/bejne/qV6mgZWXedyhqtU

[@DDRational_]

lol

[@aYoutubeuserwhoisanonymous]

Well the thing is Rationality is also a culture(science is a subset of rationality), it is the culture of using reason and evidence to seek true beliefs and aiding in ethics. You have rejected "hindu atheism's" noise for the real substance. Being part of a culture isn't a bad thing without a culture you cannot practically live, you will either have to forge your own culture by mixing or matching , "the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society." I would argue scientific culture is the most succesful culture in seeking true beliefs and it's pragmatic value has forced humanity out of darkness.

[@14debanjan]

The rationality of today may not be relevant for tomorrow. But the tradition will be remaining. That's one of the many ways how culture works. How do you think this whole cow-worshipping started in the first place ? What was the rationality behind it ?

[@aYoutubeuserwhoisanonymous]

@@14debanjan I think we have different notions of rationality for me rationality is whatever allows me to win my values. If something doesn't allow me to win my values then it isn't rational anymore.

[@Bone.doctor.v]

There is no reason/proofs to believe in a god the religions of the world put forward 💁🏾

[@gamingarea9011]

everything is reason and proof of God.

[@gamingarea9011]

@@x_FaceLess_x 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@CjqNslXUcM]

There's no proof that the external world exists, yet we're not all idealists. This is not how philosophers of religion approach this problem. There can be evidence for or against theism. Evidence is something that makes a proposition more likely than it's negation. An example of evidence for Hinduism is the existence of Hindus. In a world with zero Hindus, where no one were to know what Hinduism is, the truth of Hinduism would be clearly less likely. An example of evidence against Hinduism is the falsity of Karma in one's lifetime. In a world where doing immoral acts would have measurable negative effects on you that go beyond the reactions of humans, the truth of Hinduism would be more likely. What philosophers of religion do when comparing metaphysical worldviews, is they gather the evidence for and against competing hypotheses. They will measure the simplicity of the theory against its explanatory power. Why is simplicity a theoretical virtue? Because there's no reason to believe in a claim, when it explains something that has already been explained. For example, historical Hindu metaphysics does not correctly explain the known facts about the universe, therefore it loses against metaphysical naturalism (naturalism means the view supported by the sciences, where supernatural things don't exist). Modern Hindu metaphysics is often adapted to correctly explain the universe, evolution, the nonexistence of karma in this life etc. However, when explaining scientific facts, Hindu metaphysics needs to posit the same things naturalism does. At this point, Hindu metaphysics and naturalism both explain the observed world just as well, but Hindu metaphysics has additional posits (such as Samsara). In this case, Hinduism is rejected again, because it has useless commitments that are not needed to explain the world. Naturalism is the simpler theory.

[@zaphodbeeble]

Neither is there proof for the lack of God.

[@indiangamerbg8346]

​​@@gamingarea9011 You say- a unicorn exists and it built the earth I ask- what's the proof for a unicorn existing You say- the earth - dude that's not a valid answer that's just circular reasoning. You have provide evidence for the unicorn existence first, than provide to Evidence that the unicorn created the earth, until than earth isn't evidence for the unicorn

[@ofAwxen]

reducing the entirety of "Hinduism," to merely something that upholds the caste system is reductionist and bit of a strawman position in of itself. There are problems of inequality in all cultures all over the world. This inequality simply manifests as the caste system in our history. That shouldn't mean you get to hand wave all the philosophy, math and science that our traditions have provided. Atheistic societies such as modern day China or communist Russia have had classism despite any tradition based backing to them (not making the claim that all atheists are communists) Those that claim to be Hindu atheists aren't in favour of caste discrimination, they are materialists that embrace aspects of their traditional roots.

[@DDRational_]

I haven't done that. I've mentioned that i reject this religion because of its evils.

[@ofAwxen]

@@DDRational_ Please be aware that you are ignoring millennia worth of art, architecture, literature and philosophy produced by this "religion" and reducing it to a single point of criticism. What is this if not for a blatant strawman? This reflects either ignorance or bigotry on your part, you can do better. While your criticism of the caste system is certainly valid. You can better educate yourself on its actual history and of the methods undertaken by "Hindutva" groups in order to eradicate the issue. "Hinduism" isn't perfect and has had many missteps throughout the ages, but we've also had the ability and introspection to reform ourselves every now and then. Not many other traditional systems can make that claim.

[@y1.5]

Hindu itself mean a person who believes varna system and many scriptures says varna is created by God. So being hindu Athiest means you believing in god's system and denying god's existence at the same time..

[@ofAwxen]

@@y1.5 strawman

[@Hecatemoonlight]

​@@y1.5makes much sense

[@kritik3604]

i saw you made video on hindu minister, shivoham, scientific santani etc mostly of all your videos on showing how wrong hinduism is , generally i dont had problem if you are biased with all other religion like GMS is, he is atheism but he clarifies much deeper and talks about every religion and it does not feel wrong, but your videos are just against hinduism in some sense, I know now people will get triggered but i am just talking rational. Like you made video about sai deepak and diwali thing where he talks which even i think is lie and i support you there but problem why not on muslim the bakra EID, the stupid festival which just sacrifice the animal and people cheers that, you said diwali creates pollution which is true, but for your info animal husbandry creates max pollution in agriculture so if people are more veg there will be less deforestation, and growing new tress does not help at all the last option is just to stop cutting of forest so for saving the earth will you turn your self veg, the day you will do that i will not celebrate diwali or the day when muslim not celebrate EID, you should make video on that. I know atheism sounds cool but truth is you are athiest just views, there are already good creater like GMS, who way better knowlegable videos. Make videos on muslim ,chrisrtiain etc and lets see if you can grow your audience from or just hate(because muslim are very orthodox). I dont have hate but just a repeated thing i saw on your video and when this is all about rational so why not think that way.

[@DDRational_]

Cool dude. Great feedback. Go watch his videos if you're keen on videos debunking things in Islam and Christianity.

[@malicemischievous3753]

Meow

[@SillyCar31]

Meowch meowch

[@ayobvklxvah]

:3

[@nikhil0029]

Meow

[@No-I-dont-want-that]

Language is descriptive and not prescriptive. When will people understand?

[@CjqNslXUcM]

Do you know what descriptive and prescriptive mean? Language can clearly be both, I can describe something and I can prescribe something. I think what you meant to say is the study of language should be descriptive, which is a commonly held belief in modern linguistics, and it is of course itself prescriptive. It's self-defeating to prescribe everyone to be descriptive when discussing language. The reason philosophers prefer to use terms in a consistent way is due to the cooperative principle. If you intend to have a productive discussion, there must be a mutual understanding among other things. This was elaborated in Grice's maxim of manner. If you want to be understood you need to avoid obscure and ambiguous language. If you give atheism the definition of "non-religious" sometimes, or use phrases like agnostic atheist, you are not being clear in what you mean.

[@MondayMorning-yv7nf]

okay.... vimoh is a proud humble person.... 🤭

[@ofAwxen]

"proud humble"? that sounds like an oxymoron

[@iamsus3144]

Cet 🐈

[@iamsus3144]

I misspelled intentionally

[@shyamagrawal8375]

I myself am an atheist and an ex-hindu but saying that Hinduism is just caste system and nothing else and someone who tries to associate with it is necessarily associating themself with caste system discrimination is just blatant strawmanning. Hinduism has many aspects to it. Many Hindus or ex-hindus are not relating themselves with the caste discrimination part when they are talking or relating themselves with Hinduism.

[@arxyn]

you can't be agnostic while being an athiest because agnostic means abstaining to the argument that there is god or not whilst athiest means that you're denying that there is no god you how can you "abstain the argument you're denying to?" Just say that were athiest and debate is over 🙂 At 2:32 you say vimoh lacks the belief that there is no god thats what every athiest lack lol what kind of argument is this? If I don't lack belief in God it means I'm thiest and lacking belief in god it means there is no god according to you Now at 4:00 according to your logic what will be the defination of a child saying someone father? Does we have more meanings? Answer is no! At 7:15 you say why I/someone can't be proud of hinduism? Because this is a long preserved culture which is older than many new "cultures" that's what they're proud of not the casteist things they also say that casteism is wrong? So now what can't i be proud my relegion/culture is older while criticising the things which are wrong?

[@MondayMorning-yv7nf]

When I say that "I am an atheist", I am saying that because I am absolutely sure that god does not exist...... there is no other interpretation of that. if somebody says that he does not know if god exists or not, he is not an atheist.......... he may be something else, but definitely not an atheist.

[@CjqNslXUcM]

@@MondayMorning-yv7nf That's false, an atheist believes that there are no gods. They don't have to be certain, they just have to believe it over the other possibilities.

[@sumitpatwardhan2002]

​@@CjqNslXUcMincorrect

[@leherohuman797]

Do we really have convincing evidences for casteism in Hinduism for as long as it is ?

[@ardhbawa]

Their scriptures clearly talk about castism. Their oldest text, the Rigved, has divided the society in 4 Varna, so it's upto you whether you assume Vedas to have been in existence since 1.96 billion years or for several centuries. Thus their scriptures themselves are convincing evidence.

[@leherohuman797]

Thank you for replying but I should look what does really Varna mean. Is it a hierarchy? How do we know that the rig veda we have now is as it was ?

[@leherohuman797]

Well we don't need to assume. We can be convinced that a veda or a scripture is this much years old by carbon dating, right?

[@leherohuman797]

I meant atleast

[@MoonDeity-sy9yd]

No one can prove it is by birth unless they find any verse that clearly say only son of Brahmin become Brahmin on the other hand their are verses that show it is by profession in Mahabharat Yudisthir also confirm it

[@Deshbhakt-hx9du]

❤❤❤❤😂😂😂🎉🎉🎉🎉😂❤❤❤❤😂🎉

[@patrickkishore2408]

Consider wearing a shirt and avoiding the use of "wanna" for "want to"

[@eishuno]

Isn't it kinda going too far, when you label one 'culture' being the 'bane' of "so many people"? It's funny, i feel like people like you who love these 'labels' are the exact reason why conservatism on the rise. People are attached to their culture and there are many aspects to a culture not having to do anything with, say, casteism. When you tell people how their culture is apparently a bane to many, many people without any nuance, well, congratulations, you are playing into the exact narrative being peddled by the right.

[@akshay5295]

Take names bro. You’re not doing anything wrong by taking names. It is directed at arguments by someone right? You’re responding to someone. Let us know who. So that we can go and actually verify and listen to them what they’re saying.

[@jojo_ranjan]

And that is exactly what he doesn’t want. He doesn’t want to give those bad faith arguments another viewer/listener.

[@akshay5295]

@@jojo_ranjan well if you suppress the opinion and hide it that’s shady. It’s questionable. The first source needs to be known to cross check. Otherwise this response is meaningless. A response / reaction is meaningless if I don’t have access to the primary source. This “not giving them views” is secondary. It’s not as important. And when is that attitude when he or even Vimoh react to KZbinrs who spread misinformation? When they react to sadhguru and many other personalities. They show the video. They’re reacting in real time. Where is that “I don’t want to give them more exposure “ attitude then ? Honestly, it doesn’t matter if they take names. That doesn’t give them any more exposure. Only people who watch this channel will go there. And it’s not like they’ll be instant followers of that channel.

[@jojo_ranjan]

@@akshay5295 I don’t exactly agree with Pranav’s rationale. Just tried to explain it to you because I thought you didn’t get the ‘Why’? My mistake.

[@akshay5295]

@@jojo_ranjan gotcha

[@blade6568]

So called upper caste hindus haven't been privileged for years. The upper caste people who you demonize have been excluded from reservation for decades regardless of their financial situation. Nihang sikhs have been attacking right wingers with swords in punjab but your dishonest trio has been silent on this and you come out on this? Just show some impartiality for once but i think that's too much to ask for.

[@M4DN3355]

For thousands of years upper caste were oppressed by so called lower caste people,they were devoid from education,property and social status by so called lower caste people,15 % upper caste only hold 86% of the nation's resources.they have suffered so much govt should take a step and provide the 15% population 10% reservation .

[@LoveYourself-my9nz]

Lol! Self biased over the roof. And who supported nihang singh attacks here?? Who?

[@blade6568]

@@LoveYourself-my9nz It's about a person saying whoever says he is a hindu and isn't ashamed of it is privileged. Hindus haven't been privileged since the Mughal era regardless of caste. Caste system has been abolished and today dalits are becoming temple priests in up but multiple cases of Brahmins being beaten by bheem party goons have come forward with no condemnation or concern from sickular pimps. So this fake narrative which demonizes the general category hindus is so dangerous and dishonest. You are fighting an enemy which doesn't exist today. Hindus are not only vedant believers or Sanatan followers but sikhs, jains and Buddhists also. The word Hindu came from Sindhu which came from the name Sindhu of Sindhu river. So just don't toss around the word bias whenever you feel like it.

[@RitikXchauhan]

​@@LoveYourself-my9nzu don't support anyone who isn't supported by your KZbin masters, u just hate everyone who is hated by these manipulative youtubers, you are actually much worse not having your own biases just following others blindly

[@Hecatemoonlight]

Tit for tat