Argument from complexity is rather silly

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น •

  • @realshot9125
    @realshot9125 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +52

    Hey vimoh it was me 😭😭😭😭🙏 , I loved the convo and I didnot have organised answers to those , now I have. It's a dream come true for me I showed it to my friends and family that I talked to you I hope I will debate you more

    • @SaikatBasak
      @SaikatBasak 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      I recommend you watch Laurence Kraus's lecture on an universe from nothing.

    • @Dontwatchyoutube
      @Dontwatchyoutube 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      The questions were really good :) It is what I always ponder over too. For our minds, it is a very logical leap to think that there is some creator.

    • @one_autumn_leaf69
      @one_autumn_leaf69 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@@SaikatBasakThanks for the recommendation.

    • @justacherryontop6538
      @justacherryontop6538 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Till now, there is no way to prove that if wind carried sand with it and somehow a sandcastle can't be created because it's complex. Look for contradictions in reality which will depend on your definition of God of course.

    • @abhinandanbhattacharya1145
      @abhinandanbhattacharya1145 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I would recommend reading "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins, evolutionary biology is complicated and this book simplifies it to the maximum extent possible. Once you are done with that, read "The Ancestor's Tale" by the same writer. The second book addresses the issue of complexity and how perfection among living organisms is a misunderstood aspect.
      I hope it helps.

  • @CUBINGGURU
    @CUBINGGURU 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Single cell was simple then everything is evolution

  • @sujayshah13
    @sujayshah13 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If the universe is so complex that it needs a creator, then the creator must be much more complex and he will need another creator for himself for the same logic..

  • @pmis2362
    @pmis2362 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Like natural number, there is natural cuteness. This is complex cuteness

  • @spuriusscapula4829
    @spuriusscapula4829 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    "Complexity" is relative and requires a frame of reference anyway.

  • @lycopodium262
    @lycopodium262 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is the best argument found in quran too!!
    Muhammad could only think about this argument to prove god
    Otherwise your sword is always with you... conquest and convert

  • @Goodgamesful
    @Goodgamesful 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    We can not overcome 'DEATH'. Dear brother, death is a name given by human society, which is in fact a continuous change process of matters in nature. When water converts into ice in a very simple natural process, it can be called as water died and ice is born.

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      True. And to the best of our knowledge, when we die, we turn to dust. So we die and dust is born.

    • @Goodgamesful
      @Goodgamesful 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@vimohlive Thank you sir for your personal reply. Its my great pleasure. I'm a big fan of yours since long. 🌹❤️🙏🏻

  • @exopyrox
    @exopyrox 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Why is there the evolution of simple systems to complex systems in the universe? Kindly explain.

    • @TravelleroftheMicrocosmos
      @TravelleroftheMicrocosmos 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It mostly has to do with efficiency more than complexity. Evolution is not a goal dependent process. Most species would actively avoid evolving into something else, but natural selection compels them to become more efficient in the environment they live in. Complexity is merely a by product.

    • @exopyrox
      @exopyrox 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@TravelleroftheMicrocosmos why

    • @exopyrox
      @exopyrox 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@TravelleroftheMicrocosmos why is there natural selection....i am not referring to a biblical god here...but there is a source of all

    • @TravelleroftheMicrocosmos
      @TravelleroftheMicrocosmos 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@exopyrox asking "why is there natural selection is the same as asking "why is there acceleration". Just because a sentence is grammatical doesn't mean it makes any sense. Natural selection is a process by which nature selects those traits helping the organism to adapt to its environment the best. That is why humans don't grow wings. We don't need them. If you want an example of natural selection, look at industrial melanism in moths.
      Also, if you're arguing for a source, you have to prove that source exists. Evolution has nothing to do with a god. Even if tomorrow evolution is proven to be untrue, that does not automatically prove a creator.

    • @exopyrox
      @exopyrox 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @TravelleroftheMicrocosmos yes why is there acceleration...why cant i ask it. Why do we have to accept things taught to us as brute facts...why though

  • @ShivamKumar-qz7or
    @ShivamKumar-qz7or 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow

  • @exopyrox
    @exopyrox 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Don't natural processes demonstrate an inherent intelligence? Why does intelligence have be the human type?

  • @Mummy-p5x
    @Mummy-p5x 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Also @vimoh what do think about these bhakti-sufi saints? Like there are numerous saints who claim to have seen god or have realised the essence of god. Were these appearances or realisations hallucinations or just creation of mind? I put this question because in recent times i have come across many names with similar experiences. What do you think about them,? In current times there is one personality called Sri M. He has written his autobiography called 'apprenticed to a himalayan master'. In this he describes his experiences from childhood till adulthood. A lot of supernatural phenomena have been discusses in it. If you be interested please have a read of it. And please discuss with us what should we make out of such 'experiences'

  • @manojl3388
    @manojl3388 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    sometimes, I feel the questioners are knowledgeable but they are not articulating their points to Vimoh properly.

  • @SayanSarkarAkaDragon
    @SayanSarkarAkaDragon 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Dinosaur bahut pehle ke nahi the bhai, aur dinosaur ke pehle ka bhi kafi information hai. Dinosaur mesozoic era pe tha aur life ke spread hua precambrian pei

  • @amantripathi2715
    @amantripathi2715 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    sir agar mai nature ko God man lu tab aap mujhase kaisa praman manenge jisse main Ishwar ke hone ka aapko Vishwas dila pau❤❤❤ please bataiye

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      main poochhonga ki nature ko god kyun maante ho. nature ko nature maanna kaafi nahi hai?

    • @amantripathi2715
      @amantripathi2715 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@vimohlive kya iska matlab aap god ko do pairon wala do aankhon wala aur do hathon wala vale ko hi god manenge ye jaruri hai kya
      mai nature ko kyu god nahi nam sakta
      waise aap ye mat soche ki mai kisko god manata hu matlab mere liye kaun god hai aap bas itna bataiye ki aap ko god k hone kya kya proof chahiye

    • @amantripathi2715
      @amantripathi2715 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@vimohlive samajh lijiye agar Eiffel tower hi god hota tab bhi to aap yahi kah sakte the ki Eiffel tower ko Eiffel tower Mano god kyu manate ho
      to ye galat hai na agar mai aap ko Eiffel tower ko god proof na kar pau to aap bol sakte hai Eiffel tower ko Eiffel tower Mano tab bat thik rahata

    • @amantripathi2715
      @amantripathi2715 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@vimohlive to isase kya main yah nishkarsh nikal sakta hun ki aap Ishwar ke ek Swaroop ko mante Hain Jo aapke Jahan mein baitha hai

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@amantripathi2715 main poochh raha hoon alag alag cheezo ko god maanne ki kya zaroorat hai? un cheezon ka naam hai. unko use karo. why the need to call anything god?

  • @krishnatiwari8028
    @krishnatiwari8028 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    i love himesh ❤

  • @Mummy-p5x
    @Mummy-p5x 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    How is everything in so much sync and interdependent? The ecology, the species living in it, the mountains, the vegetation there. everything is so much linked to each other. If one thing is messed up with the other automatically starts degrading. I wonder how everything is so connected?

    • @srghhh5589
      @srghhh5589 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Because the universe is a product of causation. Something causes other things. There's logic. Mountains have more trees because they get more rainwater and less habitat.

    • @momo19991
      @momo19991 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Because we have evolved through Natural Selection to be adapted to our environment. The species which survived were adapted best to the specific environment. When this changes, we may not survive, and other related organisms may not survive.

    • @insightfulislam786
      @insightfulislam786 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Indeed, There is a creator
      The food doesn't get cooked automatically in kitchen
      Indeed There is God
      When we see a table which is such a simple things we don't say it wasn't created automatically from natural selections
      When we see complex things like computers made by humans we do say it is created by humans then why not us , we are more complex creation
      May Allah guide us all to the straight path not the heedless one

  • @676kumarrahul
    @676kumarrahul 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Next topic Nihilism 🥺

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      there are already many videos here about nihilism

  • @Milindmutuswami
    @Milindmutuswami 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Vimoh please react to Yoga of Love and how confidently he puts silly arguments🤌🏻😭

  • @GOKUPLAYZ534
    @GOKUPLAYZ534 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Have you heard some of Osho's thoughts and his philosophy? What do you think about it?

  • @Madara456
    @Madara456 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Hello sir because you are older thank for making such good argument . I learning to some good arguments

  • @SS-ct4hv
    @SS-ct4hv 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    💙💙💙💙💙💙

  • @TheRishuIsLIVE
    @TheRishuIsLIVE 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Sir bigest fan

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      The biggest fan I ever saw was in Pune airport

    • @Nickel287
      @Nickel287 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@vimohlivewhat did he do ?

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

      @@Nickel287 Nothing. It was a giant ceiling fan.

    • @justalive24
      @justalive24 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@vimohlive😂

    • @Nickel287
      @Nickel287 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@@vimohliveyou got me man

  • @mhmmdmz
    @mhmmdmz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Vimoh's arguments usually boil down to him not 'seeing' something ... not very strong IMO

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      feel free to come talk to me on any saturday at 8 pm.

    • @mhmmdmz
      @mhmmdmz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@vimohlive Thank you again. Will try but prefer doing a 1-1 (or similar)... :)

  • @mhmmdmz
    @mhmmdmz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Misleading rebuttal ... complexity implies inverse probability of something happening on its own. If something doesn't come into effect on its own, there is an external effector ...

    • @mhmmdmz
      @mhmmdmz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@romibengali huh?

    • @PramodKumar-gy8lb
      @PramodKumar-gy8lb 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Sure, as long as you don't insist that the "external effector" is a god.

    • @mhmmdmz
      @mhmmdmz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@PramodKumar-gy8lb let's not call it god .. but accepting that there is an external factor is progress. This is good.

    • @PramodKumar-gy8lb
      @PramodKumar-gy8lb 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

      @@mhmmdmz Everything we see around us has external factors involved in their creation. I have no reason to believe otherwise and I am also comfortable with the idea that there are things out there that I will never know about.
      Your patronizing tone indicates that somehow we would reach a god conclusion by going down a road of reason. Reason never takes you there. There's always a fallacy in the arguments when anyone reaches a conclusion about a god and it is not that difficult to spot.

    • @mhmmdmz
      @mhmmdmz 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@PramodKumar-gy8lb - patronizing? - in any case, the idea is the belief in an external creator is the most rational and plausible explanation to our present observations. What's the fallacy in that argument (If one were to overcome the bias of the popular definitions of God... ).

  • @chandeshwardas2763
    @chandeshwardas2763 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Bhai hindi me bolo , south asian hindi samjhte hai english nahi

    • @vimohlive
      @vimohlive  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

      bhai poora south asia uttar pradesh nahi hai. I talk to people in the language they use. Why would I talk to an English speaker in Hindi?

    • @hindiisonlyalanguagenotkno913
      @hindiisonlyalanguagenotkno913 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Vaah. "South" asian hi keh diya. "दक्षिण एशियाई" nahi mila tha sanskaari shudh Hindi main. Tamil channel pe bhi jaake bolna chahiye "bhai south asian hindi samajthe hai, tamil nahin". Par voh jaake nahin karoge. Sirf english baat karne vaale channel pe aakar karoge.

    • @ShobhitGupta12
      @ShobhitGupta12 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Does language matter if the recipient understands it?
      The question was in English, and Vimoh responded in English. Nothing wrong with that. And Hindi is not a sole representative language of South Asia. There are also other great languages like Urdu, Tamil, Telugu and many others.

    • @spuriusscapula4829
      @spuriusscapula4829 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Sorry sir, I'm fluent in Hindi, but f*** Hindi.

    • @rgb_82
      @rgb_82 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      tf u mean, i don't speak hindi lol