Street Epistemology: Michelle | Disconfirming Presuppositions
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
- Location: San Antonio, Texas
Recorded: 7 June 2017
Released: 13 June 2017
Twitter: / magnabosco (follow me)
TH-cam: / magnabosco210 (tons of Playlists)
Facebook: / magnabosco210 (like my page)
Website: anthonymagnabo... (contact me, appearances)
SE Resources: tinyurl.com/ab...
SE Community: tinyurl.com/ab...
Audio Only: / ep-153-dialogue-anthon...
** Add foreign language captions w/TH-cam's community contributions tools **
Summary: Michelle is certain that her presupposed, faith-based God belief is true, and perhaps even exempt from disconfirmation.
Recorded w/Go-Pro. Edited w/PowerDirector.
The views addressed here are mine and mine alone, and are not necessarily shared by members of my family and friends.
#StreetEpistemology #Magnabosco #Apologetics #Defeasibility #PresuppositionalApologetics #PresuppositionalApologist #Presupositions #Presup #Faith #AnthonyMagnabosco
Anthony is the atheist patron saint of patience.
I wonder if - inside his thoughts - he wants to scream out true statements that contradict the interviewee.
Instead, he figures out a way to ask a question which logically gets one to same statement, and without having to say it!
People hate being corrected, though. This is a difficult but very effective method, imo.
@@Jason918114 i sit at my desk throwing a rubber sponge at the people on the screen, the temptation to rain down fire and brimstone on these people is only offset by my compassion for dumb animals.
@@Jason918114 Your thinking of the Anti-fascist followers...
@@HarryNicNicholas try watching the video with Caleb at the Alamo. Talk about yelling at the screen...
R'amen
Her entire argument boils down to "if there is no slave master, then who's slave will I be"?
Dan Barker
www.thinkatheist.com/photo/dan-barker-if-there-is-no-master-whose-slave-will-i-be
I've never heard that quote before, it is a great way to put it. They are only delegating the search for meaning to another being/entity (God), but why would this god meaning be more important than your own? This delegation of meaning makes it easier for them to cope with existential fear, because they don't have to decide anymore (slave/master), but of course truth doesn't adjust itself to fit your emotional necessities.
Misty Marshes
True
Life is too short , and there is no god, or keeper of the universe, or an afterlife,
So we should make the most of today, and be the best person we possibly can and be excellent to everyone!
;~)
Love&Science
It must have been extremely difficult for Anthony to stay in SE mode for this one. My fallacious reasoning bingo card is blacked out.
Ryan Williams When someone so smugly dismisses an atheist's ability to love another person without a God right to your face (not to mention taking a swipe at Hitch!) it takes a lot of work to set that aside for the purpose of unpacking their methodology.
You might use animal affection as an example. (Some young eat their parents of course.)
Hold on! It didn't seem to me that she was dismissing the possibility that atheists could feel love for another person. She was saying that everybody loves, those who don't believe in a god simply experience the 'gift' of love, so to speak, without acknowledging the source. I am not siding with her, but I think your transcription of her words is incorrect
Cataldo Leone I suppose it is possible! Thanks for watching.
Cataldo, that is my take too. She acknowledged that nonbelievers loved (because god created them that way). They just can't see god created them to love. This would then be consistent with her god belief. What I found more interesting was her acknowledgment that nonloving people exist. This is a direct disconfimation of her belief. Yet, she adds in the evil loophole to dismiss the nonconfirmation. . .
Biggest lie on TH-cam:
Anthony's 5 minute limit
Its a good way to pull them in.
Anthony's 5 minutes is the mythical promised cake.
THE CAKE IS A LIE!
Watchmaker right off the bat!
Obvious brainwashing done by someone on this poor girl.
You might think that if you were walking along a beach and you didn't see a watch, you would have to conclude that what you did see was not designed. As the only point of the argument appears to be that the watch looks designed in contrast to whatever else is around it.
R.D. the blind watchmaker.
Roq: Exactly. I don't know how this ploy still works on people. The point of the watch is that it is obviously NOT natural and it is created, so how the hell does that show that the natural shit IS created? It fails right out of the gate.
+Greg Martin had to pause the video to have a good sigh before continuing.
I found it funny that she claims to be 100% certain and yet also considers herself to be open-minded and a truth seeker.
She openly admits that she has no way to test her claims and that faith must be used, but then dismisses claims by people who she thinks also base their claims on faith like with scientific models of Evolution and our existence on Earth. Which, we can presume, she doesn't think is justified or true.
That's very hypocritical. It's also very alarming that she thinks science is based on faith.
again with the complexity, if you design something you make it as simple as possible, if anything, the complexity of the human body confirms there's no god, although it's near impossible to kill a human (plane crash miracles) it's totally prone to the vagaries of the environment. you have to ask "what does god want" because this is the weirdest way to any end product, to my mind god should be content without a universe, he's perfect, right? but if he does need humans, why not make us single celled god worshipping nano robots in the first place?
Harry Nicholas “if you design something you make it as simple as possible”
With the assumption that a god exists, how can you say that he had not done just that. This might BE the simplest, and best, possible world that entails free sentient creatures under that first assumption. Or maybe the best possible world entailing free sentient creatures can not be ‘simple’. Assuming an all knowing God exists, he could evaluate these things perfectly towards a given goal. It’s also not true that we always create ‘simply’ when possible: stories, relationship with others, and many more counter examples. There may be an appreciation for the complex in many of us.
@@HarryNicNicholas i agree with Demolition2000. We improved cars design because they are just better but that didn't make them simpler
"Is your mind closed?". I think that was the most effective question you asked her. Bravo.
I'd have to say to myself, "Self, you must remember that it's about helping them, not about being right and winning anything. Let them spread their beliefs out on the table (whiteboard) and actually look at them. Patience is required because this conditioning of theirs goes back to early childhood. It's likely all they've ever 'known'.". Thanks Anthony!
Jarbones Yes! Exactly this!!
so say we all !
Heavy indoctrination here. I feel for her. Just regurgitating apologetics she has heard in church.
I think Michelle is an excellent example of how humans process senses and emotion at a rudimentary level. She deftly protects her belief without the discomfort of critical examination of them. The primary requirement for managing two cognitive models at once.
A subconscious self preserving idea protection mode
This one hits close to home, my mother's boyfriend and I were having a conversation about beliefs, I attempted to utilize SE to explore his belief and it became difficult when he began explaining quite confidently that if I didn't share his belief I would be incapable of love, or morality, unfortunately my mother had disclosed I lacked a god belief prior to our conversation, and I was unable to maintain the ambiguity I had hoped for. It was difficult not to respond with anger at such smug and confident accusations but I was able to maintain the dialogue and we ended on a cordial note, although I don't feel much progress was made, I'm thankful for the tools I've gained through these videos and practicing SE that allowed me to maintain a professional demeanor with my interlocutor in this instance. Cheers Anthony, have an above average day or night.
It can be hard not to see any progress within that conversation. Hopefully you did place a pebble in his shoe and he thinks about your conversation a couple of times in the long run.
Her smugness wanted me to punch in her face 🤛 🤜 glad i was not alone
Anthony. Really nice job sticking with the motivational interviewing spirit and avoiding attacking.
As a practicing clinician. I have found that using the word "and" instead of "but" is a simple tactic that helps prevent negating a person's belief and having them become defensive. It also increases ambivalence and the increase in potential for change talk.
Ex. "faith can have disconfirmimg evidence and at the same time your faith doesn't need disconfirmimg evidence"
Great video. Thanks
Chris Fernandes Thanks. And yes, I need to work on "yesanding" :)
If you attribute everything bad to "evil" and everything good to "god" your beliefs will always be confirmed and are impossible to disconfirm.
Task them with putting every occurrence imaginable into each column. Since they have all the answers, it should just be busy work.
(Heads) good wins;
(Tails) evil looses.
Yes exactly! I look around and see evil, that is due to my God. I look around and see good things, that is due my God. What could you see that would disconfirm the belief?
@@MooncubedesignAu probably a chicken Crossing a Road with a purpose of philanthropy without any beliefs whatsoever and just because he wants?
I wasn't very thrilled to hear her say disabled people contribute to society in no way. Weather the ability is physical or mental I guarantee there is something they can do to contribute.
Yeah, she is very unlikable in general, and I agree on that point, that was not cool to say.
Unjustified knowledge claim, arguments from ignorance, 'The Watchmaker' argument, god of the gaps, "no purpose without god", retro-fitting to match a presupposition of god, "prove god doesn't exist", acceptance of evolution is faith, "Were you there?", "Everyone has faith" - this is like a greatest hits of theist fallacies.
Stephen B Funny stuff. Yep, there sure were a lot of common apologetics in this one short talk!
You have remarkable patience when talking to some theists. I admire and respect what you do, and it's nice to see you getting through to some people and giving them pause for thought.
well, that was painful. you really had a hard time getting her to think on disconfirmation. I'm not even sure she understood what you were talking about.
Extremely painful.
I really liked your line of questioning in this video. I get so aggravated when Christians say that even atheists ultimately rely on "faith". I have trouble trying to explain the difference between religious faith and other types of faith. I think you nailed it when you tried to get Michelle to explain how she could test her faith.
The next time a Christian tells me that we all use faith, I'm going to ask them to give me an example of religious faith and an example of secular faith that they think are equivalent. A common example that Christians like to use is "you have faith that your wife loves you." In their mind, that's no different than "I have faith that Jesus loves me."
The difference here is that if I find out my wife has been cheating on me or if she intentionally tries to harm me, then I have evidence that my "faith" has been misplaced. Have you ever heard a Christian able to offer examples of things that would convince them that Jesus does not love them? Even unanswered prayers ("It must be God's will to not grant my prayer request") or bad things happening to them ("It's all part of God's plan") will not sway them from their "faith".
They are very different types of faith and I think you did an effective job of trying to help Michelle distinguish between them.
Mike Renshaw To date, I do not believe I have ever had a God believer adequately explain how they can test the faith they are using to conclude that a God exists in the same way that a person can test faith placed that might be placed in some other secular thing (e.g., chair, airplane, elevator, spouse, etc.). That's the golden ticket to helping people who use faith to conclude their God exists realize that they are NOT using faith in the same way. They've carved out a exception for their unfalsifiable (avoid this word specifically if you can and go with "untestable" as it confuses people) position. On top of that, people can use faith to conclude that all sorts of deities exist. So atheists I think have to begin getting comfortable with accusations that we use faith too. Fine. I use faith as you define the word. But those instamces where I use faith is testable. How come your application of faith is not?
thats a good question, how can you test faith in a material object vs something immaterial. But the question presupposes that the same method of testing is applicable to both. Testing the existence of a chair for example vs the existence of a law of logic are two very different categories.
for a chair we can use the classic scientific method. however to use the scientific method we must assume 2 things first.
1. that the universe behaves in an orderly fashion (the uniformity in nature) so that experiments are repeatable with similar results.
2. The laws of logic exist, are immaterial, unchanging and universal laws that apply to all of reality.
but a really good question is how can we justify these two assumptions to apply the scientific method to prove the existence of the chair?
The Christian worldview has a consistent reason and justification for these 2 assumptions and can therefor apply the scientific method.
But do atheists have a justification for the uniformity in nature or laws of logic?
@@jrocktesla7984 just because Christians have a justification, makes them true? Let's say christians had a justification in 1705 for God not letting them to fly or else humans would kill other birds flying around. Voila, with the first hot air balloon in late 18th century will make the whole argument false! You see how this goes? Sooner or later we will definitely find the origin of life with the highest consensus, falling in line with evidence- but what makes you think that Christians will accept that? They don't even accept vaccines and evolution and round earth!!!!
One of the most fascinating conversations I've heard you have so far Anthony. I can see so much of my former self, not even 3 years ago, in her answers! She doesn't seem to be quite processing the questions. Her brain is working the entire time to arrive at the conclusion she already "knows" is true. I hate to see comments that insinuate that these types of entrenched believers aren't worth wasting time on. It may take a bit more work and time for the questions to strike some sort of cognitive dissonance in the interlocutor, but these types of believers can still very much be influenced to question their fundamental beliefs through respectful SE like this. Great job giving her grace at the beginning and sticking to the questions too Anthony. With my former faith beliefs, there's a chance I also wouldn't have realized how offensive it could be to make some of the assumptions against non-believers that she did. Loved her and the conversation!
coanwilliams Beautiful assessment. There IS hope for people who are deeply entrenched like Michelle. Thank you for watching and your comment.
Don't make a mistake of confusing pre-rational with post rational. Even though she probably has her worldview interwoven with bunch of dogmas, that Anthony did a great job to challenge, she also obviously has some inside and spiritual experience which gives her this confidence. Truth is always larger than provability and materialistic worldview reduces world into only 3rd person's perspective 'objective' view.
I love your work Anthony but that interview was painful to watch.
It's sad to see this kind of belief system, as it demonstrates a deeply closed mind. No sense of inquiry, and no interest in doing so.
Agreed, but it keeps her out of nihilism. Stupid faith is often healthier than nihilism.
+Cary Cook I beg to disagree, honest nihilism is better than self deception any day. At least a nihilist has integrity.
Dante S ignorance in itself isn't a bad thing, it's bad when an ignorant person claims to have facts on a given subject that they are ignorant on and claims to know what they're talking about when in reality they are ignorant on the subject. It's good when an ignorant person seeks facts then changes their view or belief based on new demonstrable facts
C.F. Gauss... You said "better". That's a value judgment. I said "often healthier". That's an objective fact.
Dante S ... I did not do what you accuse me of doing. [A is an alternative to B] does not imply [A is the only alternative to B].
Her body language changes quite clearly during the interview when things really get deep, she becomes very protective.
I’m becoming obsessed with these videos. They’re so chill and almost meditative.
We love each other because we are primates, and primates are very social animals. I just had to say it xD
Yes it's an evolutionary mechanism that increases our chances of survival - just like every other animal on the planet - and they care for each other without a concept of a god.
You would first have to show that dualism is false to say that that is the only necessary condition for love.
@@TheDemolition2000 what do you mean by dualism?
Quite the obvious point that she obviously does not understand or is purposely misconstruing so she can keep her belief intact. However, the point about loving and taking care of someone with a disability requires a more interesting and nuanced answer, one I wish someone would sit down and provide for her.
@@trueaddict8733 sorry for the late reply, youtube comment notifications are very wacky. It is the idea that there are two kinds of reality, and that there exists a physical body and a non-physical mind (non-deterministic).
So my point in saying that, is that you would need to prove that dualism is completely false in order to say that the act of "caring" is STRICTLY a biological/physical process.
"A life without god is not worth living." Do you live under a rock? This type of rhetoric kind of freaks me out.
She tells him that she’d see no meaning or purpose to life without her God belief, and this gives Anthony no pause in his zeal to instill doubt.
I’m atheist and this freaks me out.
@@atypican It should freak you out. She told THE truth....about reality
@@Lerian_V I don't think the fact that no God means no purpose is what's freaky, what's freaky is the whole "if there's no master, then whose slave shall I be" mentality.
These are the type of words we hear coming out of fanatics.
@@SCP.343 We are children of God. It's totally ok to say we are slaves to him; it shows humility, but he nonetheless regards us as his children. That's why he came and died on the cross for you and me.
Not knowing God means not knowing purpose. You can give yourself whatever you feel or think should be your purpose, BUT that would be a perversion since you don't know the reason/PURPOSE for which you were made in the first place. It's like buying a product without manual. you can only wing it as you go, which might invalidate the warranty.
Video resolution and sound quality are superb!
Again, cheers to you Anthony for not slamming a confrontational home run in the first two minutes of this conversation! Watchmaker, presupposition, etc. this gal has never heard the other side of her own arguments. Great conversation!
The way she describes religion is like a honey trap. Once you get in it, you can't get out. As you pointed out, that sounds pretty scary.
Watchmaker right off the bat. My biggest problem with the watchmaker analogy is that none of these people have ever ( most likely) been walking along the beach and come across a watch. What usually happens is these people are walking along the beach seeing a completely natural scene and somehow come to the conclusion that all of this beauty had to have been created by God. So the watch is irrelevant. People make watches. We know that for a fact. What we do not know is if gods make sand and water and sunlight and clouds and all the lovely things that these people want to attribute to their god idea.
Walking on most beaches you will find plastic junk made by man , therefore Man is omnipotent and also made the sand and the trees.?
One factor that is often missed, which discourages questioning one's faith is fear of the void. Being left with no reason or purpose. This only happens when the fact that all our ideas are generated and maintained by us. This means that we are the ones who attribute meaning to our lives. Most religion prevents us taking credit for it.
I wish the people who comment on your TH-cam videos could be as as polite and respectful as you. I get a serious whiff of smugness most of the time I scroll down. It's unfortunate, because I take your approach to be one of the key lessons, and it just seems to be wholeheartedly ignored.
Very genuine person. I think its important for SE to be egoless, as you were in this case, rather than win by scoring points. ( Well done to stay centered, even when confronted with the view that Atheists have no reason for loving their children, ahgh !! : )
Straight in there with the watchmaker clause. This clause has been hammered on by Pastors. Millions of random people don't gravitate to the Watchmaker Clause by a complete random event. Not millions don't.
I kept thinking "You should ask her X" Then you asked her X and it just didn't seem to work out. Considering her beliefs (and even her demeanor to some extent), I think it is impressive that you could talk to her for 30 minutes and end up very cordial with each other.
Yes this was one of the least amicable ones. like even comparing with the pastors preaching at the cross, but then again they are there to preach and convert
Very powerful! I truly hope Michelle takes a look at this and reflects on her belief... keep up the good fight, Mr. Magnabosco.
I wish Anthony could have another conversation with this lady today. I’m curious to see if her thinking has evolved.
Thanks for sharing this video. I found myself feeling upset at how Michelle viewed and understood atheists, and I felt impatient when she claimed to be open-minded while only accepting proof that her god claim is false to lower the confidence she had in her belief. I admire your knack for remaining calm and focused in these talks.
Sometimes you ask "How would you discover that it's not true". I don't know if there's anything to this, but I feel like the phrasing makes it seem as though you believe that it's not true, and ask them how _they_ would discover that _you_ are correct. So I would ask "If it weren't true, how would you discover it" (which I think you also often do). But I'm not at all sure whether that _actually_ makes a difference.
I love your patience. Thanks Anthony.
She seems *really* entrenched in arguments from personal incredulity ("I can't understand how an atheist can have love/beauty/etc"), and was pretty eager to conflate faith with reasoned expectations. Also she never really gave a solid answer as to how she could falsify her belief at all. Overall, it seems like something shes never really thought-out, and I would guess she was raised with these beliefs from a very early age. Very interesting nonetheless.
The 13 minute mark was a really big moment. This was a great conversation, Anthony.
Jeez...not the "Watch Analogy" again. If you saw a watch on the beach, of course you know that someone made it...because you have prior knowledge that people make watches. However, to assume an entire Universe is made by "something/someone" is preposterous...because you never seen a Universe get made, so how can you conclude that a Universe comes into existence in the same way a Watch does? FURTHERMORE...if you assume that all complex things need a "Creator" to exist, who exactly created God? Theist...please stop using this argument, please.
I know...it's a ridiculous argument.
I've heard some people say that God is "simple", and not complex. Either way, we have:
If God is complex, then apparently you don't need a creator for complex things to exist.
If God is simple, then complex things can come from simple things.
If any serious theist intellectual is going to make a case for God, it most certainly can't be used this way. It's clearly flawed to say "It's complex, and therefore needs a maker."
Agreed - as long as you don't say NO complex things need an intentional maker
Oh of course. I think there are certain configurations that occur in nature ONLY through an intellect. Just not all.
I think what they are trying to say is that the kind of universe we are in would be impossible without their god to make and sustain it. So God is "necessary". And given that "he" is necessary, then you don't need to explain his existence, because he is the only thing that could exist, as a fundamental basis of reality, given our universe. Quite how they know that the particular attributes they ascribe to their god are the only ones that could possibly result in this universe is another question.
She miss understands what an Open Mind Actually means. She thinks it's the willingness to listen to other peoples different beliefs than her own, but in actuality, to be Open Minded means, that one is Open to the possibility of being Wrong, one that is capable and willing to Change their beliefs based on New Evidence and or Reason.
And this notion that Everybody has Faith in something, is False, she fails to understand how Reason and Evidence and the expectation that the past 10,000 times I sat down in that chair it's Always held up, giving one a Good Reason to believe that the next time shouldn't be any different, or how one has Faith in one's spouses Love for them, but the Evidence of them telling me, expressing it to me gives me Good Reason to believe them, No Faith Needed.
Faith Only means that you are Not wanting to know what is True, and will believe it regardless of it's True or Not, and here lies the whole problem, though they claim to care about their beliefs being True, they are simply lying about this fact when it comes to their god beliefs, and atheists are Truth seekers and as said many times by Matt Dillahunty, we wish to believe in as many True and as few False things when it comes to our beliefs, Period, and one who can believe in Anything based on Faith, Can't say the same.
Sure it's True, one can't prove a god Doesn't exist, but Science makes your god unnecessary, an Ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance - NDT
VanillaGorilla 84 Nope. You either live in a state of absolute skepticism or you adopt some Properly Basic Belief.
If you believe that the natural world exists, or that the rules of logic are a guide to ‘truth’ then you have also adopted a belief system. Who is to say that contradiction cannot exist? It’s unprovable, but we decide to take that as a fundamental axiom. Gödel’s incompleteness theorem
Everyone has an unprovable belief.
This would be one the hardest talks for me, amazing job Anthony sir. Experience seems to be amazing teacher.
Michelle was so earnest her beliefs and was trying so hard to get there. Your questions were great, it seemed really like she was giving it some thought. I wanted her so badly to make the connection about dis-confirmation.
I would love to know what she thinks now. What sort of impact, if any, this had on her.
24:27: I think a form of this should be one of your warm up questions, like the tic-tacs. "If a person has belief or an idea can't be dis-confirmed, would you say that person is open-minded about that belief or idea?"
Greetings from an American Expat luckily retired in Thailand. First of all, Bravo. Brilliant stuff. Second, as a belief test, I'd ask if a quarter million people starving to death in the Sudan makes these believers question their faith... but then I see that this might be more confrontational than you want to be... that it might make some of them close up... Anyway... thanks for your good work.
Interviewee: “Yes, if there was disconfirmation of my god I would adjust my belief.”
Interviewer: “What would you accept as disconfirmation?”
Inside mind of interviewee: Error...error...HELL, HELL...NO to satan...praise Jesus!
Indoctrination, and operant conditioning is so powerfully stunning to witness.
"I was just brought up in a certain kind of household." She admits that she is a product of her training. If a dog could explain why he refuses to shit on the carpet, it would sound very similar.
Just wow. As soon as she mentioned our dear friend Christopher Hitchens I was confident where she got her views from.
Nothing frustrates me more than someone asserting that I believe something that I do not.
I also have an invisible friend who comforts me. I have a relationship with him.
I recognize her false confidence from how I used to be. I have the feeling she will confront herself with reality some day. She is too intelligent not to.
“Is your mind closed?” Love it
Michelle's attitude tests the limits of civility.
"I'm pretty young but I think I've been hit with all the possible ideas," says the cross armed "open minded" apologist.
It must be nice to know everything, but forgive me for saying that that's essentially arrogant by definition: And to smugly assure people that their lives have no meaning and they can't REALLY love their own children unless they (secretly) believe in her god? That takes a lot of nerve and would be laughable if it weren't so inappropriate.
Wow.
But that's the truth. Truth hurts.
When Anthony reflected Michelle's words back I felt she did not hear the meaning of her own words (which you spell out) & for a frustrated moment I thought to myself "sometimes SE is too subtle".
That was very paradoxical. She's open-minded, yet she's 100% right. Faith leads to belief, yet you have to believe to have faith. Truth is when nothing could change her mind, yet her mindset is based on truth. I'm trying, but I can't find any meaning. Except cognitive dissonance maybe.
I have so much respect for what you are doing and specially how you are doing it. At the point that I am at, I would not be able to do that. My mind is getting crazy all the time through this, want to say "this is wrong, this is not the way reasoning works". Keep it up man! Maybe some day, I will be able to do as you do, but now, I always want to point out where their arguments are flawed. I have done that and often the conversations starts not working well from that point. So I can see your point, why you are doing it the way you do... Greets from Germany. (I hope my English is not to bad for understanding what I mean)
Man this was a tough one. Would'a pissed me off. so insulting!
Just read your name here, and because you mentioned your insulted, I'm curious what your justification for the uniformity in nature is which is a foundational assumption of the scientific method?
This is painful. I hope she watches this.
I agree. The word that came to me was "sad".
Anthony, your talent with SE and how you apply it is honestly inspirational! Thanks for all the brilliant videos, you're actually kinda changing the world.
Wow! Presuppositionalism was one of the most annoying things I have ever ran into when I was studying apologetics and counter apologetics. It was very interesting seeing SE used to examine presuppositionalism
Also, bravo on not tearing that watchmaker analogy apart. I'm sure that was tempting
I think she just likes hearing herself preach
Michelle fills me with a deep sadness. Her words are dehumanizing and deeply hurtful, and she can't even see it. Early on she said a life lived without belief wasn't worth living... to say something so cruel and inhumane so easily... and remembering when I would have said similar.
I used to be a believer. I recognize everything she said as repeated, learned old brainwashing.
I would love to hear Michelle's take on The Blind Watchmaker. If you happen to still be in touch with her, I'd happily purchase a copy for her to read, if she's willing to take the time to do so and think about it.
And for that matter, "Man's Search for Meaning", as well.
Other random concepts I'd be interested in (seeing you) exploring with her, based on some of her last points: Black swans (disconfirmation of "all swans are white"), and various parasites (that create suffering in ways that might be thought of as cruel, etc.)
I often find people underestimate the staying power of an emotionally compelling and satisfying inference. This is likely why religious beliefs are so ubiquitous.
Claiming you are open minded is a polite retort to protecting further investigation into the beliefs themselves. Specifically, Michelle diverted the open mindedness to that of engaging with unbelievers for the aim of proselytizing and not seeking critical evaluations of her beliefs. Further, her response was quick and succinct, which may suggest she is conscientiously unaware of how her brain is processing these deep inferences.
Michelle would benefit a lot from watching Robert Sapolsky's Human Behavioral Biology lectures on youtube. You should watch them too, Anthony. They're really good and they get way better in the second half.
Just a brilliant breakdown of her reasoning. When she said the universe just looks obviously designed, I would have liked to ask her - “can you tell me what a non-designed universe would look like?”
Excellent work, Anthony! Great, great interview and kudos to you for keeping calm and on topic. You were correct not to get triggered by her "borrow my worldview" shtick. Michelle seemed a bit of an introvert and didn't really project her voice well, but I notice that on some vids the person is difficult to hear from the low volume. Is there some way that can be helped somehow, perhaps with a mic for them or something? I don't have any answers for the problem, I would just like to hear them more clearly. Thanks a bunch for your great work, glad you are back posting content again. Cheers, mate.
Red Hunteur Sorry the audio was a little low on this one. She was a low talker. I probably should've boosted the audio in post production, but then my voice would've probably been louder. I don't want to make things too complicated in the field - getting people to stop for five minutes to talk to a stranger is challenging enough and asking them to start wearing equipment is pushing it in my view.
Understandable. Most people are not as quiet as she so it's not an ongoing problem or anything. Just throwing that out there. At least with her she threw out most of the typical arguments (watchmaker/"look at the trees!" etc.) so I already knew most of what she was going to say before she said them!
This conversation had to be unbelievably frustrating...
Evan Acey Incredibly so.
20:11 "Hitchens has faith that evolution is true". ......Okay,,,,if you define faith as:
Mountains of fossils. Years and millions of examples of the fact of evolution, from our DNA. Dating processes. All the evidence.. If all that is faith, then, okay, I have 'faith' in evolution.
Now, show us one goddamned scrap of evidence of ANY KIND, and I'll have "faith" in your "god".
It's perfectly reasonable to have faith in evolution. Just like I have faith in trigonometry. When Michelle talks about faith in evolution etc she is committing a equivocation fallacy.
Example of equivocation fallacy:
My tree in my yard has 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐬.
My bank has 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐬 all around the world.
M̶y̶ ̶t̶r̶e̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶a̶ ̶b̶a̶n̶k̶
Great video, Anthony, and way to drill down to her epistemology. To me, the kernel of the issue with her epistemology is this: should one believe in something until it's shown false, or should belief be reserved until something is demonstrated to be true?
EDIT: after hearing your closing comments, I think it's more distressing that she would think truth is that which cannot be falsified. If that's the case, how would you ever know you are mistaken?
you can know by the impossibility of the contrary.
for example, if Christianity is true, then every other worldview is false and therefor, all other worldviews will be internally inconsistent and/or inconsistent with reality.
I have made this analogy of with a pitch dark room. If you make a claim that the entire room is empty and infinite and you keep walking. And the only thing that will make you change your mind is when you hit something. But the problem is that you don't want to walk into other directions, just walking straight- arguing that's how you are supposed to walk
my favorite channel on TH-cam right here, keep up the great work Anthony! 😊
She has no idea how condescending and unsubstantiated her claims are. "People who are atheist are in capable of love without steeling from believers god system. They believe in god even if they claim not to." She knows nothing about anything outside of what she has been spoon fed. She is sure of something she has no evidence for. She is a presupposionalist to the bone slathered in confirmation bias. Anthony, you are a Saint. I could not restrain myself from really challenging her in a firebrand way. You are a SE master.
I wonder if she understands that vague rhetoric is dodging the question. If I ask someone what the best car is, I expect a specific answer, not something like, "The one with the best performance". If you don't know, just say you don't know. Some people think you have to give quick answers to show confidence.
I felt like you missed the chance to help her realise her improper use of the word faith.
In response to the hypothetical person who believes in a god that makes people rich: Maybe a question of the form "If the person did eventually get rich, would that mean the god has to be real?" could have helped. She seemed very fixated on the idea that a lack of disconfirmation implies confirmation...
(Or use Sagan's invisible immaterial dragon in the garage?)
I was hoping for more probing into her method of determining her belief is true, and comparing/contrasting it to people that have used exactly the same method and have come to a different belief. You've done it before, and I think it's a very effective method to use that doesn't rely on negating her untrue assumptions about evolution.
I think he remained calm because he knew there was no reaching her.
OMG, straight into the watchmaker argument.
I liked this one. I found the progression interesting. I like how you pick up on the frequency of a word someone uses, like "love", and also show good examples of taking a genuine curious position to listen, and not assume in advance their thoughts.
I feel like I've encountered some similar types of responses as hers, and while I think I've caught onto some of the psychological tendencies, I haven't yet found questions or methods of quickly penetrating these tendencies.
By tendencies I mean #1: parrying a penetrating question by answering a different question that may be related. Rather than answering a difficult question, answer a different question while shifting the topic slightly.
And #2: some trouble thinking about or answering hypothetical questions. This tendency may also go along with things like never seeing oneself as ever doing anything wrong, or projecting assumptions onto others.
These types of tendencies are probably outlined better in books or psychology studies. If anyone has comments or free resources to link that aren't very time-consuming, I'd love to know. More specifically, if there are approaches or types of questions that work better with certain people.
I find myself weak to these same problems of not finding methods to question them. I quickly fall into their trap of hypothetical comparing naturals with the supernaturals
I had the same thought process as her until I studied people more, the neuro and social sciences, the investigations of which were driven by my empathy towards people of different groups who I became friends with who were outside of my tribe.
"I want to believe what I want to believe and I don't care what the world says."
You’re quoting her out of context.
She’s describing what she would say if she were closed-minded. That’s not her actual position.
i think being the resault of random process is so much more beautiful than being created by someone.
Holy mackerel, you are a more patient man than I am. Good job, seriously.
Nice video man!
As soon as she mentioned watch, Anthony must have hear a bell in his head saying "the watchmaker fallacy again!" :)
This is frightening
I'm so glad to see you making more videos Anthony. Keep up the good work!
Did anyone else have problems hearing this girl? I had to put on my TV to make her out, but to be fair my hearing isn't great.
You can use an extension for Chrome called Ears: Bass Boost, EQ Any Audio!. It can boost the audio a little when it's too low. Try it
Francisco Zattoni thanks, will do!
So what would disconfirm it for her, perhaps developing a serious illness despite her commitment to her god?
Whenever you ask a question they don't want to answer, they tangent off - just like the political talking heads on TV. I wish there were a non-confrontational way to get them to stop doing that, or admit that they have done it, or at least SEE that they have done it..
"How are you today? Groovy."
Immediately knew I was gonna like this one.
It's so frustrating when people respond to specific questions with vague and cryptic questions.
it was interesting when she said "I want to believe what I want to believe"----
Actually close minded isn’t about avoiding people. That’s the opposite. Avoiding people is out of fear. You can’t fear something that’s not a threat. Which makes the threat something you’ve considered to be stronger than your belief.
First few words you grasp how plain and simple her little mind is
Argument from probability is one I would love to see explored more deeply. Believers often say that it's difficult for them to accept that we came about by random processes (I don't believe to processes to be random) but I might ask if the process were still 'random,' but much more likely, say 90%, would they be more likely to accept that? In other words, is it that the process is random, or unlikely?
She seems unable to handle the crucial hypothetical of falsifiability (twice).
Nice talk, exemplary patience
The offer of certainty, the offer of complete security, the offer of an impermeable faith that can't give way is an offer of something not worth having. I want to live my life taking the risk all the time that I don't know anything like enough yet... that I haven't understood enough... that I can't know enough... that I am always hungrily operating on the margins of a potentially great harvest of future knowledge & wisdom. I wouldn't have it any other way. And I'd urge you to look at those who tell you, those people who tell you at your age, that you are dead until you believe as they do. What a terrible thing to be telling to children. ...& that you can only live by accepting an absolute authority. Don't think of that as a gift. Think of it as a poisoned chalice. Push it aside however tempting it is. Take the risk of thinking for yourself. Much more happiness, truth, beauty & wisdom will come to you that way. Thank you
-Hitchens
Great video Anthony. Would have love to hear u challenge her on how she could be 100 % positive of a belief based on faith. Great job though. Love watching your videos.
How can someone be so insulting and not even realizing it?
Back and forth is the new definition of circular.
I just don’t understand “I will believe this claim till someone proves it wrong”. Thats just so dangerously arrogant AND closed minded when she said she’s open minded...and as you said too it’s terrifying.....
P.S. you gained a new subscriber just for sheer patience you have that I have none of lol