Consciousness and Existence | Thomas - Georgia | Atheist Experience 23.24

The Atheist Experience 23.24 for June 9, 2019 with Matt Dillahunty & Jenna Belk.
Call the show on Sundays 4-6pm CT: 1-512-686-0279 or use our green call the show button to save on long-distance charges: www.atheist-exp...
Don't like commercials? Become a Patron and enjoy ad-free content: / theatheistexperience
Podcast versions of the show may be found at:
www.spreaker.c...
We welcome your comments on the open blog thread for this show.
► freethoughtblog...
The most up to date Atheist Experience videos can be found by visiting atheist-experie...
Subscribe to the ACA monthly newsletter here to get an advance copy delivered to your inbox every month, as well as access to the Thinking Allowed archive: aca.activehost...
To read the latest issue without signing-up, go here: www.flipsnack....
-------
WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?
The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES
► www.atheist-com... (The Atheist Community of Austin)
► www.atheist-exp... (The Atheist Experience TV Show)
More shows and video clips can be found in the archive:
► www.atheist-exp...
DVDs of the Atheist Experience can be purchased via:
► www.atheist-com...
NOTES
TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Opening Theme:
Shelley Segal "Saved" www.shelleysega...
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal
Copyright © 1996 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.

[@Alramech]

Thomas is definitely a good caller. Even when he butts heads briefly, he will be willing to listen and concede bad points. And he ends his calls being very nice and gracious.

[@zoomer1673]

Dafuq?

[@3stepsahead704]

@@zoomer1673 he is .-.

[@zoomer1673]

@@3stepsahead704 ._.

[@zoomer1673]

I meant youtube glitched out ( i clicked on another vid and saw this guy saying the exact same thing [on another video!]

[@ross-carlson]

Yes, he is - but he won't and doesn't "get it" - even at the end his attitude is "okay, I'll come up with something new and try again". No learning here - just let me see what other bullshit apologetics I can try - and until he gets on the show he'll be convinced he's still right - and the cycle will continue. Listen to his other calls, they all are the same.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

This guy is willing to concede and re-evaluate his ideas when shown that they're not valid, if only we were all able to do that. Hopefully he calls back, he's seems like a really nice guy.

[@ross-carlson]

While yes, he was nice and respectful - a rarity - listen to the end - he learns nothing. He's already sitting there thinking "damn, that didn't work, I'll have to find something else to justify this bullshit" then after the call something will pop in his head and he'll think "that's it, I've got it!" and unless or until he calls back that'll be his justification. I do commend his attitude here - but listen to his other calls, exactly the same and by where he starts here he's learned nothing. Indoctrination is a terrifying thing.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

@@ross-carlson I understand, but he eventually won't have a leg to stand on and if he's honest with himself he'll have to concede and if that happens I feel he'll want to tell everyone why his arguments failed

[@jsenseman4320]

Takes a brave human being to seek after the truth, inner stand the beginning of wisdom is the knowing we know nothing about the things outside of our personal box of humanism. This much is truth, History is always changing, its only as valid as the last discovery. Consciousness is the essence of existing, God is the spirit of consciousness, We ARE ALL PART of The infinite eternal energy and free will is why I'm unable to make you see, You exists always have and always will you can't change that fact.

[@jsenseman4320]

@@crazyprayingmantis5596 When I was in the pretending stage something happened and I woke up, Do you wanna wake up?

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

@@jsenseman4320 If I have always existed, where was I in 1927?

[@jns8393]

Thomas is willing to listen and learn. He has a good attitude and is thoughtful.

[@thetruthchannel349]

*Mhmmm.... Im sure Thomas is an authentic caller. Boy, you people sure do live in a bubble of great gullibility.*

[@HotelierNYC]

This kid is one good sport. Mad props to Thomas.

[@Olyfrun]

If you're not awake, you are without God. That's quite the claim!

[@craigcorson3036]

Condolences on the loss of your grandmother, Matt. I hope that her life was long and happy, and that you and she were on good terms.

[@ritchiestirling6801]

What a bizarre thing to write as hope to a video.

[@craigcorson3036]

@@ritchiestirling6801 Did you not hear him say that he just got back from burying his grandmother? I heard it, so what's weird about expressing condolences?

[@ritchiestirling6801]

@@craigcorson3036 Yes, I heard it. And it didn't prompt me to suggest that he and his grandmother had any reason to be at odds on her deathbed.

[@craigcorson3036]

@@ritchiestirling6801 How about the fact that he is atheist, and she, very probably not? Ya think THAT maybe caused some friction between them, Ritchie?

[@Vivi2372]

@@ritchiestirling6801 do you just go out of your way to be a dick or does it come naturally? It's normal to offer condolences to people when family die. It's also normal to hope that their relationship with said deceased wasn't strained when we know that members of his family, including his own parents, have put strain on their relationships with him.

[@cyrus3316]

Thomas is literally how every human should aim to be... he had opinions he shared them he is willing to acknowledge them wrong if proven as so and willing to keep thinking and searching to be better.

[@stevedresser83]

he's so polite, i wanna be friends with Thomas

[@danielt.4330]

Seems like a good guy with a good heart. I hope he keeps learning more about how to be logical, skeptical, etc. He seems like he's genuinely honest, which is all you need to search for truth.

[@garychap8384]

Same. I have friends with some VERY strange ideas, he'd fit right in. My only requirement is decency and I have a feeling that Thomas has that in spades ; )

[@luvbotany]

Me too, i wanna be friends with him. I dont wanna be friends with Keith Peters, he is a jerk and not worth my buddy Thomas or my friendship.

[@grantwing4942]

Matt was so patient on this call. I really enjoyed listening even if the analogy part went on a bit much.

[@shifty495]

Kudos to Thomas. Matt gets the double yew, but Thomas was outstanding and didnt get butt hurt. Great job, Thomas. Keep searching.

[@mikesabin8568]

Great caller. Respectful during the conversation, asked questions, did not presume to know everything, intelligent, and brought up relevant topics..

[@drakekay6577]

4:00 THAT is how you know you are in a real, genuine, honest conversation. When you or someone else mistakes something you or someone else said, then is corrected and ACKNOWLEDGES that they misheard! INSTEAD OF FORCING WHAT THEY CONTROL YOU SAYING DOWN YOUR THROAT!

[@danniealexander4131]

Good exchange. I like this caller. I agree with Matt on his analysis of the arguments.

[@Nathaniel_Peterson]

I disagree with both of them.

[@gamozak]

When the majority of the people would be like Thomas then the world would be much better place.

[@danielirvin4420]

Kudos to the caller and to both of you. Enjoyed the exchange.

[@blaster-zy7xx]

I don't understand why this is so hard for theists to understand. Conciousness is not a thing, it is a process. When the process stops, it doesn't go anywhere, it just stops. Why is that hard to understand?

[@mikekohary1075]

It's hard for them to understand because they want to equate consciousness with a soul, which to them is a "thing". When you die, it's your body that dies, but your soul continues on. This is the crux of Thomas's argument, but he doesn't have the honesty to admit he's talking about souls, so he uses the idea of consciousness to make it sound more plausible or accessible to those of us who know he's full of shite. :)

[@mabatch3769]

They’re afraid of death, not afraid of dying, afraid of being dead. Most people are, myself included. Though I’m not naive enough to think I’m going to live on after I die.

[@zulubeatsprince]

Not a theist or afraid of death.. but im leaning towards the notion that consciousness is broadcast into our brains like a radio signal. When your radio breaks the music stops playing.. hell you can even turn the volume down, change stations, but the music still remains. Either That or our brains have their own version of wi fi we just havent picked up on yet. Just a hunch though nothing provable yet. not so far fetched since it took less than 100 years for our man made devices to do this.. i think the most complex billion year old processing devices known to man can likely perform similar functions but at a much higher level.

[@blaster-zy7xx]

@@zulubeatsprince I have heard this idea before, and I'll push back on that hypothesis. Broadcast from where? and received by what? and broadcast by what? Consciousness is awareness of the environment from the perspective of the individual, not awareness of something universal or from a standpoint that is common, (like a common song heard from every radio receiver on that station) Plus, from an evolutionary standpoint, I don't see how that hypothesis even works. I think it makes much more sense that organisms evolved to individually sense their environments and process that data inside their own brains. This would act as a survival mechanism. Sensors, such as eyes ears and feelers, send signals to a central processor (brain) that formulates a response that increases their chances of survival; that survival feedback loop evolves to eventually create higher cognition. I don't see how a "central broadcasting" of consciousnesses fits into that evolutionary model nor how it works. Also, by studying brain damage, we have been able to map what parts of the brain process various senses, like vision, hearing, memory, speech, etc. This is more evidence of individual brain processing. To extend into your analogy, when a radio receiver breaks, we do not see the radio not receiving Fleetwood Mack yet still receives other artists.

[@zulubeatsprince]

@@blaster-zy7xx you said consciousness is awareness.. what is aware? How and why? And aware of what? Leads you back to the same problem of why does the universe exist? How does a broadcast not make sense to you when we use them everyday in all shapes and sizes and all our senses work that way. Much of the em spectrum is not understood and now we know there is a quantum field. source could be anything in INFINITE space, dna could be the antena, lots of other systems in the brain itself.. ive seen research that shows ideas and certain evolution patterns spread across the globe as if transmitted or somehow when one person invents something in another part of the world someone has a similar idea. this is an entire new frontier we barely even touching and i have a hunch much will come of it. The most complex computers on the planet probably have wifi bro.. we may not figure out how to use it for another 100 years.. but plenty of hints its there

[@Algrimor]

One of the best callers. He actually had a premise, presented it, heard their rebuttals and considered it and was honest when he realized they had better points. Take his call every time, he was how every caller should try to be.

[@brucewailes7744]

This is the third call of his I've listened to lately. He learns from each of them. He studies what he did wrong and does the homework to fix it. Someone needs to recruit this person and pay for some formal education for him. He's intelligent and interested in how we know things.

[@AbleAnderson]

From Ross Carlson above: While yes, he was nice and respectful - a rarity - listen to the end - he learns nothing. He's already sitting there thinking "damn, that didn't work, I'll have to find something else to justify this bullshit" then after the call something will pop in his head and he'll think "that's it, I've got it!" and unless or until he calls back that'll be his justification. I do commend his attitude here - but listen to his other calls, exactly the same and by where he starts here he's learned nothing. Indoctrination is a terrifying thing.

[@DrMikeE100]

Thomas. Long ago, I created a "sillygism" (that is a neologism; sillygism being a word I made up). Here it is: 1. A tuna sandwich is better than nothing. 2. Nothing is better than all the health, wealth, and happiness for all to enjoy. 3. Therefore, a tuna sandwich is better than all the health, wealth, and happiness for all to enjoy.

[@PeteAtoms]

I've always looked at consciousness as a process, and i like to compare it to a flame. If you can tell me where the flame went after blowing out a candle, then i can tell you where consciousness goes.

[@cascorick8253]

PeteAtoms by blowing out a candle, you blow the heat Source away from its fuel, there for no Flame, I don't think Consciousness works like that!

[@lmoral222]

I like how a lot of people like Thomas. He seems cool enough for me.

Kudos to the young man Thomas, who was so humble and open to the possibility of being wrong. Good show.

[@CrazyKingJammy]

Rusty Writer damn good show.

[@ft4903]

@@CrazyKingJammy Yes it was, yes it was.

[@CrazyKingJammy]

@@ft4903 I believe both parties were honest in this exchange. This is the type of honest interactions I like to see.

[@ft4903]

@@CrazyKingJammy Yeah its nice that Thomas could see he was being objectively unreasonable

[@amtlpaul]

@DrJames Powers You are not plausible. Trollist charlatans posing as sincere believers never are. But they rely on sheer shamelessness to get by all the same.

[@garywright8137]

If you weren't conscious whilst asleep, an alarm clock would not be able to wake you.

[@badatheist9948]

we can not identify what consciousness is, but I am going to identify consciousness. But I do respect Thomas, and in his pursuit of truth, he will drop his belief. He is Matt, years ago.

[@huyked]

@DrJames Powers The former is more plausible.

[@TrettinR]

@DrJames Powers Lying about "atheisms lies", interesting strategy. Atheism makes literally none of the claims you're saying they do. But I've noticed that intellectual honesty, or regular honesty for that matter isn't terribly high on your priority list. So keep up the strawmen, lies, arguments from ignorance, and pompous hatred. You're a GREAT ambassador for christianity.

[@cainthebastard7053]

DrJames Powers I knew you were going to spew bullcrap when I saw the cross profile picture. Lol.

[@TrevorIsCommenting]

@DrJames Powers your proposing a logical fallacy called a "false dichotomy" or false choice. Those aren't the only two choices so your argument is useless

[@huyked]

@DrJames Powers Since you seem so confident in your beliefs, and say your have 50 years under your belt, please prove that your god exists in video format and upload it to your channel. You should be quite the resource for believers and non-believers alike.

[@patsox2004]

My favorite caller. This guy is polite, courteous, honest with his views. This is a smart guy who's able, and more importantly, willing to reevaluate a position that may be incorrect. You can tell he is really searching for the truth and answers.

[@mikekohary1075]

What evidence do you have that he's willing to re-evaluate his position? Seems to me he proffers basically the same argument every time, just worded in a different way, always performing mental gymnastics to try and make it stick. I appreciate his civility, but he's disingenuous and that in itself is rude IMO. Personally I can't stand him and I wish they'd stop taking calls from him. Discussions with him are polite, but not that interesting and they ultimately go nowhere.

[@patsox2004]

@@mikekohary1075 um, like when he presented his syllogism for Matt to evaluate its validity maybe? Matt proved it to be invalid and he accepted it.

[@Drosera420]

My brain is the computer. My consciousness is the program running on that computer. Its really weird to realize that I'm just the program... thinking about the computer running it, but.. never the less this is where I am, and everything I am... is entirely within that meat. Holy shit I need to make sure that meat is better taken care of....

[@CorwynGC]

Your consciousness is ONE OF the programs running on that computer.

[@destronia123]

Matt broke the caller's brain

[@rockhead1731]

I think it might have been broken before the call

[@rowdeo8968]

i LOVE THIS CALLER ----NO CIRCULAR TALK HE IS JUST CURIOUS AND QUESTIONING THINGS IN LIFE. HOPE HE CALLS AGAIN. HE IS HONEST AND WILLING TO LISTEN DISCUSS AND ADMIT IN OTHER WORDS HE REALLY WANTS TO LEARN.

[@Boris99999]

Consciousness is a process, executed by the brain, just like a fire is a process executed by a candle! Where does consciousness go when the brain dies? The same place a fire goes when the candle is extinguished!

[@cascorick8253]

Борис we understand why the fire on the candle went out, we really don't understand what happened to the consciousness!

[@Boris99999]

@@cascorick8253 What do you not understand? It stopped just like fire that`s it. It is a chemical process. When it stops it doesn`t go anywhere, it just stops. Why is it so hard for you?

[@jeffwells1255]

Now that's a simple and accurate description that I've heard before, so a big thumbs-up for you (unless you're in Italy, where the meaning of that gesture is rather unpleasant)!

[@solinovo3219]

​@@Boris99999 The fire doesn't ever go completely away, the phenomena we call fire is really a transformation of energy, it transforms into heat that gets transferred to the wind which then move other things, and that energy can even eventually start a new fire, sure in the end it can get dissipated and shot into the void of space but even then it doesn't stop existing because their effects are still present, so everything is really one large interconnected process. Perhaps the better analogy is to think of consciousness as a radio wave and the body as a radio set, the radio may get broken and then fixed but it will pick up the same signal, the signal which only carries awareness.

[@Boris99999]

Zilos Godie Nope. If you place a burning candle under a sealed dome - the fire doesn’t “go to space”, it doesn’t transfer anywhere - it just stops as there’s no more oxygen around. The fire only “exists” under curtain conditions (fuel, oxygen and temperature) - the same goes on with the consciousness. I’m sorry that that fact disturbs you so much that you are willing to lie about actual reality - but it is a fact, you can’t do anything with it other than adapt and live on! If consciousness is radiowave then surely you could build an artificial “consciousness receiver”, right? Or at least detect those waves with something! Right now I don’t see any reason to think of the thoughts in our brains as anything but mere biochemical reactions. Our thoughts are dependent on the chemistry of our bodies wether you like it or not. Receivers don’t change the message drastically because they broke - they usually either slightly distort the message or stop working at all. As an example: Let’s pretend that some thought is the message. Something like “I love my family” if a person is a receiver and he is suddenly damaged, could he suddenly turn this particular message and turn it into “I want to kill my family using my father’s shotgun that he keeps in his closet”? Isn’t this change to much to be considered just a distortion? There’s clearly new information that was added to the message - that is not something a receiver does!

[@blaster-zy7xx]

Matt is making this more complicated than it needs to be.

[@josephengel8263]

if you immediately restart this video once it ends, its a perfect loop

[@craighorton8339]

Matt, I herald you for your gallantry and your willingness to sieze the initiative.

[@shaan702]

This young man is thoughtful and curious. If he keeps using logic to search for the truth he will be an atheist any day now.

[@DennisMoore664]

There are degrees of being conscious that can be observed in a plant growing or even turning towards sunlight but plants don't have a brain. Observation of mycelium may also indicate a form of consciousness. It's a complicated world and too often we can't see past our anthropomorphic bias.

[@vdannyv]

Yall have beautiful conversations damn lol. Cool thanks for sharing... I mean the channel not the comments btw.....

[@craighorton8339]

I'm glad that Thomas was able to clarify things for us.

[@steveo4400]

I don’t particularly have a dislike for religion, I recognise the obvious good in its communities and the obvious bad with regards to global divisions. Having said that I think I’m forced to concede that I am extremely grateful for the way Matt, Don, Tracy, Jen, Jeff, Russell, Richard, John etc have all applied a logical perspective to the way we should think about everything. In particular Matt I have to thank greatly for your passion for logic and sharing how easy it is to deviate from a true track inadvertently. Matt you’re a fine fellow. Truly. A little harsh at times, but I never feel uncomfortable. You’re simply correcting people correctly. Top show. Has had a positive impact on my life and my thinking. Keep up the great work. Steve (UK)

[@a1612]

Steve O could you describe the " good" religion does in its communities. The reason I ask is in my personal life my interactions aren't good from Jehovah's witnesses arriving on a peaceful Sunday morning because they have a message to give me to black folk ( I am black American) telling me unsolicited that I need to stop reading physics and start reading the bible or I will be sorry when I die. I guess what I'm saying is inside of their communities they are okay but they don't seem to want to keep it to themselves

[@TheTruthKiwi]

@@a1612 explain Pascals Wager to them and tell them that you are only worshipping one less god than they are out of the thousands of gods that man has made up.

[@TheTruthKiwi]

@@tonyaratlaff7990 I would argue that it's because Russia and China have opened up to and are being scrutinised by other secular Western Countries is the reason immoral dictators aren't committing mass genocide, not because they're becoming more religious. I'd be interested to know the sources of your claims.

[@Dr.TJ1]

@@tonyaratlaff7990 You only made one mistake, but it was a BIG one. Stalin and Mao didn't kill those people based in any way on religion. In Stalin's case, he had people killed who did not agree with his political policies and whom he considered enemies. The most recent estimates are that Stalin had about 6 million people killed. In Mao's case, Mao set targets for steel production that could not be met and local officials told farmers to melt down their equipment. Without the equipment, crop yields fell dramatically, causing many millions (latest estimates around 35 million) to starve. So not only did you get the numbers wrong (41 million instead of 100 million), you totally got the reasons wrong. Had absolutely nothing to do with atheism. But even if you want to blame atheism for all those deaths, which is incorrect, when you consider the deaths caused by Christianity, you have to include all deaths caused by Christian majority countries. When you do that, you have to blame Christianity for at least 100 million deaths worldwide. Are you sure you want to stick with your comment?

[@ft4903]

@@tonyaratlaff7990 Do you currently worship a deity that you believe literally killed every infant, toddler, and expecting mother on earth by drowning them in a flood? Just curious...

[@joeclark1621]

Consciousness isn't just not an illusion but rather real and fundmental. To say that consciousness is an illusion is like saying that awareness, sensation like pain and joy are illusions.

[@craighorton8339]

Good conversation. Thank you to all.

[@avellinklater3566]

Thomas is engaging in some quite astonishing mental gymnastics..... On a second thought on the computer vs a person part of the discussion, we (humans or any animal/creature) are machines as well. We are just machines of a different kind. Bio chemical vs electrical.

[@huepix]

I'm not a machine. Machines are designed to do something. I'm a life form

[@ft4903]

@@huepix You're designed by natural selection to blow your load in a pretty lady to the best of your ability. Unless you want to have a bunch of semantic arguments.

[@jean-philippehaufroid6425]

@@ft4903 Technicaly, the lady don't need to be pretty. Just to be female. and human too. Almost forgot that one.

[@ft4903]

@@jean-philippehaufroid6425 Yeah you are correct

[@devb9912]

"That's a bizarre world to live in" Yes, yes it is.

[@Blackieswain]

I'm not sure if this is what Thomas was getting at, but here's something that came to mind while watching this. Everything in the known universe thus far has existed since the beginning "Big Bang" . For example, the elements that we are made of and that make up the periodic table are a result of processes throughout time and energy conversion. So, if consciousness is a part of reality it is a byproduct of said processes/conversions of what always was. Then we can say that since nothing can be completely destroyed(or created) only converted, consciousness exists after our bodys shutdown/die. It may just be the next stage of it.

[@DayzoIRL]

Great discussion!!

[@68021]

My question to the caller would be, where was my consciousness before I was conceived ?

[@je5t3r57]

Totally agree

[@arjanstam78]

Outside of space and time, iow outside of reality. Indistinguishable from non-existence. Just like god. Maybe god is my evil twin. YaHWeH & NOWeH...

[@TrevorIsCommenting]

In heaven lol

[@ethanbolen4425]

You experience reality of course you have a soul the physical evidence may not be there but the fact you feel and experience reality is a logical conclusion to life after death

[@JPeraltavideos]

@@ethanbolen4425 how is that?

[@sparki9085]

"something has always existed, consciousness is something, therefore consciousness has always existed" *What*

[@lourok6824]

Great call

[@WukongTheMonkeyKing]

That was quite enjoyable. Caller seems genuinely interested in finding the truth, and is learning the things he thought as rational were not as rational as he thought.

[@tengun]

Consciousness always fascinates me! IMHO, computers do have consciousness. It's just a different kind of consciousness than what we have. A computer can make decisions based on the inputs, and that's what makes it conscious. Heck, we can even program computers to be self-awared. Humans are just the same. We make decisions based on the inputs we received from the environment. It's just that our inputs are so much more, and we have a very complicated way of processing information.

[@sherifnabil50]

Matt sneakily ignored the computer analogy when he realized it would back fire against him. He's angry and a bully.

[@thomasmurrell6908]

He's seldom angry and you think him only a bully because you don't want to understand

[@ritchiestirling6801]

Consciousness and soul are not interchangeable ideas. Sentient beings is no proof of a soul existing. If you had no consciousness before birth (actually 3 yoa or older), why do people expect consciousness after death?!?

[@anomalousanonymous1]

Three? I have several memories that I can easily date to being a lot younger than that. For example, I can remember instances of being "tossed" by my father (because it completely terrified me). I would guess that an adult could not safely toss an infant at 12 months or older. I was probably significantly younger than that. I lean towards the view that these terrifying experiences, in some sense, sparked my self-consciousness into being.

[@PhazterMaze]

I think the problem with this (and most of this conversation) is that the words are so vaguely defined. Google says that consciousness is a state of being awake and aware, and that a soul is the essence or embodiment of a specified quality. When using the word soul, most people specify the quality as awake/aware. For those people, it is interchangeable in that way. To me, it's the difference between an object- oriented model and a functional/procedural model.

[@igorkrugly4842]

Electricity left the computer😂

[@artwillvideos]

Thomas listens, takes notes, does homework, comes back for more, and is willing to concede his points are not valid or sound. I’ve heard him a couple of times. It’s refreshing! If he started from “I don’t know, let me see what I can figure out about the universe”, instead of “I believe in a god, now let me make the universe conform to that belief” then perhaps he’d be truly on point. 🤷🏽‍♂️

[@HelloGarvitJoshi]

Hey Matt... I think you are constantly mixing counciousness and wakefullness. The difference is when someone is is deepsleep they are not wakeful but concious, when we are dreaming we are not wakeful but concious. When we are walking(physical experiencing the world) we are both wakeful and concious.

[@cosmikrelic4815]

who said? i think when you are in deep sleep you are unconscious.

[@Fraterchaoraterchaos]

when you get home, and you turn the key and your car stops running, where did the running go?

[@garyskinner2422]

It ran off

[@trevorsimmons3811]

Got an analogy for conscious. When someone plays a piano, you can hear and enjoy (maybe) the music. When the person stops playing, does the music go to octave heaven?

[@theresawilliams4296]

I was just talking to a creationist on another link, and he was asking me to prove what caused the big bang. Because I said I honestly don't know, he said in the same breath that his god did it. So I asked him, I know if I make claims I have to show proof, but why don't you have to provide evidence for your imaginary friend. He got upset and say that he doesn't have to, because god has always been and always will be. So I said to him that if something that exists needs a beginning, well who created your god, because this being exists and so he needs a beginning as well. This guy couldn't answer that and wouldn't show proof of his god, because in his head he can make god claims and doesn't have to show proof because his god is eternal. These people really don't get the concept of proof/evidence for their claims.

[@kylechristensen3290]

This was way better than christian callers

[@timmatter1058]

The reason we can fix a computer to be able to access what is stored on its memory and we can't for a human is that our memory is stored in a biological brain which starts to break down beyond repair in only a few minutes without oxygen.

[@joeclark1621]

To modify a certain part of the brain or touch it will make you see red for example, we get that, but that doesn't tell you what/why that sensation of seeing red is. It just tells us what quarralates making it happen.

[@FaanaMusic]

Why would reality/God/consciousness have to be logical or provable. Is there any reason for that? Why would logic have to lead to true? How would we determine? With more logic?

[@HiThere.ItsTom]

The self is an illusion. Consciousness is up for debate.

[@rockhead1731]

Warm and dead, I like that, somebody's a Stargate fan👍

[@ryanp8518]

Can explain please

[@rockhead1731]

@@ryanp8518 when somebody dies by hypothermia their not truly dead until they are warmed up and unable to be revived hence the saying "warm and dead" there was an episode of Stargate where they have that same situation in the Antarctic and Matt Dillahunty made mention of science fiction and I put 2 and 2 together.

[@roofuscat2]

Dude, stop axing Matt!!! I'm not going to ax you again. ✔

[@ArchAGabriel]

LOL !

[@fortnite4901]

is a legitimate English dialect with its own unique grammatical, phonological, and lexical distinctions that vary from the General American accent. Would you 'correct' someone from some town in the UK for speaking 'incorrectly'? Or what about any other country that has English as a native language but has its own distinct qualities like the ones I mentioned before? Or hell, what about the Appalachian dialect which also has its own qualities that make it differ from the so-called 'standard' accent and grammatical conventions? Languages don't exist in a vacuum, and there are numerous things that affect dialects. What about you though? Do you speak 'proper' English? Do you use 'whom' correctly and when it should be used? Do you use the subjunctive mood correctly, or do you just merge it with its past forms of the verb 'to be'? Lol nice try at trying to sound smart though and dismissing valid phonology of a US dialect of English just because you probably associate it with people of particular socioeconomic background. I'm sure if you were to type more or if I heard you talk I could point out peculiarities in your accent that deviate from the 'norm' and or deviations from standard grammatical conventions. But that would be stupid to do so in a condescending manner because that's how language develops, and any person that's studied linguistics (myself included) knows that.

[@ArchAGabriel]

@@fortnite4901 do you understand the term prolixious diatribe ?

[@ryanp8518]

How is it a legitimate dialect ? So basically if enough people mispronunciate or misspell a word long enough it is a legitimate dialect and if one or a few people do the same it's simply erroneous? That can't be right

[@Digitize27]

@@ryanp8518 Forgive me if you're being sarcastic, because it doesn't translate well, but that's _exactly_ how languages develop and evolve over time, usually facilitated by some sort of geographical divide. How do you think American English diverged so drastically from British English in the first place? The same is true of more localised, regional dialects. So yes, currently I would argue that axe is a mispronunciation of ask, but if enough people keep saying it for long enough, then it would absolutely be a valid variation of dialect. Just like 'loik' is a recognisably Liverpudlian (Or generally northern) pronunciation of 'like' in Britain.

[@dimitrioskalfakis]

'god is the consciousness we experience' must be a new level of 'revealed truth' with this caller. at least he is willing to carry on a conversation even though not sound and with ad-hoc premises, retractions and rationalizations..

[@defeatingdefeaters]

Thomas seems like a great guy who’s genuinely interested in the truth.

[@mikekohary1075]

He seems like a nice guy, but he seems actively deceptive. Not maliciously so, just ignorantly so. I don't think he's interested in the truth, he's interested in buttressing his religious beliefs, otherwise he would have let this whole argument die a long time ago. Instead, he keeps calling and basically repeating the same thing, just worded in a different way.

[@joaquinzannchez3184]

Listening to Dillahunty talk about things he does not know/understand, must be the most futile act one can CONSCIOUSLY do.

[@zimbag]

Matt says I am sure this an answer to some question but not this one. I am going to steal that.

[@joeclark1621]

If a person is strictly physical, why do we have emotions? Notice I didn't say what generates these emotions. I realize the brain affect how consciousness behaves. I get that and I of course agree with that but the brain doesn't tell us what emotions/senseation/awareness are. It just tell us how it affects consciousness. I hate to be repetitive but this is the point. We know that consciousness isn't an illusion cause pain feels real. Sensation feels real, we also don't have an explanation and might never will on why/what are those sensation are and why they're happening. Also, if ppl will say the pain for example might be an illusion, well why stop there? Why not describe every experience as illusion and make the entire existence a doomed, miserable delusion?

[@peet4921]

''When someone dies his consciousness is no longer with him'' Thomas says. No, your consciousness simply doesn't exist anymore, because the atoms of which you're made of, especially those which make up your brain (which in turn produces the mind) stopped behaving like when they did once being alive. It doesn't explain all questions about consciousness, but it proves that it cannot exist outside of, or in a brain being dead.

[@rockhead1731]

I still don't get how his beliefs in consciousness( which in this context is just another way of saying a sentient being) get us any closer to proof of the existence of God

[@PhazterMaze]

He defined god as consciousness. What's the problem with him calling in to discuss what he considers to be evidence for the existence of god? That's the show... I thought it was a good conversation.

[@TimLondonGuitarist]

Good caller & yes, Matt is living a strange existence

[@JD-tp6ei]

I have a question, I would love to hear some thoughts : What is it about humans, that from as far back as we know, have always came up with some kind of God story or religion or belief system that has a creator. Or the existence of a soul. Why did we feel the need to come up with these ideas about a god or creator. Why did the human brain seek it?

[@joeclark1621]

It's true that there's no concrete evidence for the continuing of consciousness after biological death but so what? We also don't have concrete evidence for things that seems also real but aren't able to be measured. The whole point of research is to show open mind along with skepticism to these kinds of things.

[@cemarabaci9836]

I think we can stop talking about phenomenal consciousness as something irreducible. Scientists also would not be looking for a thing that turnes H20 to water, water simply is H20 and nothing else. There is no Hard Problem of Water( no Hard Problem of Consciousness).

[@pallejensen9484]

So im guessing thomas is the new synonym for the expression WORDSALAD

[@inescapableutopia4505]

No, AI is not conscious at the moment. I used to work for a homosexual black man who really liked to ask Alexa questions and then tell her "thanks bitch." The first time he did it I thought he was being extremely rude, but after that I realized that Alexa is not a real person and we can be as rude to her as we want because she is a computer construct and not a real living entity whatsoever.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

One is either conscious or one is not.

[@tedgrant2]

When my dog is sleeping, he is obviously not conscious. But very often his ears, eyebrows, nose and feet twitch for a time, which indicates he was dreaming. Sometimes his whole body shakes rhythmically and he makes a "woop woop woop" noise. That suggests he was having a really exciting dream. Making whoopee perhaps !

[@TheDahaka1]

Thomas is really trying, but these concept are really far from what he can currently grasp. He's doing a good thing calling.

[@Orthodoxy.Memorize.Scripture]

Consciousness provides us with the awareness of ourselves as individuals and our surroundings. It is connected to the brain or part of the brain and even connected or part of the mind. All these possess an a-priori knowledge that work with other parts of our humanity to function. Logical absolutes remain a part of these. We didn’t have to first learn about them to function. But we can learn through study about them. We start with them (so to speak) to even be able to talk about them. I find is so interesting how this a-priori knowledge acts like a computer program, software, information, that interacts with our physical being. In addition, a-priori knowledge as it pertains to the knowledge of God likewise is something built into us and something that a person must begin with to make sense of evidence for God or anything pertaining to the one true God who made us. We begin with a-priori knowledge making us consciously aware, providing us with the ability to think, and knowledge of God. Consciousness and the human mind both can be affected by different things. So too can the a-priori knowledge of God in human beings. What yah think?

[@BigDaddyAddyMS]

I disagree with Thomas, but damn he's refreshingly thoughtful and actually listens to other ideas. He's going places.

[@ashleigh6558]

my brain hurts from what matt said but I appreciate it 👍

[@domwings4329]

When someone makes a claim and you ask them to explain it and they completely avoid answering and have to explain other things prior to getting to the answer, you already know the person doesn’t have anything to explain.

[@tedgrant2]

There is an idea that consciousness is independent of the brain. Yet every night I lose my consciousness for about seven hours. I strongly suspect that when I am dead, I will lose it for ever.

[@zulubeatsprince]

Dreams kinda disprove that.. you're still conscious.. just of the dreamworld you create and avatar within or of nothing. In deep sleep, the experience of time also stops but you're still conscious.. just of nothing, no space or time.. either conscious awareness is a byproduct of the physical, or is the foundational substrate of what we consider as physical matter. Maybe its not that consciousness goes somewhere.. but that its everywhere and just plays wihin the mind like a radio signal doesnt go anywhere when the radio stops working.

[@tedgrant2]

@@zulubeatsprince What happens to your thoughtfulness when your brain stops working ? Or your recklessness. Or your loveliness. Or your inventiveness. Does tactileness survive death ? I hope so. I like feeling things.

[@tedgrant2]

@@zulubeatsprince "Conscious" is an adjective and by sticking "ness" on the end we get a noun. But you do that trick with any adjective and it seems to create an object. Helpful => helpfulness. What happens to your helpfulness when you die ?

[@tedgrant2]

@@zulubeatsprince We have five senses. Sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch. Some people imagine that when we are dead, we will still be able to see and hear. But nobody imagines that when we are dead we will still be able to taste, smell or touch.

[@tedgrant2]

@@zulubeatsprince But interestingly, the Hebrews were quite convinced that God likes the smell of cooking. God has no nose, so how does he smell ? (Genesis 8:21)

[@Rob-uu8wt]

Please don’t axe Matt. I like him.

[@corychurchwell9802]

Consciousness is awareness.

[@arjanstam78]

The terms being synonymous could be deemed to be one possibility, but are they, necessarily, the same...? Regardless: naming an incompletely understood phenomenon differently does not seem to reveal very much, if anything. Maybe an increasingly accurate description would be more helpful. A starting point could f.i. be: Is consciousness a thing? Then what kind of thing is it? What does it consist of, and how? Is it a process? Then what kind of process is it? What are its properties? Is it a collection of processes that work in tandem? Then what kind of processes are they and how do they work together? What is known about the requirements for its existence? How can we find out more about that? Etc.

[@MrXeberdee]

Consciousness doesn't need to go anywhere, it might still be in the body even on death. Maybe it functions like a musical chord that we can recognize, but we seem to need all the notes of the chord to identify it. We are still conscious when we sleep, but in a different way. What about a coma? The definition becomes blurred. When can we say a living creature possesses it at all? What about a chimp? a mouse? a tardigrade maybe? eukaryote? - Who decides? The truth is that we just can't define what it is - and on what level it occurs. So we have to conclude without much evidence that we don't really know what happens to it when we die.

[@MrXeberdee]

@Dirk Knight you missed my point entirely. It might be present in cells. Nobody really knows where it begins. I'm not saying it is though, it's just another possibility. Everybody thinks of it as either / or, but it might be accumulative from a cellular level. So we could even have it before we are born in some lesser way.

[@MrXeberdee]

@Dirk Knight You are talking about energy with the Hurricane analogy. My argument is, it depends what you call consciousness. You can say 'no it's not present', if you define it as a sleeping person not being conscious, then that's where your definition ends, but they still have a form of consciousness IMO - poke them and they will wake. As do coma patients, turn them off, and they will die. You can take that all the way down to single cell organisms that have a limited form of it. It seems to me that all life has some form of it. Trees are conscious of their surroundings and can adapt to them - wheareas rocks don't. What seperates biological life from everything else is IMO consciousness - the state of being aware of and responsive to one's surroundings.

[@MrXeberdee]

@Dirk Knight That's interesting, that you felt pain - but you describe having had absolutely no sense of self. Who are you in this scenario then? Our consciousness is our awareness, and you were aware of pain - so you were still conscious there somewhere. As I say, it how you define it.

[@MrXeberdee]

@Dirk Knight Sounds like fun :) I died once for 5 minutes, totally black - nothing! I think we agree mostly, although I would suggest that of course we have a replication process, it's just way more advanced than 'lower' organisms. If you, like me, agree that we have evolved into what we are, then at some point in the past we have also replicated in the same way and we still carry those genes in our cells somewhere. Parts of us do replicate of course, but the importance that we attach to our complete form and our advanced form of apparent consciousness and individuality, is obviously an ego thing. If it was legal, we could easily be cloning ourselves, and that would give rise to some interesting questions. Nature is cloning all the time for more simple lifeforms. DNA is a self replicating molecule, but it couldn't really be said to be a conscious process (even though some would have it) - it's more like a chemical machine running on a temporary supply of energy. Hydras are a great example - put them in a blender and reduce them into singular cells and they will reinvent themselves again, and some say they might even be immortal, but if all the cells die, then it is not possible to make the Hydra. If the energy in the cell changes form - and the genes lose it after a while, they are not capable of replicating the Hydra. The singular cell here utilizes energy to react to it's surroundings and to connect with other living cells. That might only be a chemical energy reaction to us, but then again our advanced bodies and conscious minds might also only be just that too. The question then becomes - when, or even why, does an 'energy machine' - a chemical, genetic or molecular process develop into a state of life with conscious awareness? As we are both having different ideas about when that is, then it is obviously not very well defined or understood. Simply because we think there is an answer - ie. some point where the state changes from one to the other, we imagine putting an end to all the religious woo in the world thru this scientific fact. Because we don't have that answer, and because it might just be a personal preference, then we have to put up with the religious ranting that this is the work of god. Spiritual energy v. non-spiritual energy etc. On that point, I would agree - we humans have a form of 'spiritual' energy. That is because our emotions are traditionally known as spirit - such as 'what is the spirit of this idea'. Is it gloomy, happy, angry etc. Emotion comes from the mind, and we can label it 'spirit' - but it dies when the energy leaves the cells. The energy however doesn't die, especially if we live to pass our contribution to it on in our genes, then we are also in a sense immortal :) Until the point the sun expands to engulf us all - or we are swallowed up into a black hole. Bugger.

[@megaramo4219]

Can I ask question if we able to fix human after death like a computer and at the same time make a clone with all the memory and other properties , then now the two exists at the same time then can someone tell who is who , like lets say we created the clone first then , the clone is really conscious again with all the memory, lets say after that we revive the old body by changing some parts, and wow now there is two version of the same person , then who really lived those memories and who is just have fake memory from the two existing persons with the same exact memory and body build ?! lets say that that person is someone you love how to know who is the real one , and how to know if none of them are the real old one, + our body is always fix it self and changes molecules and cells all the time is that also change the person? that's the reason why I believe in soul .. and I really do not like this but it true "As I have no reason to believe in afterlife or god but I also don't have reason to believe that all humans are conscious or all are not conscious maybe some are not and some are .. I always search for someone really understand what I'm saying ...

[@tedgrant2]

The noun "consciousness"is obtained by sticking "ness" on the end of the adjective "conscious". We can all play this game. For example stick "ness" on the end of "stupid" giving "stupidness". Now let's invent the claim that stupidness can only come from stupidness, without any evidence. In order to avoid an infinite regress, there must have been a first stupidness and that came from God !

[@lewisner]

This was an interesting call but I think Thomas has been listening to William Lane Craig too much.

[@robstammers7149]

Very interesting, when I talk to someone, am I talking to their conscious existence of self, when we die our consciousness no longer exists, body is separate from self, as the body is only a vehicle to house our consciousness. We are not our bodies. Computers are not conscious, that is not an assertion its a scientific fact. This turned into Matt speaking gobbledygook. Matt your glasses have always existed just in a different form, so we could say that everything has always existed in some form.

[@JamesLoweryHypnotherapy]

Actually Matt, I don't think Plotinus' form of Neoplatonism is incompatible with atheism. Neither are all forms of solipsism, or for that matter, Idealism. I'm not strictly identifying as being any of these things, except for being an atheist. However, philosophy is not incompatible with atheism because it does not always include the concept of deity; except for the awful branch known as metaphysics. This individual is obviously somewhat familiar with conciousness studies, and possibly Neoplatonism or Idealism. They are not inherently incompatible with atheism. Even if one would speculate upon a deity within this philosophical context, it is at best a pantheistic or Deistic element such as the panpsychic view on conciousness. Either way, kudos to all of you and just be glad these views are a far cry from religious fanaticism.

[@thegraphicgoose]

Why do people say axed instead of asked? Its very annoying

[@joeclark1621]

Consciousness isn't created by the brain cause even the best neroscientist on earth asserts that the brain has a quarralation and even a causation to what consciousness does and behave but it doesn't tell us what consciousness is.

[@davydtaylor4151]

Such a silly discussion. Truth be told there are times when we can fix and computers, but there are also times when fixing either is not an option, whatever is wrong is terminal. I don’t understand why they continue down this route.

[@urbanmommy4802]

Have these glasses always existed ? well may be yes....the materials from which the glasses have been made (and the materials from which thse materials were made) have always existed, so i guess yess ?

[@DadeMurphy666]

3:55 consciousness IS god

[@geraldammons5520]

What on earth is the point here?!

[@tedgrant2]

Consciousness is a mystery. Therefore we need to propose that there is another bigger mystery that created it. But we have no way of explaining the other bigger mystery, So at that point, I give up.

[@tristannish8913]

Does this guy seriously not realize that everything is something?!? Seriously.....

[@bobs182]

The problem is people confuse thing with think. Personally things don't exist until we think about them. A thing is an object of our thinking. We call anything we can think about a thing. This caller thinks thinking/mind/his god is the basis of reality.

[@craighorton8339]

There is also a brain stem.

[@Ozone280]

Time after time theists put forward their assertions/beliefs and as soon as Matt says "How do you know?" they start floundering.