seeing things | why atheism is not like colourblindness [cc]

An invitation to critically assess religious argument and experience.
You can support the channel at: / theramintrees
--
subtitles
Arabic: TranquilOblivion
Brazilian Portuguese: Aymar Pescador Jr
Bulgarian: Djeitko
Slovak: Peter Ščigulinský
--
Gold from bismuth study:
K. Aleklett, D. J. Morrissey, W. Loveland, P. L. McGaughey, and G. T. Seaborg. Energy dependence of 209Bi fragmentation in relativistic nuclear collisions. Phys. Rev. C 23 (1981): 1044-1046
--
music: excerpt from Chopin's Nocturne No.20, performed by TheraminTrees

[@FiniteAtticus]

I remember when I was young, I was told that if I ever doubted god's existence I should just keep praying until I believed again. That being said, the little voice in my head that spoke, " this might all be bullshit, " never went away.

[@matthewvandeventer3632]

I remember when I said I would kill myself if I ever "lost" god. What a ride I've been on that led me to loose my beliefs.

[@arkaslayer6612]

As an ex Muslim I used to be told that the devil is whispering to me when I question religion

[@VincentGonzalezVeg]

@@arkaslayer6612 anyone who dosent want you to think is not your friend

[@legoworld246]

@C FletcherYour comment reminds me of a conversation I witnessed once. Between a firm believer in Christianity and an Atheist, both from my school. The Christian guy said that God is real, because he had saved him from illness. My Atheist classmate made the best response ever for that. "When you were sick, did you go to the hospital? Did you take medicines? Did you see a doctor? Or did you just stay at home, praying? Because if it was the first alternative, I have some news for you."

[@celestialvision5073]

I'd just like to ask... do you think your doubts prevailed because you were just too intelligent to fall for it? Or because none of it made sense to you? Because if the first, I would have to question how you could be smarter than ever Christian in the world. And if the latter I would have to ask why you thought you had the intelligence required to make the Decision that God doesn't exist when so many scientists, so many millionaires, and so many really realy smart thinkers claim that they know for certain that God exists.

[@britishsubject8722]

"Colour blindness is....a red herring". Or a green one? Sorry. I'll get me coat.

[@wolf1066]

Hope you didn't give up your day job. :P I'm gonna have to pinch that joke if colour blindness comes up in conversation, y'know that, right?

[@thecomputerguy6335]

Nice

[@myrpatroll]

@Quinton King might be a quote, but that would be a corporatist, they don't like competition, where as capitalism and thus a capitalist is driven by compition either in service or produce.

[@squeenixu]

... :|

[@darbylynch9391]

😂😂😂

[@diemos09]

Whenever I have to deal with theists I just change the name of the God and reflect their argument back on them. "Well you really believe in Allah, you're just angry with him." "If you just open your heart you'll hear the voice of Quetzalcoatl". "Documented, eye-witnessed miracles prove my book is true. So Mohammed splitting the moon in two and putting it back together proves the Koran is true." "I can hear thunder so that proves thor and his mighty hammer are real." "Don't you want to go to heaven? All you have to do is believe in Ameterasu and it will happen."

[@ssghostleviathan9820]

Someone playing a little smite

[@SuperPrettyPink101]

Will you marry me?

[@theherald4340]

CS Lewis is right; there are two kinds of people. Those that bend their knee to God and proclaim, "Thy Will Be Done!" And those that will not bow their knee to God; whereby he says, "Your Will Be Done." If we choose to be separate from God; then certainly he will not go against our will, should there be a Judgement Day.

[@diemos09]

@@theherald4340 If God's omnipotent there's no way his will can't be done. It's only the will of religious leaders claiming to speak for god that can be defied.

[@theherald4340]

@@diemos09 So which of the two people are you, according to CS Lewis? God's omnipotence has no relevance as to our personally acknowledging him or not. You and I are given that free will to choose.

[@S_tierr]

When i started questioning my theism, one thing that kept me believing was that when i prayed, i felt like god was listening, i felt comforted by a sense of contentment. I wanted to test that by praying and talking to god as well as others about what was troubling me. i prayed to god and felt satisfaction and content, i prayed to Zeus, then even tried Ariana Grande and felt the same i did praying to god. As a final test, i talked to a stuffed animal about how i was feeling, pretending it was someone who could understand and empathize with me. Consequently, i felt great if not a little better than speaking to god. i later came to realize i can write down my thoughts and take credit for me helping myself by acknowledging my feelings instead of talking to myself and putting the credit in the hands of some higher power. edit: i was taught that prayer is about “building a relationship with god” and we could do that through rehearsed prayers and or actually talking and reflecting -for comfort advice etc

[@bridgefin]

Sounds like your prayer never encountered God but only yourself. Self talk is good but it is not prayer.

[@krembryle]

@@bridgefin go abuse children in your church, your comment is passive aggressive and unnecessary

[@ponponpatapon9670]

@@bridgefin sounds like self-talk *IS* prayer

[@bridgefin]

@@ponponpatapon9670 That would be true if there was no God. But, if there is, then prayer is to Him and not to our selves.

[@SydBodeker]

@@bridgefin you sound dumb as shit my boy

[@ladyjatheist2763]

I once told a friend that I'm an atheist. She said, "no you're not, you're one of the nicest people I know." She came really close to seeing a side of me that's NOT so nice.

[@bloothechronosapien4288]

Maybe in her mind or indoctrination only religious people can be 'logically' considered nice.

[@YoheYamatai]

​@@bloothechronosapien4288that's what has been thought to people...🙃

[@DeltaNovum]

​@@bloothechronosapien4288only people from her own religion even, maybe.

[@atlas956]

Same. My best friend is a devout Seventh Day Adventist. I remember that briefly after we met she was like „you‘re such a nice person, how can you just waste it all and not become a christian to go to heaven?“ the idea that i didn’t need a motive (like going to heaven) to want to be a good person who contributed to society absolutely blew her mind. religion really does promote some weird, instrinsic selfishness and black-and-white thinking. She still firmly believes that I‘m going to „come around“ eventually… because otherwise she‘d have to face the fact that her God would very much murder innocent, good people for not believing, and that that’s very much not in line with her own morals. So clearly, I must be a closeted Christian /s

[@ladyjatheist2763]

you and me both apparently@@atlas956

[@AronRa]

Brilliant. Sharing.

[@JonGray1]

Not seen anything new from TheraminTrees in ages. Really enjoy his work. Thanks for the link AronRa​

[@TheraminTrees]

AronRa Thank you.

[@1KeyJee]

Aron, you are my hero

[@arkaslayer6612]

Good to see you here aronRa

[@udaikumar1782]

Aron ra , you are great.

[@ericspencer8093]

For me it was history. The past makes no sense with the existence of an omnipotent being. Likewise, it's been my personal observation that theists tend to be ignorant of history.

[@Valiguss]

It’s interesting to me that we saw the opposite things, for me history of not just earth but the universe seems to suggest to me that there is something, it’s all too similar and orderly to me for it to be completely random. I don’t know what it is I even believe in, just that there is something, a force an entity, idk.

[@ericspencer8093]

@@Valiguss Thank you for bringing this up. In my university days I came to much the same conclusion as you. The more science I learned, I was struck by the organization and patterns of the universe, and concluded that it's all too consistent to be merely an accident. However, when I mentioned this observation to one of my professors (chemistry, to be exact), she made a point that blew me out of the water: Our understanding of the universe and its workings naturally appear organized and to follow a consistent pattern, because that's how the human mind functions. We (humanity) created those definitions according to our best ability, and this requires organizing our knowledge and fitting it into a neat, consistent system. However, when you apply the math, the pure physics of the universe, it shows something quite different: the universe is chaos, in constant flux, where the smallest variables result in drastically different and unpredictable outcomes. It cannot be truly measured, only guessed based on our flawed ability to understand. She explained it much better than I do here.

[@pantsenfuego9986]

The events of history are not constant, not necessarily factual, fallacious to appeal; history is a story. Here lies a demonstrable constant of the human condition: The record has always been propagandized, by both benevolent rulers and tyrants alike. Nothing new under the sun.

[@monochromeart7311]

@@ericspencer8093 well the thing is, in randomness the small chance still exists, no matter how small it is - it's possible.

[@villager_2713]

Being curious about this topic, I'd like to ask you this following question I've been wondering of... Is morality❎ & immorality✅ having to do more with facts & faiths? Because I noticed that religion✝️☦🕉✡☯️☪️ and science⚛ that lean into taking the leap of faith🙏 (lead by assumptions & authority which is unverifiable) tend to led into blind conclusions in which they reject conflicting evidence -which tragically happened to one of the local area where a group faith-healing christians✝️ in the pandemic rejected the scientist's advice from findings that covid-19 is deadly🦠 under their faith, hosting a ceremony where they got infected and many tragically died💀. www.mmtimes.com/news/yangon-govt-sues-pastor-holding-sermons-infected-70-covid-19.html *I added faith-based science as there is one ideology called Scientism that states where people literally accept science as faith & should not be questioned like Religonism. kirkcenter.org/essays/scientism-is-not-science/ Whereas religion☸ & science🔬 that follow facts tend to accept both supporting✅ and conflicting❎ evidence, in which they learn via observation and reasoning to make it more verifiable👁. Like the science in its scientific method and religon that is applicable to it like Buddhism. (See the Kalama Sutta - pin.it/27zKKD6, which tells the Buddha tells his followers to not follow Buddhism blindly unless it agrees with their reason & sense) I think one's true morality lies in the facts there, since it makes one objective with truth which does not require belief. I like to know your thoughts, as I'm quite curious and I'd like to know more. I'm asking you this as I'm a university student who's writing an paper called "Should Religious🧙‍♀️🧙‍♂️ people be allowed to do Science👩‍🔬🧑‍🔬 in our education systems?" And I need your help if possible.

[@Braeden123698745]

Music: excerpt from Chopin's Nocturne No.20, performed by TheraminTrees Thats awesome

[@mrflip-flop3198]

You like classical music too?

[@craigcorson3036]

@@mrflip-flop3198 Lots of people like classical music, which explains why every major city in the world, as well as many of the minor ones, has a special building and a select group of people dedicated to its performance. Some cities even have two such places and groups - or even more. Never doubt that many, many others share your enjoyment of classical music. It is not something to be ashamed of, but to be celebrated.

[@micaelgarcia1576]

@@craigcorson3036 Can I just... Ask why would you think he was ashamed of it? Just... why would one be ashamed of liking melodies?

[@craigcorson3036]

@@micaelgarcia1576 I don't know where you are from, but here in the USA, people who enjoy classical music are looked upon with a mixture of suspicion and derision. It used to be considered a good thing here to be cultured, and educated; now it is seen by many as ...I don't know, elitist? This country is not what it once was, and it hurts my heart to see what it has become.

[@raulperez2308]

@@craigcorson3036 yeah...people that like and most of the times play classical music are more often than not considered snobs, it's not only in the states either

[@xXTrack394Xx]

The stereogram of the floating baby was so cool and extra.

[@bulwinkle]

It's funny, my eyes go unbidden into stereogram mode whenever I see one.

[@hadeskingoftheunderworld7010]

U_

[@HoneyBadgerVideos]

Very cool indeed. And heureka moment as well

[@cade8986]

Couldn’t see it Lol

[@lily91109]

I could see it, I just didn't recognize the shape...

[@gido9467]

I’ve decided that henceforth, when questioned or challenged about my religious beliefs, I’m going to tell people I’m a hardcore Christian, but am actively choosing to defy God, and go to Hell.

[@eliasjakemoran6434]

YES LADS!

[@differentbutsimilar7893]

Ahh, the Masochrist sect.... those crazy masochristians.

[@Javiervs258]

Satanism FTW

[@Super_Citizen_Paimon]

Tmw you say "fuck it" and go full-on edge lord.

[@Beelzebubbbbles]

I'm not sure how long ago it was that I first discovered your channel, and that of your brother(?) Qualiasoup. Long time ago. I always found them hugely comforting, and useful. I was born into Catholicism, did a stint in the Witnesses between 10 and 15, while simultaneously being sent to a Catholic boarding school that was more like a reform school. Smack in the middle of rural Ireland. I believe I was 14 when I wrote to the Cistercian monks to find out more about their lives, with a view to joining them. Although at the time I would have been silently praying at night to Jehovah. I abandoned it all, slowly, without really noticing. Chemistry, Physics, Biology, and History all seemed better distractions, and had more to teach me. I was first called an atheist when I was 17, by my new religion teacher - I'd been expelled from the boarding school and was now happily ensconced in a Christian Brothers near my home village. The brothers were fine, unlike most of the sadists in the Carmelites who'd ruled me for the previous 3 and a half years. And now I was an atheist, according to the expert. He didn't appear to be annoyed, more disappointed. When I left two years later I realised that what he'd actually looked was resigned. He knew that he had two years of arguing ahead of him. Now I find myself with a 15 year old son. He spent Xmas with the in-laws, I stayed home as his mother is in hospital and I go there each day. They worked on him to get baptised as a Lutheran, and he came back looking to me for a little guidance. And now I get to watch your videos with my boy most evenings as we eat dinner, with a lot of pausing for his questions. So, twice now your videos have helped bring peace and reason into my life. Thanks for that.

[@TheraminTrees]

Thank you for sharing your story. I smiled as I read your sentence: 'I abandoned it all, slowly, without really noticing.' It's funny isn't it, how that can happen - how you can find yourself just slowly walking out the door without realising what you're doing. Sometimes of course we're spotted by others who can see where we're headed - and the door is slammed shut in our faces. For a time. I love the relationship you describe with your son. That ability for family to have those kinds of conversations - to be able to ask questions and receive honest answers instead of ideological script - is wonderfully precious. Peace to you both.

[@8698gil]

I abandoned religion gradually too I was about 8 when I started to question my parents about some of the bible’s more fishy stories (eg., how did Noah feed all the animals, etc.), and by the time I was 12 I knew I wasn’t a believer.

[@Kwolfx]

This video reminds me of a conversation I had with a deeply religious relative when I was about 18 or 19 years old. I had already been an atheist for a number of years. At the close of our conversation my uncle said something that struck me as very odd, because I thought it was a very weak argument. In fact, it wasn't really an argument at all. And he wasn't trying to hammer his point home. I knew his beliefs were sincere and that he could have made a much more impassioned statement about his personal belief in god and why I should believe. I was expecting something like that. However, after watching this video, I now realize what he was doing, and I realize he was actually being much more clever than I originally thought. First, he told me that he recognized that I was a very sincere person. I guess that was the buttering up part. Then he told me that he saw me as someone who is, "seeking the truth." (I bet a lot of fellow atheists have had that said to them.) I really had to fight back hard against making a disparaging snarky comeback, something that only a teenager would think was appropriate. I knew I wasn't seeking anyone else's idea of truth, so I just smiled instead. Then he said that "God, will open a door for you. All you have to do is look for the sign." Then he added that there was no way to know when that sign might appear. It might come with an unexpected delivery of good fortune, like getting a job or promotion I thought wasn't going to happen. It might appear when I was at my lowest point, when things were really going badly and the sign would show me a pathway to a better future and a pathway to god. This sign might also appear spontaneously in a single moment of inspiration seemingly unrelated to any immediate crisis. "Just look for it" he added at the end. I was reading Lord of the Rings at the time, so I thought, "Well, if Gandalf suddenly appears in front of me casting spells and warning me about Orcs approaching, that would be a real sign in my book." I just thanked my uncle for our conversation and some personal advice he had given me about purchasing a car. He had once worked at a used-car lot and knew how to negotiate to avoid added fees and deal with the psychological traps salespeople play on potential customers. In that secular arena his advice was both practical and sound. I never fully understood why my uncle wanted me to look for a sign. I knew that I had no intention of looking for non-existent signs of non-existent god. But, perhaps I intuitively realized that when you start looking at clouds long enough, you can start seeing anything you want to see in the them. Like a sign showing you the way to a deity. While that Christmas Day conversation has stuck with me over the years, I never really thought about very deeply. After hearing about Derren Brown's Fear and Faith project, my uncle's strategy is so much clearer to me now. Just look for signs in the randomness of your daily life and you are bound to see and fixate on things which you attach great significance to, even though they have no real significance at all. "Uncle, you learned more than just how to sell used-cars at jacked up prices to unwary customers. You learned how to make people see things that aren't really there. Clever, very clever indeed."

[@9ower]

Lovely comment and story thank you for sharing your knowledge

[@mrpokemon1186]

My doctor told me I was colourblind. It really came out of the 🍊.

[@greenytoaster]

lmao

[@keisukekun86]

"Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." Pslam 137:9 (NIV). This was the first verse I'd read that made me question the motives and morals of the people of the Old Testament, and ultimately, the God of the whole Bible. I was a young teenager, 16 or so, when my questioning got me to read the entire Bible cover to cover, searching for context that would make it all make sense, that would restore the love and beauty I had grown up seeing in so many verses. After 8 years of trying to rationalize my beliefs and wallowing in self doubt, I was finally released from the shackles of my former religion. Theramin, your videos were a major part of rebuilding myself after that decision. Thank you.

[@eleos5]

Psalms were written by David, he wrote poems to god at the time of him being hunted. He felt rejected yet clung on to hope. This verse is not from god, it's from a man who felt betrayed.

[@Austin-ub2gi]

@@eleos5 well it led him to question a God he didnt say God said it.. he said it made him question the people of the old testament

[@eleos5]

@@Austin-ub2giI didn't know that was his motives, that is interesting. Thank you for telling me that. I can see that you are having some difficulty understanding English. Please let me elaborate. I did not state that God made David write anything. If you review what I said, I specifically said that Psalms wasn't written by god.

[@Austin-ub2gi]

@@eleos5 which has nothing to do with what he said because he said the people of the old testament.

[@eleos5]

@@Austin-ub2gi Oh. I just got what you said. I thought you meant that David was writing about them. We were having a conversation talking about two entirely separate people! Sorry for the misunderstanding. Yes, I explained that was why David had said those things, because if you look at it that way, you can see why he said such strange things and why it seemed like he had strange motives and morals. If you read on you can see that David was a pretty great guy (until Bathsheba).

[@pato7314]

I hate it when color blindness is assumed to mean I see in grey scale. I suppose there might be an extremely rare form of it where that is true. However for the vast majority of color blind people including myself it is more like color challenged. My form is known as Red/Green color blindness (confusion). What happens is that if an single object is either green or red I see it as green or red but if a red object is somewhere in a group of green objects I will not be able to find it. Strange, right. The other thing is 'blended" colors like purple which I see a blue (the red gets lost) or a pale yellow-green which I will see a simply yellow. OK rant over. I will re-watch the video now setting aside the true definition of my type of vision.

[@spongebobsquarepants4413]

Thats exactly how I am. But whenever I mention Im colorblind to friends they hold up stuff or point to something asking what color is it. It doesn’t quite work like that, not for me at least.

[@larsswig912]

I wonder what would happen if a group of red-green colourblind people, for example, grow up together isolated from everyone else, but then one day they venture out into the outside world and discover that there are entire new colours that they or their ancenstors have never seen before. Now what if there are colours that even non-colourblind people can't see, and one day we discover those colours albeit still unable to see them? I think I'm thinking too much now lol, ever since I stumbled across theramintrees I've been thinking a lot.

[@Lttlemoi]

@@larsswig912 The colors the human eye can perceive, relate directly to how the different conically-shaped light-sensitive cells react to various wavelengths of light and to how that light reaches these cells. If your cone cells behave differently or you have more/different kinds of cone cells, you experience different colors. For example, the famous painter Monet had his cataract surgically removed, after which he suddenly painted with a lot more blue. The lens in human eyes filters out some UV light that the cone cells can detect. By changing the clouded lenses with artificial ones, this UV light was no longer filtered out of what he saw, making him see everything with a more blueish tint. There's apparently also speculation about some women being tetrachromats, meaning they have four different cone cells, rather than three. This is because there are two similar genes on the X chromosome that each encode the pigment for a similar, but slightly different cone for green light. Women who have both versions should therefore be able to distinguish more colors than average in the green/red region. Among animals, there's plenty of examples of animals being able to see further into the UV or IR range than humans can. Bees, to name just one, can see more of the UV range. You should look up pictures of flowers taken with UV-sensitive cameras. The sad bit about this is that so far, you can't make people perceive more or new colors. You can only enhance the contrast of the image by filtering out some wavelengths to make it easier to tell the colors apart (that's what those color-correcting glasses for colorblind people do) or you can use false colors (used all the time in astrophysics, where images are often taken in the UV, X-ray or microwave part of the color spectrum and are then recolored using blue, green and red).

[@flamingpi2245]

Lttlemoi Mantis shrimp can see thousands of colours

[@birchtree_6]

You have protanopia! It’s the most common form of color blindness greens and reds are challenging and because of that it can affect other colors like purple bc they have red in it My uncle is in fact colorblind and can only see in gray scale

[@ari_anon2228]

i’ve been staring at that fuzzy image for 10 minutes and i still can’t see anything send help

[@DayumAli]

Adding another positive comment to the bunch because, as previously mentioned thousands of times, this channel is great!

[@SrValeriolete]

I was raised a christian. So I felt pretty strongly the presence of God, his love and the grace of the holy spirit. I've marveled in awe at it's greatness, thankfull for everything he created and for the plan he had for us. I've had my prayers answered, and some of my wishes attended. That's the kind of thing they think is a direct experience of God, but it's just profound feelings, deep emotions and a good deal of coincidences and hypnosis. People from all religions have it, some people have it for political leaders and ideologies and cults. If devotion proved anything everything could be proved. You can find people deeply commited to all sources of things. Of course, when I talk about my past religions experience they will try to dissmiss it, to say my experience wasn't real or wasn't profound enough, most theists are quick to deny all profound experiences of other religions as ilusory and their own as true. We have people fasting, self-sacrificing, punishing themselves, dedicating hours of their lives to a cause, how dare we say their experiences aren't deep? Deep experiences says nothing about their sources. Hitler was probably very passionatly and certain about his ratial superiority. Being in love doesn't make the person you're in love perfect just because you're in love with them, and being in love with an idea doesn't make it more true or beneficial.

[@DanaTheInsane]

Hitler was also very passionate and concerned about his Christianity read his book it’s disgusting

[@scotty4189]

This video insults me! How dare you say such things about me! I'm colorblind!

[@usefulbobcat]

But can you see color?

[@kitkatsartsuwu8398]

Same

[@lycanthoss]

@@usefulbobcat if he believes harder he can

[@myrexcontent5840]

lmao you dont try hard enought to see it, i expected better of you!

[@BlacksmithTWD]

Do you believe people who claim to see different colors where you only see one and the same color?

[@TranquilOblivion]

This is unbelievably clear & minblowingly insightful. Many thanks!

[@TheraminTrees]

Glad you enjoyed, Yousif.

[@TheRojo387]

But he got colourblindness wrong. Many colourblind people have dichromatic, not monochromatic, vision.

[@Mysteriousmachine1]

@@TheRojo387isn’t monochromatic vision a valid type of colourblindness though? They can see things, but not colour. I wouldn’t say that’s wrong, just not 100% representative. If anything, the dichromatic colourblindness would either complicate or expand the metaphor. But if monochromatic vision actually doesn’t exist, then I will take back my comment.

[@dianegillespie7002]

Again, you describe so well my own deconversion experience. Trying to hang on to faith, I read the Bible more. Also, I watched people. The ones we were supposed to watch out for, the bad ones--the atheists, Unitarians, philosophers--the freethinkers evidenced much more of the virtues the Christians claimed were theirs. Christians did not show a higher spiritual or moral high ground, rather the reverse.

[@EvolBob1]

Diane Gillespie Yes, that can come as a shock...we don't eat babies. Did you also experience those arguing for their religion were projecting their own fears on to you?

[@Atoll-ok1zm]

I was never a strong believer. I went to church on occasion, never really discussed god with my family. Then my dad put me though confirmation. At first I was excited. I thought I believed, tried to force myself to feel a divine connection. Begged for anything from above. But there was nothing. Death happened and life went on. Prayer changed nothing. Taking part in the rituals felt good because it was community, not because it was divine. Communion was just bread, thats all it ever was. Then we started reading and discussing the bible. That is when my faith fully slipped away. I threw away my cross and bible and the feeling was incredible, I was giddy. I felt free. I have never looked back. It was the confrontation that set me free.

[@aknavvy3188]

Please kindly remember, even the fluffy "Good Samaritan" story cannot be attributed to Christian Values, as the SAMARITAN was not a CHRISTIAN!

[@bridgefin]

That was a story told by Christ to explain how we should act. There was no Samaritan who did those things. No human has a monopoly on charity and care for another since we believe these are baked into the human heart. Jesus was criticizing the Pharisees here for their lack of that same charity.

[@itzakhywell7668]

I think you slightly missed the point of a parable...

[@chronomancer8772]

that's actually the point of the story. Sumerians where the ancient enemy of the Jews and anyone at the time would have known that. It's about how kindness isn't about tribalism but the story has since been twisted around. It's like if a Natzi saved a Jews life out of kindness one time during ww2 and three thousand years later "Natzi" just became a short hand for "good person".

[@cathianmoss]

I asked once what my Christian friend (who subscribed to the "everybody knows my god, some just hate him" thing) thought of people who had never heard of their god and show no recognition when they are first told. My friend took a long time to answer, and it was very circular.

[@segtendonerd64]

@Theodor Willis you mean 2 right? A mom and dad?

[@segtendonerd64]

@Theodor Willis I don't know, there's more proof that I was created from a pair doing the sideway monster mash than an omnipotent being creating me for the sole purpose of being discarded to Hell for not believing it exists.

[@joshuaklein8429]

I remember watching that video you were mentioning at the end of your video. It was at a time during my transition from religion, and it was a bit unsettling seeing how these things worked in me at one point. All of your videos are always so well put-together. It's always a treat seeing them pop up in my feed.

[@JohnBedfordSolomon]

This Channel makes KZbin Worthwhile

[@truvelocity]

You out did yourself on this one. Clear, concise and well ordered. I can't say enough about your willingness to put essays together for the public so that you can inject reason into society. I think your sereies should also come in different languages. Do you use patrion? I'm willing to donate for all of your hard work.

[@TheraminTrees]

truvelocity Cheers truvelocity ;8) A few folks've mentioned patreon to me recently - so looking into it. Certainly be up for making a lot more videos if there was enough support for me to devote the necessary time.

[@mistert800]

TheraminTrees I would support also. I think if we can get you a shout-out on one of the bigger channels, it could definitely be viable. Edit: scratch that, I see you already have a pretty healthy number of subscribers

[@TheraminTrees]

mistert800 Thanks - that would be much appreciated.

[@Benderrr111]

Thank you so much for spending your valuable time to prepare this amazing presentation! I appreciate your time!

[@TheraminTrees]

Bender Bending Rodriguez Thanks - glad you enjoyed it.

[@benevolent6705]

I was trapped in the haven't-tried-hard-enough cycle my entire life. I tried so hard and it cost me my health and half my life's years, assuming, I live to an average age.

[@gotcha9983]

Same. God saved me ...the irony.

[@VogtTD]

Their colorblindness analogy really falls apart if you try to apply it to former Christians who turned to atheist

[@spuriouseffect]

They just say those people never knew god, or that they just left the church because they wanted to sin. LOL

[@IsamBitar]

This is remarkable work. It hits right at home and as much as it is beautiful it is also uncomfortable, even to me as an atheist. You have my utmost respect, TheraminTrees. Thank you.

[@gypsumlilac5362]

9:40 that verse actually catalyzed my exit from christianity, because everyone i knew was using it to justify/defend hell.

[@renekruse7221]

I liked your video, and it would have been my favorite video on religion, if it had not been for the Derren brown part, I took the time out to watch both the first and second part of the show Fear and Faith, after you recommended the second part, and I could pretty much predict what was going to happen in the show, but I kept holding out in the hope that I was incorrect, which I was not, sadly. The whole show is a setup for religious people all leading up to the "religious convertion" of and atheist, which I 100% believe to be staged, not at all genuine. I understand that he is trying to show religious people that they were manipulated into their religious believe, but I do not believe in fighting bullshit, with bullshit, and I find Derren brown disgusting.

[@1980rlquinn]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. I also watched both parts of Fear & Faith following this video. I have no patience for "reality TV" writing and editing as it is, but I was particularly disturbed by the practices in the first half.

[@fletch195]

As a theist, I found this so good I gave it a thumbs up. Well done!

[@unenglishable]

the stereogram is a theramintrees!

[@ladysisi6547]

I live in very atheist country I don't know a single religious person. How can people be sure in god's existence?

[@secular555]

Best damn channel on KZbin!

[@19moey86]

I couldn't agree more. Not only are the videos so well made, but the guy is simply brilliant. The scope, depth, authoritative grasp of the logic. It's so stimulating.

[@Rmacnation]

Could not have said it better

[@neoneonize]

I‘m a colourblind atheist though...

[@darkkitty22]

Haha oh

[@laughy38247357075834]

Thank you so much for this video. It's helped me unravel a lot of the theistic fallacies (especially about coincidence) that take up useless space in my mind. Great video.

[@loriw2661]

What an amazing video! I've just recently discovered your channel and I'm so glad I did. The narration and music is wonderful but most importantly the subject matter is superb and well done. Moving on to the next video……

[@placidqualm]

6:52 For those who still cant seem to get it, binocular vision refers to making your eyes focus beyond the object in front of you, so behind/through your screen while still keeping it in your main line of sight. It’s the difference between looking at raindrops on glass vs looking past the raindrops and through the glass.

[@Mysteriousmachine1]

17:24 Ironically, I think I’ve only increased my capacity for more precise, effective self-criticism by being less of a theist. The nature of theism is to have scripted answers for everything, so everything is a black and white game. Remove the veil, and you have a whole cosmos of possibilities you can explore without being branded by hot iron, such as the complexity of taboo emotions or intense (albeit kept to myself) criticism of the people you may have loved but didn’t have the guts to say anything about.

[@YoheYamatai]

Aren't religion being filled with weird rituals and contradictions too ? If religion is wrong and atheism is wrong then atheism is true 🐍

[@Mysteriousmachine1]

@@YoheYamatai I’m not sure what you mean by your explanation. Could you clarify what you meant?

[@YoheYamatai]

@@Mysteriousmachine1 what don't you understand in here ?

[@Mysteriousmachine1]

@@YoheYamatai “if religion is wrong and atheism is wrong then atheism is true” I’m not sure what person would say both sides of a 2 sided debate is wrong. There’s can only be “religion is right or atheism is right” but there’s no such thing as a person who would actually say both are wrong, at least not out of genuine belief. It just doesn’t make sense, which means the ‘then atheism is true’ statement doesn’t follow, meaning even if atheism is true, it’s not because of your previous argument. I do agree with the weird rituals and contradictions part though, that I both understand and agree with.

[@Betta66]

12:33 - 12:48 I think a lot of people went through a similar process regarding Bill Cosby

[@thoughtcriminal2815]

yes, also, Michael Jackson

[@seguaye]

Fantastic video, Mr. Trees! As always it’s insightful, interesting, and vaguely terrifying.

[@CraniumOnEmpty]

"Insipid" means "lacking vigor or interest" and isn't a strong negative. Like saying "lackluster" or "unimpressive" or something. I say that because of my own imagination when you said the word. I'd heard it before, but never really looked it up, so didn't have an exact definition in my mind. I thought you were saying it looked horrid or something from the tone, but that's not what you meant. It was a huge distraction when I watched it. I'm not saying it should be changed. I'm just letting you know what I heard on first viewing and why I decided to define it here. I loved the video. Thanks for making it.

[@TheraminTrees]

CraniumOnEmpty Yep, I'm not saying I find rainbows ugly - just that they leave me cold. I find them bland, insipid - or 'meh' in modern parlance.

[@Beggar42]

TheraminTrees Wwell, the rainbows don't particularly like you either, so puh! ;)

[@sweetsweatyfeet]

TheraminTrees I feel the same way about fireworks displays. Seen too many of them rendering them bland and monotonous now.

[@сукаалди]

I only respect christians who respect me and don't discriminate against me for being a non-believer.

[@eleos5]

Well then, there's many people who are like that, but also many who don't. Please remember, just because we believe in several things the same (we meaning Christians) doesn't mean we all are the same. I know of christian jerks. But I know many kind people as well.

[@сукаалди]

@@eleos5 that is what i said. I only hate christians that are disrespectful to other people. I know a christian who is nice and doesn't judge my atheism.

[@phyokyawkhaing2251]

Your voice is rlly soothing, great job on calmly dealing with the argument unlike some youtubers who deal with these kinds of things with an emotional response

[@PhilipMcAdam]

What can I say. A wonderful message that I can relate to and what wonderful graphics

[@TheraminTrees]

Philip Mc Adam Cheers Philip ;8)

[@gregoryb9313]

I cant believe you made a stereogram of the TheraminTrees baby. My mind is blown rn. Before this video, i had no idea what a stereogram was. When you first mentioned it, I paused the video and spent like 15 minutes trying to see something, but couldnt. I then went on a 3 hour KZbin rabbit hole to learn how to see them (took 2 hours before i saw my first one, and the next hour was trying consecutively harder ones). The attention to detail on this channel is incredible. Thank you for this hidden easter egg, it was well worth the journey to get here. Im gonna finish the rest of this video now; i feel ive earned it.

[@rogerroger5649]

I have to ask myself, now that I am an atheist and have realize how religion controls and distorts lives, can or even should I sit back and just watch my friends and family continue to be used like this? I know many of us have said that we don't go around trying to take religion away from others I suspect because we don't want to appear to be "evil" or don't want to be despised or demonized by them but, are we really doing the right thing in not doing this?

[@spuriouseffect]

@Roger Roger I've been an Atheist since I was 8 or 9. My mother never missed an opportunity to tell me I was going to burn in hell if I didn't accept her religion. When we would argue about the evil in the Bible, I saw it as trying to save her from that evil. She saw it as me being controlled by the devil. After my father died, my brother and sister only visited my mother a couple times a year on holidays. I called to check on her every single day, and she would call me at least a couple times a week asking if I would stop by and help her with something because my brother and sister didn't have the time. After a couple years my mother told me what my father said before he died. He told her to be nicer to me, because I would be the only one who would take care of her when he was gone. She said "Why on earth would he take care of me? He'll never even come back here when you're gone". My father said.. "You'll see." and smiled. Mom lived another 15 years. She continued abusing me, but less often than she had before. Just a few days before she died she asked me to forgive her for what she had done, and I told her that If I hadn't forgiven her every single time she said I was going to burn in hell, I would have never been able to help her all those years. The point is, you can't fix people, all you can do is kill them with kindness. LOL

[@petergarvey7511]

I have heard this from Christians, and my response is: do people with colourblindness choose it? Would it be logical or ethical to punish them for it? When you get the answer' of course not' they have lost, since they claim the answer is' yes' for atheism. There's an persistent delusion in some theist arguments that you choose to be atheist ('you just want to sin' and all the other bunk), and you see this presup idea in several apologists' claims: even Petersen.

[@psigh8161]

I can't imagine a theist resolving a conversation with a conversion. don't get me wrong: I do believe you when you say it has happened, I just personally cannot imagine it. I've been raised as a christian, I've lived my childhood with all the clichés, like worrying about my atheist friends, believing no death was permanent, feeling touches of divinity in moments throughout my life, and of course dismissing anything in the old testament that was clearly not okay by today's morals. through the years most of this washed away, and I became less and less religious, but I've also had issues of anxiety and panic attacks in my early adulthood, and the fear of dying from my own anxiety interwove with a single strand of my former beliefs and kept it stubbornly attached to this day. I now basically only believe in an afterlife, god has borderline nothing to do with it anymore, I've tried cutting that out too, but it's terrifying to me to let it go. It makes no sense, it is causing no good, it might even have worsened my condition, and if there really was a christian heaven I wouldn't even be allowed in, since I've stopped any kind of worhip ritual. this is a cancer, I have to excise it, and recently it's slowly becoming possible, but that was my whole point: because of my own failure, I cannot picture anyone going through something that I find so petrifying through a single conversation, I wish I had one of those

[@smileyp4535]

Do you really find rainbows to be "incepid"? Or is that just a position taken to show the futility of 'explaining beauty'? Just curious

[@TheraminTrees]

I really find them insipid. Clouds I find beautiful - they have some texture.

[@jakethewolfie119]

@@TheraminTrees It is a little wild to see that you respond to comments on videos this old.

[@pineappleland5502]

Rainbows are often dull. They’re kinda cool but i like them because as achild my mom would get me rainbow cookies ;)

[@smileyp4535]

Jake the Wolfie but that's the sign of a good educator, weird is a rather negative term, unique might be better

[@SanjesusDaGod]

My binge last year on your videos was my catalyst

[@Gopherzooka]

does anyone else get nothing but ads for Islam on atheist videos?

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

Yup...

[@ArguingFromIgnorance]

6:52 BABY!

[@Aaron-rw3lv]

make a video!

[@KnakuanaRka]

Yeah, the color analogy is fantastic. A colorblind person might not be able to tell apart red and green apples or such, but they can see that sighted people can always consistently tell them apart, and thus that there is something they're seeing. Religious people can't agree in any way about what God or the gods are like or what they want, so I can't trust them to see anything.

[@KuraIthys]

One of the things that's annoying about Atheism is the ambiguous definition of it. For instance, I don't consider myself an atheist, but by several definitions people have tried to assure me are the 'correct' definition of atheism. (that's kinda hilarious in itself), I would qualify as being an atheist. That creates something of a logical dilemma that gets kinda irritating not because it's really about anything, but because you can never be sure you're on the same page when talking to someone about it. To my knowledge there are several overlapping definitions of atheism that work out to be functionally equivalent in practice, but which have different logical implications. Consider as alternate options (you can make similar arguments about other aspects of religions, such as afterlife, reincarnation, etc. - but for simplicity we'll stick with God) 1. The god of the Judeo-christian religion doesn't exist. 2. All gods officially described by any known existing religion don't exist. 3. All gods whose definitions contradict known verifiable facts don't exist. (this is subtly different from 2, but very similar in practice given the definition of the gods in most religions) 4. I don't know if any gods exist, but I'm willing to consider it if someone can give me a good reason to. (generally this is labelled as being agnostic, but there are other terms for this position) 5. I don't think any god or gods of any kind exist, and you'd have to provide some seriously extraordinary proof to convince me otherwise. 6. I refuse to accept the notion that there is such a thing as a god, no matter what you say. (this is simultaneously the most strictly accurate definition of atheism, yet also a version so extreme that it's tantamount to a strawman) There may be other possible iterations, but the thing is, ALL of these are Atheism, but they have different implications. (and as noted some of them have known, alternate names) However, because the logical implications of each of these is different, it becomes somewhat confusing discussing anything about the subject unless it can be clearly established which iteration is being discussed... Since the implications can be quite different. For instance, position 6 (aka strawman atheism) is as ludicrous and logically untenable as any religion, and for pretty much the same reason. Actively asserting the non-existence of something with no actual proof is logically equivalent to asserting the existence of something with no proof. Though when it comes to 'proof' it is of course easier to disprove a specific assertion than it is to disprove what amounts to the null hypothesis. (though as with the fact that any given religious claim could be logically disproved with a single contradictory piece of evidence, the non-existence claim also requires just a single thing to contradict it.) The other forms however, since they don't tend to assert absolutes are more interesting to discuss in some regards. Though again, since we're dealing with a topic where no actual evidence of any kind seems to exist in ANY direction, pretty much any absolute position has to inevitably be taken for arbitrary reasons. (eg, 'taken on faith'.) When someone tells you there are no gods, that is, like it or not, a statement of faith, not fact. Not because it's possible to 'prove' that gods exist, but because doing so in a general sense (eg outside of the context of arguing against a specific religion) is as impossible to prove as any other position. 'there are no gods' and 'there are gods' are, after all, in absence of further evidence, logically equivalent positions. Neither assertion holds a privileged position except amongst the mentally lazy. Occam's razor for instance is the tool of a pragmatist who doesn't have time to consider every possible alternative, NOT an objective statement of comparative truth. - it is not that the simpler position is objectively more correct; It's just more convenient and takes less effort to work with. Especially when you consider that logically equivalent theories are just that - equivalent. That means the logically correct alternative to taking the simplest possible explanation is NOT to pick some arbitrarily more complex explanation, but to consider ALL possible explanations as valid so long as all of them correctly explain the experimental observations. However it shouldn't be hard to see why having to consider 20 ideas, or 200, or a million is harder than just taking one as correct and discarding the others. In most instances it won't matter anyway, since the 'alternative' descriptions of the situation would only be relevant if they result in a divergent prediction. And if that's the case then they aren't actually equivalent theories anymore and Occam's Razor should never have been used in the first place. Anyway... These discussions do get tedious after a while... XD Arguing about literally nothing. Or at least, nothing that can hold any real relevance to a living human being...

[@oAngelofDeathx]

I get labeled as atheist for nothing believing theres a big man in the sky watching and judging our every action. but i think the universe and the mechanics that drives physics, chemistry, biology, etc, as god. To me, nature is divine. How all organisms appear to be designed. How molecules arranged the right way create dna which is the blue prints of how to make that living organism. How a star can create new elements through fusion (fission?) and those elements are now in our body keeping us alive. I reject all religious gods. But the power of the universe and how it created itself is the only god I believe.

[@StilvurBee]

Ok i kinda want this framed, or at least made note of; "When someone tells you there are no gods, that is, like it or not, a statement of faith, not fact. Not because it's possible to 'prove' that gods exist, but because doing so in a general sense (eg outside of the context of arguing against a specific religion) is as impossible to prove as any other position. 'there are no gods' and 'there are gods' are, after all, in absence of further evidence, logically equivalent positions. Neither assertion holds a privileged position except amongst the mentally lazy."

[@dr.questionmark6481]

@@oAngelofDeathx I believe what you're talking about is called Pantheism (believing the universe itself is god). I mean, for all intents and purposes it's the same thing as Atheism, but they have different implications.

[@lucasmillerthelewderofloli9327]

1. I wouldn't call this atheism since it implies you do believe other deities to be a possibility. It is basically the stance of every religion, except it reject every deity besides theirs instead of just one. 2. Atheism, though it leaves still a tiny loophole for possible theism ( A deity nobody described might still exist, but since you would never heard of it you'd have no reason to believe in it ) 3. I'd say this would actually be theism, since not all deities are omnipotent logic paradoxes that contradict facts. 4. I'd go as far as to call this atheism as well, since you do not have faith in any deity. I find agnosticism to be a bit of a cop-out myself. I do not deny that there is a possibility of a God existing, yet I am still an atheist by the fact I refuse to believe without proof. If you think there is a possibility of a God existing, but you have no ground to believe in it then you're an atheist. 5. Atheism. 6. Antitheism. This is how I describe those three terms. Theism: Belief that at least a single God exists. Atheism: Lack of belief in any God(s). Antitheism: Rejecting the concept and existence of God(s) altogether.

[@jackspiller23]

KuraIthys very interesting reading! But perhaps there is a meaningful purpose to this discussion...

[@mikeredd8833]

My Lord mystra. The first analogy was insane. You got me

[@Fritz999]

It shore ain't, as I can clearly see the multiple shortcomings of religion.

[@namkedi]

6:55 Guys What’s the 3D thing

[@JohanKylander]

his pfp

[@NioFiota]

Growing up in a christian conservative family, every video you make resonates with me.

[@JRibs]

Cloooooowd, turn into a square shape cloooooowd. Cloooooowd, turn into a square shape cloooooowd. Cloooooowd, turn into a square shape cloooooowd.

[@_souyuu]

Great video, haven't seen many people tackle it so calmly as you did. I was catholic as a child but thankfully reached the age of reason pretty soon and this video was a great way of assessing one's belief. Amazing video, man P.S: The stereograms didn't work for me i see nothing but the pattern.... google, am i blind

[@klausgartenstiel4586]

i don't blame them the real actual truth just hurts too much

[@GRASBOCK]

I was raised as an atheist. So I didn't have to think about all that so hard. After watching a few of your videos I am now concerned, that I am much less resistant to dogmas and have some hidden faith to something I am not even aware of...

[@dancinswords]

I've never gotten one of those 3d magic eye pictures to work, but I managed to see your little baby lad in that one. So I've looked at a lot more of those things now. Pretty cool. It's like augmented reality

[@dancinswords]

That interventions thing sounds like a good idea. Someone should try doing that, because I'll guarantee you Derren Brown didn't. Since it was him, they just paid someone to record videos about scenarios they had written out for them. That's just the sort of needlessly dishonest thing Derren does. He's a real scumbag charlatan peddler of misinformation

[@joehinojosa8030]

My " Parting shot" was to SAY :" Your Logic was UNDENIABLE". This means given your worldview, your perspective is logically coherent,consistent EVEN compelling. That was actually a kudos to you, though I am a theist.

[@OatmealDonk]

Love that you went to the effort of turning your logo into an optical illusion.

[@rubyvergouwen]

I think it's kinda funny how he genuinely sounded angry during the rainbow segment. What? All the deep stuff has already been commented several times, this is just something I noticed.

[@BlightCosmos]

TheraminTrees thank you so much for talking about theism. My parents are religious fanatics. It makes me feel better that someone else thinks and feel like me towards theism.

[@jakethewolfie119]

From 4:47, if you trace the motion of the moon, it traces out a Cardioid.

[@DEATHCHICKEN1337]

Someone once compared atheism to veganism. I don’t understand such analogy.

[@TheraminTrees]

Haven't heard that one - and point escapes me too.

[@DEATHCHICKEN1337]

TheraminTrees I just remembered that they also said ‘You have to believe in something.’ They could have thought that theism is as necessary for us as meat is necessary for our diet.

[@DEATHCHICKEN1337]

I’m don’t think meat actually is necessary but they could have thought so.

[@KvaGram]

Well, just for fun, I decided to shoot a hole in one of your analogizes. you can see a stereogram with only one eye. You just need a computer with image manipulating software that supports layering with different effects. I put a screenshot of your stereogram into gimp, duplicated it, sat the overlay to difference, and moved it to overlap. While this method may fail to retrieve the fine details, it does reveal the existence and outline of a hidden shape in the stereogram.

[@guillermorobledo2842]

That just means you tampered with it and made a pop-up stereogram. Kind of like how the 3DS makes 3D with 2 images overlapping. Even with 1 eye at a certain angle can see it.

[@toto_feather8732]

I had no idea what to expect when clicking on this recommended video... Oh boy, I'm speechless rn. ^^

[@Valcuda]

I remember when I was younger, my aunt was religious and was trying a bit to make my sister and I religious too. This failed on me because I was too dumb to understand anything, it also failed on my sister. I also don't think my aunt is religious anymore. Honestly, my family is quite atheist. Honestly I don't really understand religion myself, but as long as people don't try to force religion on me or a friend, I don't mind it. However if someone does try forcing religion on me or a friend, you can bet I'll try to take them down a notch or two. I basically put religious people into 3 groups, the people who don't seem too strong on their beliefs (the people that don't really seem religious), the people who are noticeably religious but accept atheist or at least tolerate them, and then the assholes who'll try their hardest to make you religious. Honestly if you're religious, I don't mind that, and I will respect that, as long as you tolerate atheist, I'm fine with that. But if you try making me or a friend of mine religious, that's where I draw the line, and I'll just attempt to get them to shut up about it. Funny story: there was one time during school where somebody was trying to force a religion on me, and I of course tried disproving their points to get them to shut up, then, some other religious person jumped in to help me, and they started to use their religion to disprove the first person. I have mad respect for the person who helped defend me!

[@cameron9665]

Love how you play by others rules and still prove them wrong.

[@notthatbitchagain6857]

I've never been able to see the hidden image in stereograms. Hmmmm...maybe that's why I'm an atheist? Nah.

[@vocetemgostodementiroso3230]

EVERYTHING MAKES SENSE NOW!!!!!

[@Alexander-nd5de]

Love the talk. I'd just listen to hours of whatever your talk about. That buttery voice 0w0

[@adaharrisonn]

TT, I may be foolish for not knowing this if youve stated it somewhere but I've looked at a few descriptions and couldn't tell--but I'm assuming you animate these videos personally. If so, I must say I continue to be impressed by all the elements you use in the videos! They seem simplistic and "easy" to most probably, but I am always appreciative of the art form that it is and the style you execute it in :). And if it's another person who animates whom you collaborate with, then well done to them! 😁

[@Patr111k]

TheraminTrees I am truly impressed with your insight.

[@deepashtray5605]

Took you long enough.

[@TheraminTrees]

Deep Ashtray Hey Mr Ashtray. Yeah I got distracted listening to Jupiter.

[@deepashtray5605]

TheraminTrees Another masterpiece.

[@MrElionor]

The reaction to atheism color blindness is also very different we don't hate the color blind we certainly don't threaten them with eternal torment in fact this analogy works better to outline how unfair such threats are if I am incapable to see what you want me to see how can you hold me responsible for not seeing it?

[@specs4life259]

Something far better can be found within that what religion promises to offer.

[@PunXX0r]

I have, myself, made the opposite journey, initially seeing faith, belief, religion, and concepts of God as preposterous superstitions which did not serve humanity except as a means by which we could justify our misdeeds to one another, and explain the unexplained, or inexplicable. I started out an atheist, and have, over time, become a fundamentalist agnostic, sure that I don't know, and further sure that you don't either. It is absolutely possible to show that supernatural explanations are not required for any phenomenon, regardless of how miraculous it may seem on its surface, but at a certain point, certitude itself becomes an impossibility, as measurement, contrast, and comparison of vanishingly small or inconceivably fast happenings simply defy all measurement or quantification. Now, I understand that just because something cannot be known does not mean, therefore, God (or aliens, or whatever) must be the explanation, and in fact, I would no more make an ontological argument for the existence of a divine deity than I would make an ontological argument against it. However difficult I find it to believe in God, I find the idea that life, awareness, or consciousness is somehow an emergent property of complexity to be less believable. A protozoa is demonstrably less complex (by many orders of magnitude) than say, the Internet, but the Internet is not aware. The primary issue that I take with Atheism, generally, is not an ontological one at all, but a behavioral one. It has been my personal experience that individuals without a sense of some kind of overarching moral order, who believe that morality is a creation of themselves (and therefore, malleable for expediency) create more suffering per person than people who have that sense. The fact that you admit to asking yourself if you have been "fair" belies some notion of an external moral order, probably the origin of the faithful's assertion which you noted - that "everyone believes in God, but some of us are mad at Him." If there is no external, overarching moral order, then why bother questioning anything you do? If you are the originator of all things, then there would be no need to compare yourself to a standard. This is Dostoevsky's theme in Crime and Punishment. Please do not think that I am trying to fall back on the simplistic argument that without the existence of God, there can be no morality, but something in our own wiring benefits from an external moral order... and we DO naturally compare our own actions to it, and know intuitively if we are doing something wrong. Anyhow, to return to ontology with a side of epistemology, the act of knowing necessitates 4 things, observation, labeling, measurement, and comparison. The absolute defies knowing to a mortal certainty, as one cannot define the universe and give 3 examples. Consciousness cannot be measured, compared or contrasted either, as everything that it is must be considered by it, itself, which in doing poisons all results with subjectivity. Personally, I believe (unfalsifiably, I know) that Consciousness is a fundamental constant of the universe, and that the - albeit imperfectly perceived - emerging external moral order is real, even if I cannot prove it. Anyhow, I think that you do yourself and your viewers a disservice by painting theists with such a simplistic and broad brush, as many are simply (like myself) fully aware of the limitations of their apparatus for "knowing" - but feel the presence of the divine in spite of that.

[@Zebo12345678]

I don't have much to say about this other than that I actually quite enjoy your view of the subject. I appreciate people like you that don't discount things until they're proven to be false. I have two gripes with what you've said though. Firstly, morality in its own right doesn't really mean anything. A wild elephant will share food with other members of the herd, because that benefits the herd as a whole. Being "good" is beneficial to everyone in the long run. Behavioral habits can be inherited, and as with everything else that's inherited, it adapts and evolves. That is to say, the concept of morality is as much tied to evolution as the adaptation of our species' bodies over many generations is. That is, if you believe in evolution, which I would say is hard to refute. Whether evolution itself is/was managed by a god, however, is still up for debate. The other gripe I have is with your statement about Atheists causing more suffering than religious folks. All the evidence I need there is... Atheists have never gone on crusades, or sacrificed people on altars. Catholics have done that. Vikings have done that. Aztecs have done that. All in the name of some gods that either demand some sort of justice be performed by the people (rather than just using their own "limitless" power) or demand some kind of offering. To this very day there are people who are indoctrinated into cruel religions and feel the need to commit terrorist atrocities because they believe what they're doing is for the good of humanity. 9/11. Of course most religious people are not murderers or terrorists, but the track record of religion as a whole is far more violent and bloody than Atheists. And as far as being mean/cruel to people over their belief, or lack thereof, the same is true for religious people. The examples in this very video come from the kinds of religious people that believe they are better than you or believe that you're a fool because you don't believe in their god. Those kinds of people are just as numerous as Atheists that believe you're a fool because you _do_ believe in god. One final note I'd like to tack on here... The video doesn't have any solid problems with the _potential_ existence of divines. The bigger issue is that throughout history and all over the globe, people have differing religious ideals. They all say they're right, but none of them believe the others are. Simply put, if everyone disagrees on religion, then who's to say that any bit of religion is true? For any religion you pick, there are dozens of other ones that say you're wrong. If you tried to side with any of _them_ then there would be another set of dozens telling you you're wrong. In the absence of any proof, you just have to go with whatever evidence you have... Without any evidence of a god, the most simple answer is that there just might not be one. As with any theory, there's room for Atheists to be the wrong ones here, but I'd rather be wrong based on a lack of evidence than be wrong based on blind faith.

[@PunXX0r]

@@Zebo12345678 Thanks Zebo for the thoughtful reply! It's always nice to encounter someone online willing to take the time to explicate and ruminate on something, especially when we don't agree. To address your first 'gripe,' I don't believe that morality must have come from a God; I'm not a theist, not really a religious person, just someone who feels a touch of divinity in life, despite being completely aware that its explanation (divine or sublunary) is almost certainly beyond my ken. I would not disagree at all that evolution is likely the author of moral feeling, seems probable to me. When I say "overarching moral order" it does not imply (to my mind) a conscious architect, any more than the strong-coupling constant or atomic-mass constant do. It's not even necessarily measurable, at least by me... (not a scientist). My point in mentioning it is only that we all seem to exhibit a belief in it, based upon our actions (both good and ill) and words. In fact, the very need to argue ideas of truth or morality stems directly from the feeling that to be wrong is well... you know... wrong. So really, I don't know that your first contention amounts to a disagreement - since I don't think that we are on the opposite side of that question, though I could certainly have misinterpreted your point. On your second contention, and this is in no way to excuse the horrible behaviors of the religious throughout history, the 20th century alone saw the deaths by execution, forced starvation, enslavement, and forced labor of over 100 million people, justified by the explicitly atheist ideologies of Marxism, National Socialism, Chinese Communism, and others. The crusades, by comparison, had a death toll of about 200,000 - over the duration of about 200 years, about 1000 people per year. Inexcusable, sure, but compared to the pile of bodies lining the White Sea / Baltic canal, it's a pittance. Compared to the Holodomor, or the Cultural Revolution, or the Gulag, or the Cambodian killing fields, the religious historical record is spotless. Now, keep in mind, I'm not defending the horrific behavior that the religious have exhibited over history. Killing in the name of ideological differences is horrible, period. In fact, I'd like to reframe the whole argument from ontology and philosophy to psychology, and use that framework to explain why I think that belief and faith have a more positive than negative effect. As, after all, not all who profess religion or atheism are unequivocally moral or immoral. It seems to me that any given human mind operates under one of two basic psychological (and therefore, moral) frameworks, that of being a small part of something real and incontestable, and that of being a large part (or all) of something subjective and malleable. The great quote from George Bernard Shaw's serpent to Methuselah captures this dichotomy cleanly: "You see things; and you say, 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say, 'Why not?'" When a person operates under the first psychological framework, their natural response to hardship, struggle, misunderstanding, etc. is to assume that there is something deficient in themselves, and that they need to work in themselves to be better, more worthy, more godly, or whatever. Is their perception and resultant action perfect? Of course it isn't, they are humans - but the constraint of placing the work-to-be-done within themselves reduces the amount of damage that they will cause even when their actions are misguided. When a person operates under the second psychological framework, however, their natural response to struggle is to assume that there is something wrong with the world, since they are the subject, the all-important perceiver. Operating under this conceit, they set out to change, not themselves, but reality itself, and in doing so cause and justify untold horrors, hell on earth, as described by Viktor Frankl or Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. You are correct that people all over the world throughout history have different religious beliefs, misguided outgrowths in response to an underlying mystery that they cannot explain. Both religious and areligious people will have varying degrees of doubt, and that doubt can lead to misdeeds. But so much more dangerous is the sense that everything is already explained, either religious or atheistic, that no mystery exists that will not out in time to the majesty of human knowledge. The most horrible acts are done by the certain, and in my experience, as well as by the historical record, those who believe that they can immanetize the echeton are more commonly Atheists than they are religious people. Cheers!

[@BornOnThursday]

Love the video; almost reminds me of "Science Saved My Soul". I haven't had much experience with talking with others about this but in almost all the videos I have watched, there seems to be a reliance on methods that don't work, and a choice to never change.

[@misad6308]

NGL, "defining pixies" sounds a lot like "Let's test how well our neural network has learned to recognise images. To test it's prowess, we'll give it *the same dataset we trained it on.*"

[@Ejaezy]

I discovered your channel today and I love your videos . It seems I've found yet another awesome atheist channel.

[@boazbouwman8893]

I came to faith 1,5 year ago and within a year i fell from faith again because i started reading the bible and i fell from faith verry quickly

[@joshuakohlmann9731]

I concur where Derren Brown is concerned: his psychological experiments can have life changing implications. The Fear & Faith one is excellent, but others can help put faih-based matters into perspective, too: The Guilt Trip, The Secret of Luck and The System are well worth watching.

[@сукаалди]

When i was on a christian primary school i believed in god but then thing became illogical and the faith really went away when one of my christian teachers said:"humans existed at the same time as dinosaurs." And "the earth is 4000 years old." And then i began thinking for myself and i realised christianity is not for me and is bullshit.

[@HelpmegetSubscriberswith-if9zk]

The biggest threat to theology is an open and logical mind -Moses

[@Bendilin]

>The fifth one is just an atheist playing devil's advocate What a pleasant surprise, they were your friend all along.

[@vixxcelacea2778]

Atheism is the default because you're not born thinking any god, gods or magic exists. You're born asking "WTF is going on? Where am I? Who am I? I'm going to cry now."

[@nolanbalzer1796]

Thank you. Graceful yet unflinching.

[@joshjosh1780]

That stereogram was a very cool experience for me, I don''t know why I haven't seen one before, but I full screened the video paused and it took about 2 mins to unfocus my eye. I started seeing blips of a oval in the center, then it had more shape and possibly shapes attached to it then for a second it was a foggy 3d object then i lost it, after a few seconds I got it back and I tried to look at different parts of the object and it disappeared, but then I followed the steps again to see it and somehow held my eye focus so that I could move my head without losing sight of the object and then I was able to look at every detail of the 3d looking object while moving my eyes around the picture, it was as if I was looking into another dimension. Very fun for me

[@anthropomorphicpeanut6160]

I had to pause the video at 6:54 and I've spent about 30 minutes looking at stereograms and reading on how to see them and I can't. So frustrating... Update: it's the next day, I still can't Update 2: I managed to see 3 online, but I still can't see the one in the video

[@fricketyfracktraintrack]

That part about cherry picking...wheww. Fans of ...a certain celebrity (don't @ me) should def reevaluate what they're looking away from and making excuses for. I've seen their tactics flipped onto critics many a time, and it makes them look out of touch at best, immoral at worst.

[@420alfonzo6]

He's so active in the comments. Nice.

[@420alfonzo6]

@Theodor Willis If you're going to heaven, I wanna go to hell.

[@ConsarnitTokkori]

one thing i find pretty funny is how fast this argument falls apart when someone points out that complete monochromacy is one of the rarer flavors of color blindness in humans, and even then, there are different types of monochromacy