What we can and cannot say we know

I gave this presentation at ASU in Tempe Arizona, and also at the University Medical Center in Tuscon, both on the same weekend. I wanted to mix these venues together in the video, but I didn't get a good audio recording in Tuscon. What sucks about that was that Tuscon had a much livelier audience! Oh well.

[@uriituw]

My left ear is well informed.

[@jaysonsk]

I wonder if anyone has a broken left headphone

[@Ragnaracc]

Usually my left one breaks so my right ear does it all

[@rebeccaranger8918]

Same here, just my left ear. When I read your comment, I started giggling. I had the same experience. LOL

[@55Quirll]

@@rebeccaranger8918 Same here.

[@GabeLucario]

Only my left earphone works so I had no idea lol

[@YesheRabsal]

"Question with boldness, even the existence of Bob."

[@piesho]

~30:25 AronRa: "There's no flying spaghetti monster" Audience: "Heresy!"

[@acHe607]

That part was hilarious

[@aaronbredon2948]

"There is no Bob!" Say it isn't so! I need my Slack!

[@standoughope]

AronRa is an epic person who literally battles daily against a tidal wave of ignorance that is hard for me to imagine.

[@thetruthshed]

So its hard for you to imagine "the tidal wave of ignorance" which is an imagined thing you imagined but are ignorant of. Maybe you just trust the wrong guy. Trust Jesus Christ, He definitely loves truly and knows more about you and everything else than Aron Ra or any human. Peace.

[@moodyrick8503]

@@thetruthshed QUESTION; How can "faith" be a *pathway to truth* if it can equally lead one to believe in, Krishna, Allah, Jehovah, Ginesh, Buddha, ect ect... The Christian God would know that "faith" would lead billions to fall for fake Gods/religions. (it makes no sense)

[@thetruthshed]

@@moodyrick8503 Faith in the Truth. I didn't say trusting just anything is a pathway to truth. Go read the whole Bible and other religions full texts. You'll see that faith in God of the Bible would mean no trust for gods of other religions.

[@moodyrick8503]

@@thetruthshed I demolished the notion of "faith" as a pathway to "truth" and you tell me to go read the bible, REALLY? FYI; I was a devout 100% believer up until I was 34. (I'm 51 now) The *bible says over & over again that God wants a relationship with us* . (ad nausea) After 2 decades of asking & pleading & begging all I ever received was silence. An *all knowing God would know how to convince me* but has not bothered to, so what more can I do??? (BTW;, I've read the Bible, Koran, the Bahagavad Gita, and several other holy books. They all require you to "first believe" then you will see, which is an open invitation to gullibility & self deception.

[@thetruthshed]

@@moodyrick8503 I didn't say faith was the pathway to truth. And you kind of did demolish it. But the word "faith" in the Bible is very much stating trust, trusting in the God of the Bible for a peaceful relationship with Him through Jesus. I do not know everything about you and do not want to argue. But the Bible demolishes the "faith as the pathway to truth" argument truly, by God stating faith in Him (the Truth) is a free gift from Him to people, but his gift of faith in His truth requires and provides for people rejecting faith (trust) in lies and false gods (idols) the other religious texts are very different. Glad you've read them, maybe the more you could do is read them again and pray again. Hope you will come to trust Jesus Christ. Have a good day.

[@Hypercube1729]

This man is a genius! So sane and rational and intelligent! Subscribed!

[@Raz.C]

Dear AronRa: A "Blessing" adds +1 to attack rolls and +1 to damage rolls for 1 round-per-level of the caster. It has an effective radius of 10-15 feet and only affects allies, including the caster (if he's within the area of effect). Conversely: The spell "Curse" removes +1 from attack and damage rolls from enemies and has the same mechanics as the spell "Bless." These are both 1st level Clerical spells, though high level Paladins and Rangers can also learn to cast them. I hope that answers your question on "What does a blessing actually do/ what is a blessing?"

[@connorirons4542]

🤣

[@Mangaka-ml6xo]

@@connorirons4542 I wonder what kind of bonus Jesus's crown had x) and maybe his "death clothing" could make him invisible ? so much to ponders xD

[@adropofgoldensun27]

Most things in life can be a "blessing" and a "curse". 😁

[@Sciguy95]

The reason everything in religion is "holy" is because there are so many "holes" in the logic.

[@johndavis9591]

theist use anal logic, they are talking out their ass..

[@jessecane8390]

We know that millions of people around the world for centuries have claimed to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Do you know with 100% certainty that they do not? And why do they to prove it to you?

[@mism847]

@@jessecane8390 It's your brain creating delusions.

[@DibIrken]

Lol

[@c.a.t.732]

@@jessecane8390 Millions of people have claimed they have a personal relationship with Krishna. How can you know they are wrong?

[@TheEarlFerg]

Very intelligently stated about our knowledge. Yes, people must learn how to think, and re-learn how to live thoughtfully. Thank you Sir Aron Ra. It was beautifully philosophical. I'm very hungry for more. I feel it wasn't long enough. You GO, Bro' I just Love ya, man!

[@lotanddaughters]

" . . . not even the existence of a GOD could resurrect the Bible any MORE." -AronRa Love. That. Shit.

[@mosquitoe4]

My left ear is loving this.

[@MyOldName]

I want you to know, Aron, that the Invisible Pink Unicorn loves you. I want you to understand the pain you cause her by denying her, and how your choosing your eternal, fiery damnation will make her suffer. I want you to realize that every invisible rainbow tear she sheds is your doing.

[@sovietbot6708]

I demand you denounce the invisible pink unicorn in favor of the invisible rose unicorn! Death to all who deny the invisible rose unicorn!

[@autobotstarscream765]

@@sovietbot6708 Aron is Steel-type, the invisible unicorn gods won't make a dent in him unless they know High Horsepower.

[@autobotstarscream765]

Fire can't melt Steel/Rock-types!

[@sovietbot6708]

@@autobotstarscream765 he's immune to bug type, too

[@autobotstarscream765]

@@sovietbot6708 Well, at least resistant. :3

[@ilkhgs]

Another one hit right the #uck outta the park AronRa. Keep up the valuable work and, you rock. Peace, love and truth for ALL!!!

[@rapsodiblue4505]

Thanks for this Aron, as usual very clearly delivered. I have seen a few instances of STB in debate, attacking initially with his "How do you know anything?" stance. I was at first impressed because it seemed as if he was embracing the world of uncertainty that accompanies science and philosophy. But to lead on to the claim that we cannot know anything at all without God is crazy! And he does this with aggressive assertions, as if he had acquired certainty. Certainty, like Truth, is an idealisation that is unfounded if not impossible.

[@kirtooahmadinejad]

Damn, you perfectly explained all this Agnostic shit i have been troubled with. Thanks Aron.

[@lesleytaylor3825]

I've been troubled by this too!

[@syn010110]

My right ear is lonely. :(

[@hadara69]

Lol! I spent like 5 minutes trying to figure out what was going on with my sound system until I figured out it was in the video. Wish he had mentioned the audio problem somewhere.

[@mekayyoutube51]

It's in mono

[@jeremyleeshields9721]

@@mekayyoutube51 No. its in stereo with audio solely in the left channel

[@ZyrusSmith]

Might want to have a doctor check that out.

[@shawndworkin]

I have to say it. The looks of Glen Benton with the voice of David Vincent. Pretty awesome! That said I love this channel and the truth is here!

[@ShaggySatyr]

it has been said before, by Aron actually. but let me say it in a simple eay. while an atheist will argue to win and inform, a creationist will only argue to win.

[@Troubleshooter125]

Outstanding stuff, Aron. Please ... keep it coming!

[@gekiryudojo]

After listening to this and understanding it I am even more atheist than I was before if that is even possible! :)

[@EskChan19]

Yeah, Aaron turned me from an agnostic atheist into a gnostic atheist. I know for certain that, at least the god of the abrahamic religions, doesn't exist.

[@acerbicatheist2893]

Oh yes. Keep it up Dr.Krauss, please!! Being super-excited makes absolutely NO difference... but I am still super-excited!

[@hannibalbrown]

I would still LOVE to see a 5 part anti-Noah video :) Excellent talk Aron, you're a gentleman and a scholar.

I agree, many have done one shot videos but we definately need a multi-parter.

[@chadeckard8290]

I think this is the foundational speech of everything you do Aron. I have come back to this periodically over the years and reflected deeply on its content. I point to this in my philosophical discussions with philosophers who tell me you don’t understand where they are coming from when they say “everyone has faith”. Certainly the problem of induction that Hume laid out so well is understood by you, and I think you deal with why it is pretty much a waste of time to bring it up as an equalizer. Though we can not know what the “absolute” truth is we can at least be corrected. The theist thinks they already have it whilst never able to show it or change their mind when shown to be incorrect.

[@ChrissonatorOFL]

Always happy to see a new AronRa video. :)

[@tammyderouet]

Fascinating as always.

[@Roedygr]

There are three views of god. 1. I know with reasonable certainty there is no god 2. I lie to others that I know with reasonable certainty there is a god. 3. I say what I am told. I am too stupid to even have an opinion. Why would they tell such a lie? Because in their community. it is considered virtuous to tell this lie.

[@5winder]

What if God reveals himself to you? Would you think yourself crazy? There is a fourth view that you dismiss out of hand, apparently... 4. I know God... I don't lie. I use truth testing (muscle testing) for guidance from the Lord Jesus. I am absolutely assured of my place, and it's not on (this) Earth. The irony of this "New Age" practice being simply (age-old) spiritual discernment is rich... Any foul spirit can move you, so be careful to focus only on the Holy One of God.

[@BlackEpyon]

***** Yep. Be warned of the placebo and reject the cool-aid.

[@Roedygr]

You can can have ecstatic experiences in the context of Christianity, from drugs, from meditation, from group sex, from a manic episode, from the activities of cults, from a Bette Midler concert, from mad infatuation... It is natural when you experience something many times more intense that anything previous to look around for something very special to explain it and to assign it to whatever your culture assigns such experiences to. The intensity creates certainty, even when the only evidence was intense pleasure.

[@zContagium]

Roedy Green 2 is technically the same thing as 3.

[@mikee839]

***** now not like this is a gay thing .......... which is ok ....... you were born that way or not but i had an "ecstatic" experience just a few hours ago .......... most would call it a bowel movement but hey ........ i'm still basking in the afterglow was that god? he's big as a horse if so

[@autorobo1000]

The slide at 15:09 made me feel old, and I'm not even that old...

[@EebstertheGreat]

"It's not special pleading if you're pleading for God." Please tell me he actually said that.

[@gw_leibniz]

It was great to host you at Arizona State! Glad to see this made it online.

[@gregorypdearth]

I think this brings up a flaw in the absolute nature of the terminology. I can know certain gods do not exist. That makes me a gnostic atheist. But I cannot know if other types of gods don't exist. It depends on how they are defined. If they are defined in such a way that we should have evidence and we simply don't see evidence where it should exist, then we can know no gods of THAT specific type exist just as much as I can know no naked cheerleaders are in the room with me right now (by the lack of evidence of their existence where such evidence should be obvious). But as certain deist notions of a god do not include any interaction whatsoever with our reality, such that there is no evidence to even be expected, I have to be agnostic regarding those types of gods as I cannot show they do NOT exist (which I realize is not my burden of proof). I can still assume the default position of not believing they DO exist, making me an atheist regardless, until such time that a demonstration could be made to show they DO exist. So as Aron himself has said, "if you cannot show it, you don't know it." And I certainly cannot SHOW that these deist-type non-interacting gods do NOT exist. So I am obviously cannot JUST be either a gnostic atheist or an agnostic atheist. I am both, contingent upon the parameters of the god claim.

[@DudeWhoSaysDeez]

Seems logical

[@theedge747]

You sir, are very intelligent

[@Hgxdx3]

(only in regards to your final point) but why start with the idea that you cannot prove there ISNT a non-interacting god vs starting with the idea that you cannot prove there IS a non-interacting god? replace god in those two claims with a made up creature or mythical one. does that not raise issues with negative claims (ie the problem in saying i cannot NOT prove it so theres a possibility - especially if theres never a potential for verifiability). in essence why make claims about anything thats defined as outside of reality if by definition its not going to interact with us anyway since we are reality.

[@connorirons4542]

I understand this and can see what you mean, but I would like to point something out. If something cannot interact with the world at all, then it doesn't matter if it exists as it can't do anything. If it does not interact with reality, it may as well not be in reality and therefore not real.

[@darrenforrester3894]

If you ever get the chance then I, for one, would be interested in that 5 part flood debunking. Mainly because I think you have a displayed talent for documentary making. Your foundational falsehoods was one of the best presentations of a summary of basic contemporary palaeontology I have seen.

[@TwippyTwilight]

If you match up the AD&D alignment chart with the Atheist/Agnostic/Theist/Gnostic chart, the Gnostic/Theists are Chaotic evil, heh, and the Agnostic/Atheist is the Lawful Good..

[@leo29july]

Absolutely great talk.

[@gspendlove]

Bruggencate is the single most arrogant speaker I've ever heard.

[@phantasmo9998]

It's how he disguises the insecurity of his beleif in magical nonsense. He's a walking talking example of the the Christian persecution complex.

[@filthycasual6118]

+phantasmo9998 They love to be persecuted for being right, just like their supposed Messiah. They come to the erroneous conclusion that, because they're being persecuted, they must be right. I don't think they ever consider that they might just be wrong or stupid.

[@kennethgee2004]

And you reply assumes that they cannot be correct. What if they are correct? What if you never considered the fact that they might be right? The the Messiah is not supposed but real and what would that mean for so many people?

[@sagerider2]

Well, you know that's why there's so much bullying at Holy Trinity. It's ridiculous. Also, they pretend that gives them the right to pick on "Lesser" beings.

[@Sekhubara]

Has anybody else realised Mr. Bruggenate's first and middle name is essentially "Satan"?

[@valerieangell7588]

“If you cannot show it to be true,you cannot know it is true.”True enough.

[@kabivose]

I cannot prove that my nose itches even though I know it to be true

[@valerieangell7588]

kabivose Hence the difference between objective and subjective truth.

[@Shooter__Andy]

Or, in other words, yes, the Abrahamic god can be real and I could be mistaken, but I rate this possiblity about the same as the possibility of the existence of Godzilla or leprechauns.

[@Shooter__Andy]

***** Well, Godzilla is too big to exist without breaking the known laws of physics, ecology, etc., and Leprechauns are indeed magical. And, of course, the stories that describe both are fulled of holes, inconsistences and factual errors. So yeah, pretty much like the Abrahamic God. Maybe to a lesser degree purely because these stories make LESS claims about reality (and therefore make less mistakes) but, in principle, they are the same to me.

No, the Abrahamic God can't be real. Genesis 1:1 was refuted by science long ago. Also, the source of the different stories of the Abrahamic texts are known. The text of the Bible has artifacts from earlier versions that contradict the current version. (For example it has politheistic phrasing in some places.) If some kind of godlike being exists, it can't be Abrahamic.

[@Shooter__Andy]

Gábor Koszper And all of these refutations and all this knowledge can, in principle, be mistaken... with just about the same possibility that the knowledge who thought of Godzilla can be mistaken. Skepticism doesn't allow for categorical statements of facts, but just because I'm granting the mere possibility it doesn't mean I'm saying it is probable in the slightest, and I don't think ANY apologist would be satisfied with comparing ther deity to Godzilla in terms of plausibility.

Andrey Larionov I disagree. The Abrahamic God is defined by the Bible in a way that has internal contradictions that make it impossible to exist.

[@Shooter__Andy]

Gábor Koszper Well yeah, but if we go through all Godzilla movies and treat them as a unififed story there'd be lots of contradictions too.

[@ScienceBoy70]

Excellent video!

[@nickcarbaugh4301]

at 15 minutes in did AronRa just meme at us?

[@tomhofmeister3246]

I guess I see truth is an explanation of reality. We can never truly know the truth for certain, but the truth is still there. We can very efficiently approximate truth. That being said I am admittedly a novice in all subjects applicable to this topic. Thanks for making these videos.

[@bary1234]

Imagine if AronRa had billion dollars. There would be no new creationists on this planet, ever.

[@TheSnoopy1750]

Not sure how AronRa having even $100 billion could help him convince delusional people that their Magic SkyDaddy doesn't exist. Theists are unswayed by logic and evidence and seem unable to break their indoctrination or outgrow their gullibility.

[@godlesshelp8503]

***** Most theists are bribed by the promise of ever lasting life ... I wonder if we could bribe them with cash now .... Hay it might be a quick way to thin out the ranks ...

[@TheSnoopy1750]

***** I understand your point, but no republican would get through a red state or red district primary if they didn't endorse religion. Even a democrat would have a hard time running on an anti-religion platform. www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-atheists-we-distrust/

[@TheSnoopy1750]

***** I completely agree - these idiots vote against their own economic interests because the GOP plays to their superstitious beliefs, hatred and fears. Obama was right, most southern voters really only care about guns, god and gays. www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/24/1280047/-Nine-out-of-10-most-miserable-states-are-Red-surprising-no-one lippard.blogspot.com/2009/06/republican-states-lead-in-divorce-teen.html IMHO, the south is largely a cultural, economic and intellectual wasteland.

[@IanAtkinson555]

And that explains why the right wing in America are doing everything in the power to stop money getting into liberal hands and are gathering and sitting on as much of it as they possibly can to keep it out of circulation and impoverish the economy.

[@johanchristensen6551]

I guess i have been a gnostic atheist for many years, but this video surely helps me solidifying that view, so i want to thank you for that +AronRa By the way, this is not my first time watching this video, i must have seen it 5 times now. I just decided to actually leave a comment this time.

[@reasonrally6658]

Hurray the fall of religion is at hand!! The silent majority re finally unifying and on a rapid rise and among the fastest growing movement in the U.S. Exposing religious ignorance is a thing of beauty!! ;)

[@ICarus-eu3jv]

The internet, where religions come to die.

[@painless4785]

One of the best videos - do an updated version if you can.

[@sagerider2]

There can only be ONE! Highlander nerd.

[@mikeclemens795]

I think it would be really funny if some ancient, previously unknown, gigantic reptile appeared (I know, very unlikely) and headed straight for Texas. Keep up the good work AronRa!

[@humbertojimmy]

Here's a simple question to demolish the whole (already dumb on it's own) of Sye's argument: - Could God reveal a false truth to you in a way that you wouldn't be able to realize it? His answer can only be "yes", because God should be able to do anything. Then: -how can you be SURE that the so called revelation you obtainned from God was true? Notice that if he insists "because God revealed it in such a way that made it clear to me", that no longer is valid, since he admited that God could trick him in a perfect way, giving him the apearance of having received true knowledge but actually having not. So, the question remains, how can Sye be sure? Ps: Aron, just a little detail (lol)... "to believe" *really IS* a verb! No need to use that against them hardcore believers, hehehe.

[@OrangeGeemer]

+Jimmy David oh, but he has a script for that too. He'll say that god can not trick him because he is love, not a liar, and if you show him aaaaaall the parts of the bible where god lies he'll just end the convesation claiming that he does not discuss scripture with non believers. He always does this when someone ask him an unanswerable question Regards

[@kennethgee2004]

No God could not reveal a false truth because He is truth and to reveal something other than Himself would be a lie. How Could God then exist if He could lie? He would not be able to. So are there things that God cannot do maybe but only because they are totally against His nature and not because He does not understand what a lie is nor have the power to lie. It is so against His nature that He just cannot.

[@humbertojimmy]

Self Fulfilling Prophet I was going to say that, but you got here first. But i guess it's really no use... They don't care if their god isn't omnipotent as long as they get to keep it (like a child holding on to a teddy bear).

[@Burusagi]

My left ear enjoyed this greatly.

[@Volound]

as an extremely strong atheist, i cannot help but feel that this talk is full of unsound reasoning and logic, that it goes too far. while it is certainly the case that we can claim with practicality that we "know" that christianity is a myth, we do not have _absolute_ certainty. we do not know *anything* with absolute certainty except for a very select few things such as our subjective experience of reality, and of our lack of omniscience. if something could be wrong, you cannot "know" it in the true epistemic sense, it is just colloquial knowledge. you mentioned the platonic description of knowledge. id like to draw your attention to exceptions to this (which you may already be aware of), because i think it will help. the "gettier problems". you can believe something that is true, you can have a good reason to believe that (a sufficient justification), but it can *still* not be knowledge. e.g. if you think the time is 6:15pm because you looked at your watch. the time could be 6:15pm and you would be justified in thinking that because you glanced at your watch which is a reliable mechanism for determining the time ..but your watch could have stopped exactly 24 hours before. it would not be knowledge because your justification, while accurately pointing exactly to the truth, was wrong. you have a justified, true belief, that is certainly not "knowledge". this is similar to how you could "know" abrahamism is false, and you would be justified in thinking you know that because you can demonstrate their laughable, mythical origins, but by a sheer fluke, a freak accident, christianity could still be true. you could make up a religion right now e.g. the flying spaghetti monster or the napkin religion, and it could be true *even though* you just made it up out of nowhere and you know you did. unless something violates what you actually know (which is very little), you cannot claim to know it to be false in a formal, epistemological sense. this is why people say "anything is possible". what they actually mean (or should mean) is "anything has the possibility of being possible, in the sense that i cannot demonstrate the impossibility of any possibility".

[@MPythonGirl]

That was his old view of absolute knowledge, you can look up his talk in Austin if you want to see him arguing that point. The reason the opening took so long was so he could explain why he doesn't use it. The main reason appears to be because that isn't how theists use the term (is it really surpriseling?). He redefined it into how it's used outside of philosophy, which is as valid a venue for language as philosophy itself.

[@PhrontDoor]

Volound Sure, we know a great many things for absolute certainty.. all the self-refuting assertion clauses, for example. So I can safely say that I know for certain that I am not omniscient.

[@Volound]

PhrontDoor "Sure, we know a great many things for absolute certainty" not any at all. ".. all the self-refuting assertion clauses, for example." i do not recognise this term. "So I can safely say that I know for certain that I am not omniscient." what? non-sequitur? i already gave that as an example. what?

[@MPythonGirl]

PhrontDoor I don't know... If this is all a dream you came up with you *could* technically know everything, because all new knowledge is randomly generated as you learn it. This would give the illusion of you not being omniscient, when you really are. Though this would be the case where you are technically God. (Sorry, my inner troll insisted I comment ;) I actually agree with you. It's an interesting thought experiment though.)

[@Volound]

MPythonGirl if this is a dream then your knowledge is confined to that of the dreamworld. if it is a dream and you do not know it is a dream, you are not omniscient. you are not omniscient whichever way you look at it.

[@MrBeaner97]

Hey! Well.. yeah being present at the ASU audience most of us weren't that lively, probably due to it being at a later hour. Great presentation!

[@rowansafley6133]

I'm sure you've heard this before but you look like the bad guy in the Disney movie Pocahontas.

[@jessecane8390]

He looks more like most artists rendition of satan.

[@mit1346]

When I entered into a relationship with my partner I first met her, talked to her, touched her, got to understand her. I didn't read about her in a book. I wasn't given a sermon on her virtues and expected to enter a relationship with her. Nobody is that stupid. Not only do believers enter into a relationship with a God sight unseen. It is arguably the most important relationship of their life. The relationship that leads to eternal salvation and harmony is entered on the foundation of TEXT and hearsay. Many will argue personal revelation that confirms this entity's existence. Or some bullshit like the complex world should be enough confirmation of an invisible almighty creator. *Unlike* when You bring your partner along to meet your skeptical friends and there is no doubt to any observer with eyes, ears, nose, and a nervous system that you do indeed have a partner. Instead we get washed out claims of personal confession, with no way to validate. This almighty being with all the powers imaginable at his disposal to prove his existence. This extremely important relationship that God wants us to have with him, and the best he can do is Text and hearsay. He can't or won't provide a a fraction of the evidence we all EXPECT when entering any other relationship in the real world. Every man woman and child could be given this evidence in any manner needed. *Instantly*. God, if he wanted, could manifest his message and purpose in a flash every day if necessary. There wouldn't be a soul on the planet that could deny God. Not one! And don't give me the He sent Jesus in the flesh as proof garbage. If he wanted to hammer that one home he could have left Jesus here on earth. We could kill him a few more times and watch him resurrect, just to be sure. But he doesn't leave any such proof. We get a book of supernatural claims. A book that needs to be explained, interpreted and defended by broken unknowing creations. Based on conflicting interpretations of vague information, we are to enter into the most significant and greatest relationship of our promised immortal lives. Really?

[@nobodyspecial1553]

***** You might be making me turn from an agnostic atheist to a gnostic atheist.

[@TheEternalHater]

+Joseph Strahm join us, we have cookies... and bacon.

[@nobodyspecial1553]

TheEternalHater I will join you! Muahaha! I am a gnostic atheist on matters of the abrahamic religions. I know they're wrong.

[@TheEternalHater]

Joseph Strahm good man.

[@ivanbraginsky8224]

+TheEternalHater But we still have Lord Gaben though. Granted, he's not supernatural, it's just he has technology that bends the universe to his whim.

[@TheEternalHater]

Ivan Braginsky thou shall not worship advanced aliens or technology.

[@StarSong936]

This is just a joke, so don''t take it seriously. What Dr. Who doesn't exist? There are no unicorns? There is no pagusus? (sp?) There are no fey? Either benign or harmful? I'm so devastated, you have destroyed all my preconceptions and everything I was raised to believe. Just so you know, I never believed any of those things, though it was fun to pretend. So Aron Ra, I salute you (seriously) take care and I look forward to more videos in the future. Now, just so you know, I was raised a Fundamentalist Independent Baptist, who later converted to Seventh Day Adventist. I don't identify with any of that now. So, the "joke" above does in some degree describe my journey. I had rather go to oblivion (not the Elder Scrolls style of Oblivion, than to face any of the religious beliefs I was taught while growing up. For that matter, if there is a God, all religions have him wrong. This is my point of view, and I'm not trying to convince you to my point of view. Just take it as my personal experience. @30:37 Oh no, you're taking away my endless supply of Ra-men Noodles? I thought I would always have a food supply. Actually, while I like the flying spaghetti monster, I don't believe in any thing like that. I do have to admit though, that without Ra-men noodles, there were times when I would have starved to death. @30:53 Bob is my Uncle, my Father's brother.

[@secularargument]

No god exists.

[@michaeleatmon9127]

Excellent 😎

[@GEdwardsPhilosophy]

Sneer at philosophy. Then do it badly. This pattern weakens atheism :(

[@seandavison3916]

keep in mind there are those who would accuse you of doing the same, save the sneering bit.

[@GEdwardsPhilosophy]

Sean Davison I don't doubt that. But there are those who simply think any philosophy that doesn't admit God is bad philosophy. So, as welcoming as one may be to criticsm, it still pays to maintain one's standards as to whom one would accept as a _credible_ critic.

[@Nai61a]

***** Can you expand on that a little, please?

[@abdelarmstr5173]

Well, mainly because the notion of God is ill-defined and rests upon the notions formed in a non-scientific era. Philosophy doesn't exist outside of science, it follows it. So a philosophy that tries to reach an understanding of God from every side is likely to fail because of that ill-definition.

[@jdgrahamo]

How can it weaken atheism? What does belief in a god have to do with bad philosophy? Where is the pattern?

[@skyjuiceification]

A good talk sir.

[@jdgrahamo]

According to Skeat's Concise Etymological Dictionary of the English Language -- "Bless : to consecrate, etc. The original sense must have been 'to consecrate by blood'. i.e. either by sacrifice or by the sprinkling of blood. Middle English 'blessen', Anglo Saxon 'blétsian', also 'blédsian', and ;bloedsian', which can only be from 'blód', by the usual vowel-change from ó to é " Excellent talk, as usual. The logic is irrefutable unless one is incapable of reason.

[@therappingatheist3765]

i tell people to have a magical day all time its the same as saying have a bless day

[@BenEllingson]

Well done Aron. My favorite of your talks yet. I'm so tempted to post to Facebook and tag my dipshit acquaintances that habitually post memes about "God" & "Jesus" but some of my clients are friends and religious but I shouldn't risk loosing the relationships... :-)

[@senjiukanuba5569]

Can someone suggest a video with background music that only plays on the right ear? It kinda feels like I'm deaf on one ear watching this video. XD

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

I love the moans and groans and cries of heresy about the Flying Spaghetti Monster! (30:27) A Million thumbs up for that!

[@Leith_Crowther]

At least the audience had SOME sense. Praise his noodly appendage.

[@Majik53]

Ohhhhhh damn, I missed it. I'm not far from UMC, I would have been there if I'd known.

[@chigong980]

Yah Mahn....never cared much for that word "blessing", because it is literally translated to mean "magical incantation". Besides, I can't get that nutty kid I grew up with (George) out of my head with the way he would refer to a "blessing". It was when he had farted in your general direction, or even directly upon you. He would say "I have now blessed you" (extreme emphasis on that word "blessed") He lives today as a broken down, drunken old hermit, with more than ten cats. I don't like to think about that guy, but alas, every time somebody says "blessed".....

[@eclipseslayer98]

Wow! I just came from a video of his where the audio was only in my right ear, and now it's in my left. Does this mean I could have watched both videos at the same time?! Sweet, that would be even faster than my snail's pace 2x speed that eye putt every video on.

[@mrx00666]

Very well said ending.

[@jaredsmith112]

Hey!!!!! i love your videos, man.

[@DavidSmith-xs3or]

The audience sure shouted out when AronRa dismissed the existence of the flying spaghetti monster and almost as loud were the shouts of shock for the dismissal of the existence of Bob.

[@lkexpress]

That Godzilla argument was brilliant!

[@Recon_Ninja]

I for one would love it if you could find time to make that video series scientifically disproving the flood. It's not a new idea, but having more scientifically and historically accurate messages put out for public viewing will always be beneficial, and coming from you I know they would be nothing less than superb.

[@doubtingthomas1312]

💜💜💜

[@ybra]

Aron please make sure there is audio in both channels in future videos (easy to fix while editing). Temporary solution for anyone that fins it incredibly annoying to only have one channel with headphones: You can pull your headphone jack half way out and you will get sound on both sides :P

[@SidheKnight]

The link to "Give the Devil His Due" at 34:31 doesn't work. (Video taken down).

[@MarcStjames-rq1dm]

hey AronRa,, bet cha play guitar...great presentation thanks the effort must be contimued to rid our species from the adaption of these out of date myths in shaping individuals psyches etc.. i see that also as an eventuality needed for our "evolution forward". (note: kinda stoned)

[@differous01]

18:10 "The Gnostics...believed that faithful conviction equals knowledge." The Gnostics are relevant in so much as they contributed this idea to proto-Christianity (ie. that period before 'Christianity' got its story straight and substituted 'faith' for 'knowledge'), however they were not the originators of the concept. They were preceded by Plato's theory of Forms, in which the mind is perceived as the intersection between the realm of Forms and the material realm (this 'Dualism' lies behind Descarte's theory of Mind too). Christianity is just one subset of the Platonic theory of Mind. It requires one to perceive, as by a revelation (read 'assumption') that the Forms are the 'absolute' truth of that which the senses discern. Aristotle rebuffed the whole Platonic theory with his own theory, which perceives the Form of the thing to lie in its constituent parts as a whole, wherein the mind is regarded as a subset of the body, which is a subset of the material world. Mind is not in a special set of its own. It is from Aristotle that we get methodical logic (as used in his Politics and in his History of Animals), by which we analyse possible combinations, whether that be in the body politic or in the bodies of living things. Science used to be called 'Natural Philosophy' and the two only became seperable once the principle of experimental falsifiability was insisted upon; science MUST be evidence based. Religion is still appealing to the Platonic perception of Forms. Those who fail to investigate another's theory of mind can end up at cross purposes. Debating 'absolute' truth without defining it is a waste of time, so one should ask "which definition is in use? 1/ absolute certainty, or 2/ a truth existing, somehow, apart from the brain and the material universe?"

[@Canalcoholic]

Anyone listening through wired headphones, pull the jack plug out ever so slightly.

[@ssabykoops]

If using headphones or earbuds, just pull the headphone jack a half millimeter or so from the audio output so that it isnt all the way in, to fix the audio pan issue

[@Yeeksquilack]

Whew! Well, glad *that's* settled!

[@barneyisabro]

The sound is very quiet :( it's very hard to hear on my tv even at 100 volume. Great videos though Aron

[@Morjensful]

Hey, sound -stuff. This video has audio only on the left side of the Aron part. Plz make it mono (easier to hear, works on all platforms). Thx!

[@eareimaj]

So you are saying there is no great green arkleseizure either?

[@stevenhogenson4880]

Aron, I enjoy listening to your presentations immensely. One observation on this program where you were comparing who the person of Jesus was to Newton and Bruggencate -- you made the remark that "Jesus never described himself as an avatar of God made flesh." I am assuming you recognize the passages where Jesus says "The Father and I are one; anyone who has seen me has seen the Father." That would seem to pretty strongly imply that the two are somehow one and the same. Just something to ponder as it pertains to this aspect of the presentation.

[@SallinKari]

What! Question Bob? But but but... I was there when he was named... hell I even suggested his name! How could I ever question that little guy. For reference, I was running a D&D campaign when a character had an 'eidolon' which is basically a summonable companion which the player could shape in a variety of ways. This player wanted to have a pet minotaur with iron scales, and while I was helping him make it, he was puzzling what to call this creature, to which I replied "I don't care, call him Bob for all I care." To which he decided that Bob was actually a good name.

[@DenisLoubet]

Bruggencate must think that laptops work by sheer chance, since neither the designers nor manufacturers knew anything.

[@JCLeSinge]

The opening discussion of "Myth" harks to something I almost commented on a previous video (bingeing). Christianity is not a myth in the same sense as other mythologies are. And not for being "true", obviously it's not, but for the opposite reason; it has no truth in it. Mythology encodes cultural truth. Even if it's not literally true, the myth frames a cultural understanding of something that is; it's a metaphor, a simple way of explaining their best understanding. That understanding moves on doesn't invalidate the function and forms of myth. And that's universal to all cultures, mythology is a field of historical, sociological and psychological study. In that sense, ontologically speaking, myths are "true". Christianity is not myth, specifically because every story of the Bible is a rehash of other myths. It's not myth because it's deliberately taking other culture's stories and distorting them. It's propaganda, built from myths. The Biblical story of the Garden of Eden, for example, is not the myth. It's a rehash of half a dozen other myths from as many other cultures. Genesis is no more mythology than the movies "300" or "Troy", for the same reason; it's a retcon on an existent myth, not an original cultural story.

[@MachielGroeneveld]

Theism is not 'just a theory', it's even not 'just a hypothesis' it doesn't even qualify for being a hypothesis.

[@MrWaterlionmonkey]

Hey Aron-Ra I was wondering what you think of a few thought experiments against pre-supisitionism. It is true they cannot show God to be true, it is also sure they cannot show which God is true or version of God is true using faith (the only evidence they really have). But also even IF we grant them that their God exists (which they still have yet to demonstrate), what if their God always deceives them? Even if they say he wouldn't they land into at least 2 problems. If they define good as whatever God commands or does then if God chose to have actually made them 5 seconds ago and put them in a matrix simulation that isn't representative of mind independent reality, then he could and it would be good. If however they say God can only do good and they define what that good is and deception isn't good we have the problem of God lying in the bible even to holy men (2 Chronicles 18:21) and they presumably were not aware, similarly God could be deceiving them in the same way. If you suggest that God is a consequentialist to justify his shifting morals then it could be the case that deceiving you fulfils some greater good that you could not understand and therefore everything included the entire bible and in reality may be illusion . If God is evil then it doesn't matter what you believe about him it is a deception done for no greater reason. Furthermore if their God is a literalist view of the bible or not or even not of the bible, then we know that delusional people do exist and they are deceived of the nature of reality by their minds or by their mistaken beliefs God gave them, how does he know that he is not the same. All they should be able to demonstrate is that we are all in the same boat and that, while science may-not be a perfect tool it is simply the best tool we have to get to truth.

[@redeamed19]

Are these public events? If you are ever in the phoenix area I would love to check one of these out in person.

[@criskity]

Damn... I just bought these headphones and now one side is broken...

[@DoctaOsiris]

That Godzilla cloud looked more like a Crocodile 🐊 to me 🤣 Or at least its head 🤣

[@yaeldragwyla8170]

One thing you said needs some clarification: While there was no world-wide flood a la the story of Noah, there seem to have been a whole series of more local floods that wiped out whole ecosystems and even human communities due to the warming that ended the Ice Age. The glaciers began to melt, the water from that pooled in places where there will still ice dams to hold the water in, global warming ate through those ice damns, and the water from those glacial lakes spilled out through the gaps in the ice dams and flooded large areas. Many cultures have stories about vast floods and the lives taken by them. Each such culture has thought that the flood its ancestors experienced were unique, at least until modern times, when evidence from archeologists, geologists, and climatologist began to put together evidence that showed that such floods took place. So there may have been no Noah, but it's almost certain that the story of Noah was handed down from much earlier cultures that had experienced such floods, and either migrated into the Middle East or were there all along. Something similar is true of the stories of Prometheus in pre-Christian Greek religion. Supposedly Prometheus taught humanity to take the internal organs of sacrificial animals and wrap them in the hides of those animals and sacrifice the results on altars of the G-ds by burning them, sending savory smoke upward that would fool the G-ds into thinking whole animals were being sacrificed. That way, humans got the delicious steaks from the animals' muscles and the G-ds got the offal. Well, it turns out that the Greeks had forgotten some of their own history, Originally, apparently, during the Ice Age, humans sacrificed the hides and internal organs of animals to their G-ds because those were the most valuable parts, the hides needed for warm clothing and the internal organs being the most nutritious parts of the animals. Those ancient peoples loved their G-ds and wanted to give them the best they had in spite of their need for the hides and internal organs. BTW, another dispute: there really are things that could be real but for which you can have no evidence. How do you know I have a mind? Maybe I'm just a pre-programmed robot writing this that has no mind of its own at all. Maybe all those you know have no minds. How do you know that someone has a mind? Unless you are telepathic or empathic you *can't realty know*. All you can really know on the basis of objective evidence is their behavior, which could be entirely a product of non-sentient processes. While I agree that many theists, especially televangelists and the like, are grossly arrogant, atheists who make certain claims about what is real and what is not can be just as arrogant. Ultimately, what it comes down to is: Can you prove to me the things you espouse? What you know yourself because you've experienced certain things that you have no objective evidence for may well be real, but if you can't show others objective evidence of it, that makes it not real. And that's a matter of social psychology, not physical science.

[@dickhamilton3517]

where does a guy get a name like Ten Bruggencate? Did he make it up? What's his real given name?

[@TheSnoopy1750]

His parents are Dutch so maybe that explains it. It really doesn't matter what his name is because he's an arrogant delusional wanker that should be ignored and will only be known by rational people as a religious weirdo with no redeeming value. He (along with Ray Comfort) could disappear and the world would be better off.

[@Sekhubara]

If you look at his first and middle name it essentially reads "Satan" (Sye Ten).

[@steveyuhas9278]

Well... he finally got around to that series disproving the flood!

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

I know what you mean when you say "You have to show that there's a there there." but shouldn't we formalize that a bit? Something like "One must establish precedent of possibility before attempting to prove the existence of a thing." Is that about it?

[@Str8upWizardCJ]

Awesome, I love the changes you made... What are your current views of nihilism?

[@ThatEphelGuard]

Sye's "arguments" are simply ludicrous. How a guy like him can make a living out of those aberrations is beyond me, even considering a religious context.

[@theBEATdude]

Oh dang I was there!

[@rosackoh1959]

hi can any one tell me were to get the sticker that's on the bible PLEASE ,,,,,,,,,,,

[@barkYdarkATFB]

@rosack oh1 The whole bible is the sticker www.redbubble.com/people/millytant/works/703072-work-of-fiction?p=sticker&size=small&.pla+notset&country_code=US&gclid=Cj0KCQjw0pfzBRCOARIsANi0g0ugaePl9706-8akxSBB34lpTKghCqEkABNQznfwYn457Z0yZLxUe7IaAh4-EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

[@pup1008]

In the beginning the sound man catered for the right ear & it was good!

[@demianhaki7598]

Why do so many creationists have such unusual first and last names?! Where do they find these people? (and I know that this seems like a rather ironic question on the page of someone called Aron Ra, but you get my point^^)

[@TheOnlyFoxYouNeed]

+Demian Haki you probably already know this by now but his name isn't actually Aron Ra. his name is L. Aron Nelson (i don't know what the L stands for).

[@kennethgee2004]

That is such a weird observation that is so far off base from reality. First people don't get to choose their names at birth; their parents do that for them. Second what would a persons name have to do with the validity of their claim? This is another form of ad hominem attack. My name is Kenneth Gee. That is nothing funny, so thirdly the claim itself tries to assert that all creationists have funny names, which is not true.

[@RockSmithStudio]

I would love to see you do that 5 part of Noah's Flood. I have friends and family who actually believe that this myth actually happened! I would love to see you present the fact on how it is impossible.