Josh-AR | Freewill Has To Exist | Talk Heathen 05.34

[@internettevarolanadam]

"Free will have to exist becuase I dont vibe with the alternative" Cool argument bro

[@Locust13]

I really like JMike, he is great at holding the callers feet to the fire to provide evidence for their claims, something that is far too lacking in far too many shows, I'm tired of hearing theists call in and walk all over the hosts, that doesn't happen with JMike

[@UngoogleableMan]

And yet at the same time we have other callers complaining about the hosts not allowing the callers to get their gish gallop of points. I agree with you though. Cut that shit off and hold their feet to the fire.

[@advorak8529]

@@UngoogleableMan And I would say, hold the feet *of their claims* to the fire. There is little to be gained from torturing the people that call in, besides, they are not the enemy. Misinformation and shoddy thinking is an enemy.

[@shinobi-no-bueno]

@@advorak8529 (it's a metaphor, nobody's talking about burning people) lol

[@TrippyKenpachi]

⁠@@advorak8529Who is torturing the people who call in? How are they being “tortured,” exactly?

[@Callimo]

lol the fact that instead of calmly and rationally expanding on his premise, Josh just gets more and more angry is just hilarious. I guess all his brain chemicals are misfiring today.

[@kenbee1957]

😆😆😆

[@willrawls5899]

Yeah I agree. I think all of Josh’s brain cells rubbing together is causing him to be pissed off determinately.

[@ricardovonkrypton8908]

He sounded pretty tense the moment he came on air...

[@gregsanich5183]

His emotional state is irrelevant bc he never had any choice in the matter.

[@jgone4856]

I really enjoy these two hosts together. They stay calm and collected and cut back on the pocking fun at the caller which imo makes for a more productive and enjoyable experience

[@Persun_McPersonson]

Yeah, that one guy who gets really angry really puts a damper on the experience for me, like we understand why you're frustrated but this is a show so be a fucking profesional.

[@jacoblodwig67]

This guy is like a southern Canadian catholic. The cadence and little quirks in Josh's voice were triggering flashbacks lol

[@TrippyKenpachi]

Oh, “god,” you’re right.

[@OnTheFritz602]

Paused at 4:10, he throws out the word "Atheists" in the same snarky way Laura Ingraham does "Liberals".

[@RaulPerez-jj5jj]

You guys are the pinnicle of ZEN and Josh still called you a***oles while you were giving the calmest answer. Wow.

[@cmack17]

Josh, no. Think about it for a moment... If free will does not exist, "punishing criminals" is not a choice. The act of "punishing" is ALSO out of the control of the punisher, in the EXACT SAME MANNER as the claim that the criminal had no choice in their actions. Try again.

[@acspicer]

Somebody raised this in another thread and it’s a great insight. I wonder why it didn’t occur to me at first? Maybe the idea of free will is so ingrained in me that I just go to that default.

[@cmack17]

@@acspicer This is exactly why I spend almost no time pondering the issue. Until a "god" appears and allows me to understand, the issue is moot.

[@fomori2]

Josh isnt arguing a logical "free will" anyways. He wants a "free will" that allows for determinism, but only when it suits his god and religion.

[@travis5181]

Johnny P. is the politest, funniest snarkster ever, and JMike is someone I try so hard to keep up with mentally. An amazing team, keep up the excellent work.

[@jimmyshrimbe9361]

3 minutes in and I understand why it's a 30 minutes clip.....

[@ChavdoMnml]

Who says we have to punish criminals? What we actually want to do is remove them from society, so they can no longer cause harm.

[@DavidSmith-oy4of]

The whole punishment idea in an attempt to control or deter certain behaviours is actually quite thin on good evidence. Punishment will only ever get us temporary compliance.

[@fbxx9845]

@@DavidSmith-oy4of - So if I understand your BS blanket claim you've checked your crystal ball and you can predict the future? LOL

[@leosoftware2643]

Shame there's no hell to handle all of them

[@DavidSmith-oy4of]

@@fbxx9845 We can predict some things with regards to behaviour, sure. It's why as a society we try to remove kids from environments where they're abused. We understand that can have long term impacts on future problem behaviours. No crystal ball needed.

[@gergelymagyarosi9285]

I think too many people conflate punishment and retribution. Punishment can serve as a deterrence, a rehabilitation, can protect society from the criminal, or could compensate the victims. All this regardless if free will exists. Like building a dam to prevent flood.

[@teresaamanfu7408]

Josh is too emotionally attached to how he feels about free will. I hope Josh watches this, thinks about his performance, does a little bit of research about free will, and calls back.

[@JustAMagicDuck]

There really are two fascinating conversations to be had here: A) does free will exist? And B) if there is no free will then does morality exist? I would LOVE to hear these guys debate that second one. Seems like it would be a great conversation. Unfortunately Josh came to trap Athiests into saying something bad so he could call them immoral and high-five himself.

[@gregsanich5183]

It's ultamitely irrelevant bc he has no choice in the matter.

[@bulkvanderhuge9006]

It's amazing how quickly religious people get angry while claiming that they have "peace" because "Jesus is in their hearts"

[@VitoDRF]

He won't

[@marcuszarate1513]

Josh is crazy. And its his free will.

[@stevea.b.9282]

The more I listen to this show, and Atheist Experience, the more aspects of Reality I realize I don't know the truth about, which is kind of liberating.

[@MrFungus420]

Y'all make this "argument" way too difficult. If there is no free will, then WE DON'T HAVE FREE WILL WHEN WE PUNISH SOMEONE.

[@rickywinthrop]

I was thinking this exact thing the entire time and kept saying it out loud to myself while listening lol

[@jamspiders4154]

That is why Josh "thinks" everyone treats him like shit, is because he treats everyone like shit... he gets what he gives.

[@williezar2231]

If that's so he's sort of making a case for determinism. Ironically. :D

[@latinzane]

"Josh, you can go back to your safe space." 😂😂😂

[@2ahdcat]

Josh is a LOVELY guy. eh? SO Christian-like. As cuddly and squishy as a... cactus. Don't Y'all wanna give Him a big O' hug? Next time He comes on? Name Him "Captain Happy-Pants". LOL

[@c.guydubois8270]

If a deity had an eternal master plan wouldn't that be a deterministic deity?

[@Ascend777]

How could a deity think 100000^100000 steps ahead?

[@c.guydubois8270]

@RWafpre quantum planning? Imagine the math skills required. Abraham's deity has mud man and rib woman, talking snakes (not 45th POTUS) and asses, magic trees, ect...this is planning?

[@c.guydubois8270]

@RWafpre contact with the enemy. Fictional deities cannot be enemies.

[@themanwithnoname1839]

Exactly, if god truly does have a plan then we dont have free will cuz all of our lives are already planned out and pre determined, so every choice we make was meant to be made so free will cant exist in any religion that has a god that claims to have some master plan.....

[@helenjohnson6385]

If the criminal doesn't have free will so has no choice but to commit a crime, then surely the people who punish him/her also don't have free will and can't help giving out punishments?!

[@JustAMagicDuck]

See THAT would be an interesting argument to see play out. If everything is truly deterministic then can morality exist? All Josh wants to do is call atheists immoral.

[@newwaveknight1]

Who hurt you, Josh? Who hurt you?

[@Silianti]

Someone named Will

[@computerflight2145]

Josh loses sleep every day over how criminals suffer insufficiently

[@kenbee1957]

Lol Sounds very much like that

[@awesomesause]

If free will doesn't exist, then you're just riding a wave. You didn't choose anything, you're just along for the ride. The exsistance of life disrupted the natural, but created a new one. The ability to think is the ability to change your destiny by mearly moving. So far as we know, everything else in the universe just happens.

[@SPL0869]

Can you see a host in Walmart telling this guy that he has to put on a mask in order to enter the store?

[@HarryNicNicholas]

followers of the christian mythology have to have free will otherwise the fun of punishing people by burning them alive for eternity gets removed from the table.

[@tomwolfe6063]

How can it be immoral to punish people for committing crimes if there’s no free will? They couldn’t have made any other decision. However, this means that the people dishing out the punishment for committing crimes also have no choice. It’s a pointless argument in my opinion.

[@fomori2]

You didnt address the "moral" part though, because something is not "moral" simply because someone has no choice. The reason it is moral, choice OR no choice, is because punishing people for crimes is done for the BENEFIT of society as a whole. Preventing someone from harming the well being of others, ESPECIALLY if they are unable to choose not to do so, is what a moral society should do. The argument is not pointless if it educates even one person on the topic. It is only pointless to those that are incapable of arguing their position and want the matter dropped.

[@Solenum756]

I love how like half of these shows are just teaching people how to form an argument and present evidence for said argument On another note these two hosts are probably the most zen like I think it would be very difficult to piss them off

[@RockDiggie]

How can theists believe free will exists if they believe their god is omniscient & omnipresent? If their god knows their past, present, and future, then their choices have already been determined by their special friend. They’re not actually making choices, their choices are determined by an outside force.

[@tTtt-ho3tq]

Because, God may know but you didn't until you made a choice. So long as you're concerned you didn't know what choice you make until you did.

[@bazingaburg8264]

@@tTtt-ho3tq Sounds more like the illusion of free will to me. If a god with perfect foresight, meaning it knows what i will choose at any junction beforehand without fail, i did not have the option to choose differently, no matter how independant or free the choice seemed to me from my limited perspective.

[@tTtt-ho3tq]

@@bazingaburg8264 Say, there's no God. Nobody knows what you're gonna choose. Do you have a free will? Do you think you're free to think and choose?

[@bazingaburg8264]

@@tTtt-ho3tq Whether a flawlessly clarevoyant deity i don't believe in does or doesn't exist, i can't assess how free my will actually is. I wouldn't know how to justify the assumption i could so completely detach myself from the antecedent variables, baked into me throughout my life, which at the very least heavily influence my thoughts and actions. I'm no hard determinist, but i doubt our will is as free as we like to think it is. Not to worry, accountability is still a practical necessity. How free do you consider your will to be?

[@tTtt-ho3tq]

@@bazingaburg8264 Being deterministic doesn't include God. If deterministic (100%) then there won't be no practical necessity. It's already pre-determined practically. I believe we have a will, a will to make choices, to choose, but it's very influenced so I'm not sure how free it is, though. (what if there's someone that knows what you're gonna choose? but you don't know he is there, I don't know he's there.)

[@chad969]

The hosts missed an obvious contradiction with this guys argument. On the one hand he’s saying that moral responsibility wouldn’t exist if free will doesn’t exists; one the other hand he’s saying that it would be immoral to throw people in prison if free will doesn’t exist. That latter claim presupposes that people would still have moral even without free will, which is precisely what the caller is wanting to reject. So his argument is self-defeating

[@garypage9515]

Unfortunately, Josh is not intelligent enough to understand what they are asking him to do, nor understand the faulty logic he is trying to employ. His emotional attachment is solely due to his religious beliefs, that we have free will, and that is the basis of our choices which either get us to heaven or to hell. Free will is foundational in his very strong religious belief framework, and without it, the need for his religion falls apart.

[@geraldammons5520]

"Josh" has no intention of having a conversation. He just wants to attack atheists. (As all presupps do)

[@IdiotDoomSpiral69]

Josh is committing a logical fallacy called an argument from consequence, in which he argues that his view on free will is true because he thinks it would be really bad if it wasn't. He also ignores the fact that sequestering dangerous people away from the rest of society until such a point that they have been rehabilitated is not at all dependent on free will. It doesn't matter if a philosophical-zombie did it, or an agent. Society would be justified in sequestering away threats. Josh seems to see some value in the act of punishment itself, instead of the desired goal of preventing, reducing, and responding to crimes that hurt other people. Punishment is not what matters, preventing and reducing the negative effects of crime are. If a punishment could not do that, there is no value in the punishment. Retribution for retribution's sake IS immoral, and serves no purpose.

[@Noname-w7f1e]

1) Absences of free will doesn’t prevent humans from making logical conclusions based on available data. 2) By punishing criminals you convey that criminal behavior will be punished making an example of the criminal at hand for other wannabe-criminals. 3) If 1 and 2 are correct there’s absolutely logical reason to punish criminals even if there’s no free will. And by the way there’s no free will - there’s only an illusion of free will…

[@MatthewSherriff85]

I like the saying, "I believe I have free will, because I have no other choice." If anyone knows who originally said that please let me know

[@mausperson5854]

Our choices are either determined or random (on a subatomic level perhaps). There is no room for 'free' in the way Josh so desperately wants. The best we can say is that we have no access to all of the determining factors that govern our thoughts and actions, so the illusion of free will is pervasive and we are are condemned not to 'be' free to feel as though we are. We function just fine with the knowledge that all of what we are and what we do is determined by factors beyond our control. If I thought the factors determining Josh's ability to process the information available was up to the task, I would suggest he read the entry level philosophy and neurology on the topic at hand.

[@healthfadsfade]

Jeez the proper response would be “let me go back to the drawing board” it’s literally that simple. The free will topic is way over my head. I feel I can choose to eat an orange or an apple. Am I missing something?

[@moonstargazzer]

This guy sounds a lot like the old guy “Mark” who constantly was calling from “Stone Church” or whatever it was called

[@nessap87]

His voice is really familiar. Anyone know other names he's called in under?

[@charlesatty]

He is from Arkansas land of thoughtless thinking.

[@mausperson5854]

The argument from consequences is a really bad way to start. Just because you don't like the conclusion that no one is technically responsible for their actions doesn't address if they indeed could have acted other than they did (thereby affirming personal responsibility), nor does it take into consideration the determining factors of those actions or indeed the determining factors leading to the decisions of those charged with the consequences the guilty party ultimately faces.

[@gatorboymike]

I put my atheist jumpsuit on three legs at a time.

[@GoodBrotherGrimm]

Man he did not know what to do when he wasn't allowed to follow his script.

[@llwpeaches]

I think Josh needs a time-out and intensive rehabilitation before reentering society.

[@Truth-Be-Told-USA]

No freewill apparently does not have to exist because obviously it doesn't exist in heaven if heaven exists. Robot argument falls apart with heaven

[@jewsco]

why are so many of these theist callers so angry? if they have god in their lives shouldnt they be happy? or do they know it is a lie?

[@c.guydubois8270]

Even stars die. Universe appears determinate, why an exception for humans?

[@MacLaw3084]

you guys may have been able to save some grief by agreeing/disagreeing on a definition of free will in the beginning

[@DustbinFunkbndr]

I was really irritated by that. Maybe should have moved past him saying “must exist” in his call screener notes. Have a good faith conversation and get to the main point of what he wants to talk about. Make the framework something like “If free will doesn’t exist, as many people believe, is it morally acceptable to punish criminals for acting based on determinism?” That was clearly the essence of what he wanted to talk about. I LOVE these hosts, but was frustrated by the way they chose to handle the first portion of the conversation.

[@segments2156]

I think free will exists and doesent... it's a matter of "magnification level"... I will explain by an analogy. From our "magnification level" we exist as individual... but if you look at a human being from a highly microscopical point of view, we're just a buch of molecules more or less held together, and interacting with other molecules that are not in our bodies. And if we looked from an atomical point of view, our existence would become even more abstract... Now back to free will, i think from the point of view of our conscience, we have free will, we make decisions... but the mechanism of our decisions making is made of so many things that we do have control on... Also, if one was to watch human beings from afar, he would probably think we are as much of drones as we tend to think ants (for exemple) are... and that our behavior is really predictable...

[@blueredingreen]

There are some important questions to consider in terms of what justice even means and why or whether to "punish" people, and these would be especially relevant if libertarian free will doesn't exist. It doesn't really get us anywhere to assert that free will must exist because you're uncomfortable with those questions or with the answers they may have.

[@anotherway6427]

Even when Freewill does not exist it's still not immoral to punish criminals. Morality specifically subjective morality works in a way that determines what is best for a society based on a net growth/worth of pleasure and pain. Yes though a rapist does not have Freewill it is far more beneficial for everyone if the perpetrator of said crime is arrested and sentenced to prison. Of course, it's not beneficial for the rapist, but this is a matter of feeling vs fact. It does not matter if the person being arrested suffers from imprisonment because not only are we now providing comfort and further protection for the victim, but also protecting possible future victims as well. Though we are not free creatures we still have a sense of moral agency because we have to. A core function of all sentient life is to avoid pain and suffering, which is something we are not free from. Therefore, as a collective society, it becomes our responsibility to form these social constructs that invoke justice, because if we didn't we would have never stepped away from the wilds of which we originate.

[@rubberparrot1]

If free will doesn’t exist do we have a choice not to punish criminals… wouldn’t that be just as involuntary as being a criminal

[@myco_chaotix]

This caller is BIG mad.

[@UngoogleableMan]

Josh is just like every other theists. Starts throwing a tantrum when the hosts don't immediately but what he's selling. First, we already have cases of people who suddenly and unexpectedly commited violent crime and it was determined that the guy had a massive brain tumor. Once it was removed, his violent behavior vanished and he was found not criminally responsible for his crimes.

[@marasmusine]

There are lots of theist callers who do not throw tantrums.

[@UngoogleableMan]

@@marasmusine true. I stand corrected. Should have said "most"

[@camiflo1578]

Sooo..this is CHAD, BRIAN..AND JOSH, right? 😅

[@TigreModerata]

Surely, if it all is deterministic, what is "immoral" about putting people in jail? Isn't it all determined, how is it out fault, how are we lesser, of we never had a real choice about how to deal with crime? I mean... What?!? It's not like half is deterministic, say the criminal behaviour, but then society dealing with that is suddenly freely chosen, somehow involves "free will", so the rest of us have it? The rest of us are judgeable for how we handle the situation, but the criminal is not because his actions are determined? Choose a lane, sir! 🤣

[@499PUCK]

If god knows everything, then we don’t have free will. Because god knows what you will do and god cant be wrong. So we have no choice but to do what god knows what will happen.

[@tonywatts2584]

"Josh - AR???" Isn't this "Chad - IL???"

[@Ascend777]

I love the ZEN af of Johnny

[@gregoryh9442]

Don’t know why this person even called.

[@azwazfilms]

dam JMike is one switched on cookie

[@sparki9085]

How is asking for evidence a "bogus ass fucking claim!"?

[@williampounds5191]

If there's no free will it doesn't matter if its moral or not that we punish a criminal that "isn't responsible" because everyone would be just as "not responsible" for punishing a criminal. Fucking think about your own hang ups for more than two seconds. It isn't just the criminal who's actions are determined, so are the actions of the people reacting to the criminals actions. What a moot goddamn point this caller is trying to make, there are even MORE reasons why its moot but holy shit.

[@DarkFire0421]

As a random individual athiest, I'll agree that the possibility of free will is possible, but only if god has nothing to do with it . If god exists the way the bible states he exists, then free will is, at best, an illusion and, at worst, a lie ignorant people tell themselves inorder to cope with death and loneliness..." if you buy into the big lie and pay 10-20% of your income for the rest of your life you can belong to a group of people who share the same fears as you !"😅😂

[@LoveProWrestling]

theres a lot of stuff that limits our free will, but ultimately its my decision if i kick you in the balls or not. If we meet it might or might not happen. If I didnt though, you cant just say I was destined to not. I keep the job i dont like a whole lot because i like money, but I can quit right now. Choice. The alternatives of hunger and homelessness are just limits, not absolutes.

[@TheNumbaOneMiss]

The only reason I don't believe completely in free will is because our environment is already pre-planned and our choices are preselected and we live in the illusion that, for example, having the choice to either go to burger king or McDonald's, this mall or that mall, or using this airline or that airline, drive a dodge or Mercedes, are our personal choices when someone else has preselected or manufactured our choices for us. Otherwise, free will would be living in a dwelling where you have to fend entirely for yourself like on some remote island.

[@tTtt-ho3tq]

I'm just speaking in general terms. Will is inside you, in your brain. But what you will inside you doesn't necessarily mean what actually could happen or comes to reality in the world outside of you is another matter. What you will or desire to or choose to eat at Macdonald's or Burger King is all up to you in your brain. Nothing physical outside of you is preventing your making a choice. However, your decision making is heavily influenced by, from the outside world. You'd need data to decide of you choices. Thus they try to influence your choice by giving you their preferred date to you. However, the second however that it's still up to you in your brain. If you think you should get more data and from other sources before you to choose you could do so if you will it so. Again to will is inside you and what that will comes true or not oris outside of you. Sometimes it comes true. Sometime it won't. You can't fly to the moon even if you will it. But if you will it strongly you may become an astronaut and may be able to fly to the moon. Of course, outside environment heavily influences or limits your will to come true or not. But you're free to will anything you want. Your imagination (data)/ is your limit. Even if you live in an island alone, you're still limited to physical environments of the nature of living in island alone. You've got spend your 90% of waking hours to secure your shelter, foods and water first. The more free time you have or the more freedom you have the more your will may come true.

[@TheNumbaOneMiss]

@@tTtt-ho3tq I totally get that. Great insight!

[@torontocitizen6802]

Does Josh have the free will to control his emotions? I doubt it.

[@sunnijo]

I don’t care whether I do the things I do because of free will or determinism. It changes nothing. Why get hung up on something that doesn’t matter?

[@donatsu8]

I think I know why the caller is upset. Because he is starting to confront his long standing beliefs after reading Sam Harris. And he realizes that he's been lied and cheated for years.

[@MrCanis4]

What is it with this 'Christian and free will'. It's all god's plan, right. So you don't have to choose anything.

[@fomori2]

Christians need "free will" in order to put the blame on the person for not believing in their god, instead of their god.

[@Ascend777]

@@fomori2 That's kind of a stupid test. "I'm going to play hide and seek and I'm going to win. You just have to believe that I'm somewhere out there, or I will send you to Hell." Christianity has degenerated even further. It used to be that good deeds let you into heaven, now it's just faith.

[@andreasplosky8516]

Christian theology needs free will, because they want the accusation, that everything is your own fault to stick, because then you need this idiot Jesus fella to save you by getting crucified, according to the sickness that is their theology. Christian theology is a very, very sick thing.

[@Emielio1]

Josh disliked this vid :P

[@mac10ner]

Amazing histing gents.....angry Christian again eh, imagine that 🤣

[@NelsonCruz77]

The whole argument is just an appeal to the consequences. He thinks free will must exists because he doesn't like the consequences of it not existing.

[@zhoupact8567]

I would be happy to snap my fingers and create entire worlds where even the worst people could go do the most horrific things they would want to anyone they want. Obviously I would make that world one where the other people would basically be NPC's. Although to be fair, I would also send actual people to a semi hell if the particular person they slighted was myself. But that is based in pure spite, nothing else.

[@jacksimpson-rogers1069]

"Holy Willie's Prayer" starts with Burns's opinion of John Calvin's doctrine of predestination, at birth, to Heaven or Hell. Calvin's logic, by the way, seems to me irrefutable, and since I reject the conclusion, I must perforce reject the three or four premises. Now we come to physics and chemistry, which seem to me inexorable. I seem to have free will, but apparently I don't. My personal solution to this is the fact that the illusion of free will seems to have Natural Selection advantages, and the illusion itself is a physico-chemical fact, so I'm keeping it.

[@Steve0272.]

You are determind for reasons , sometimes bad reasons sometimes good reasons ... problem solved 👍 , people's biology determines choices , surely josh would agree it's more immoral to let killers and bad people to walk freely , and seeing as we are not all powerful we are pragmatically justified in using prisons

[@Resinpro]

Pretty sure his evidence was to punch or yell if you disagree with his stereotyping of what he is sure all atheists think. Which, yet again, has nothing to do with the fucking claim. What’s that saying about facts and feelings again?

[@jns8393]

Josh couldn't or didn't want to understand what was being asked of him, but the hosts spent far too long talking about their views on punishment, rehab etc and how it differed across the world. I don't think that helped much to address the central topic of free will and would do nothing to sway Josh.

[@erinlynch4]

Punishment can serve as a deterrent for people even if they don't have free will. I don't think our criminal justice system should be focused on punishment but rather how to prevent crime or harmful actions in the future. Also, one reason for jailing or executing people is to remove them from the rest of society. I think we should execute more people and imprison less. I would choose execution over a long prison stay, maybe even a short one.

[@John-t8w7q]

Josh is so sadly typical. No argument. No logic. No education. Just butthurt anger because he cannot find any real evidence

[@israelcortez8684]

Desision is the father of action, "free will" is a BS way of proving there's a god.

[@Herzeleydt_Diesentrueb]

Go call a shrink

[@FoxInnaHat]

Im only about two minutes in and i can already sorta dismantle this dudes argument just with is call screen thing. "Free Will HAS to exist, because if it doesnt, then punishing criminals is technically immoral" ok...*deep breath This is obviously fallacious since it presupposes that morality is dependent on free will existing. you can still do something "good" or "evil" even if everything was already predetermined. A great example would be in most movies, games, and books; The Hero saves the day and defeats the Evil Villain. The Hero is morally justified in doing so, and the Villain is still morally accountable for their wrongdoings. These facts are still true despite the fact that the entire story is already written even if you are still on page 1. There is no reason to believe that its any different in reality. The concept of Free Will is unneeded in our reality and is purely a matter of perspective.

[@WizardImp]

I suggest the caller's argument has some merit. But the punishment would also be predetermined. Another way to look at it is... god made criminals the way they are.

[@williamjohn2910]

Only religious people have free will,,,to do whatever they want and use god as a default scapegoat.

[@robby7499]

Josh is such a crybaby.

[@zombine555]

You gotta work on your sentence structure jmike. Your broken, segmented way of speaking is really hard to follow. It feels broken and disconnected.

[@zombine555]

..it appears so do i. Redundancy for the win.

[@TheSnoeedog]

" Josh" (chad) needs to get a life

[@DaveRogers583]

Reactionary.

[@wilvannatta2150]

Most rapists were victims to begin with. So let's punish them. That will solve the problem. Trauma creates anti social behavior. Some people deal with trauma better than others. That is not evidence of free will.

[@solly119119]

I get a very strong sense of the "pedantic" from the hosts on this one. I'm 10 minutes in and the majority of the call is them (mostly JMike) explaining where the caller is going wrong in a dry and technical way. Yes, I get the caller refused to answer questions, but that's really beside the point. Doesn't make for a great vid, although the Matt D method of getting pissed within seconds doesn't work either. Somewhere in between would seem to be the best approach. In my opinion.

[@cmack17]

Pedant: 1.a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details. There is nothing even remotely "pedantic" about the hosts. Answering the hosts questions is very important to having a sensible and rational conversation. Answering the questions is not "besides the point". It is a primary point.

[@solly119119]

@@cmack17 Hello Golide, my opinion is JMike absolutely fit both of the 2 points under "Pedant" you referenced. Not so much that he did, but that he did numerous times over the course of 10 minutes. Also, the caller not answering the questions is actually, yes, beside the point on whether someone needs to be pedantic in how they respond to them. That's why I referenced Matt D's approach, which is often very different. But, when you get down to it, it's clearly a matter of taste, right? I thought JMike's approach detracted from the segment. But, that's just me.

[@hughmyron3845]

There is nothing pedantic about the host's objections to the callers proposition. The caller is showing a fundamental misunderstanding of logic. Its a complete non sequitur. Its like saying god has to exist because otherwise building churches would make no sense.

[@cmack17]

@@solly119119 JMike did not: 1. Make a show of prior learning. 2. Adhere to superfluous minor rules and issues. The caller refused to answer the actual questions and was hostile from the outset. You are correct. This is a matter of your personal tastes.

[@solly119119]

@@cmack17 "This is a matter of your personal tastes." - Well, that was snarky of you. Apparently someone can't disagree with you without you getting upset about it.

[@IsaacCallison]

Should have let him talk more. Would have been more fun than 30 minutes of pontification

[@UngoogleableMan]

No thanks. I'd rather not listen to these people ramble on for 20 minutes in a nonsensicle gish gallop when the VERY first point is in disagreement. There's reasons these show interupt and go point by point.

[@paulvonblerk9365]

As an atheist its sad to say Jonny and JMike chickened out on this one. Dodging is an understatement they just about twisted their necks off being dishonest and ducking and diving. What a poor show lads!!!

[@АртурИванов-ч9э]

What was dishonest? Asking an argent for the statement?

[@paulvonblerk9365]

@@АртурИванов-ч9э define argent.

[@АртурИванов-ч9э]

@@paulvonblerk9365 sorry, argument

[@mtoolan]

Jmike is aggressively ignoring the guy’s actual argument to be pedantic about the wording of the initial statement.

[@UngoogleableMan]

No he's not. The guy didn't present an argument. And there's a reason hosts don't let these people gish gallop for 20 minutes when the very first point is one of disagreement.

[@Callimo]

I disagree. The caller, Josh, had no actual argument, only accusations. They asked for evidence of his claim that "free will *has* to exist", but instead of providing that, he decided to get aggressive instead.

[@Ascend777]

Jmike probably didn't explain to Josh in a way that he could understand. The layman version is: Josh didn't provide proof for free will. Josh only said what would happen (or what he thinks would happen) if there is no free will.

[@lemmyhead8578]

Josh, you need to chill, bruh.