+Latent Soul Just don't get too comfy with them. The reason Christianity is largely benign these days has more to do with the fact that most majority Christian countries are secular rather than any virtues inherent in the faith. When the Christian church has wielded state power in the past they've committed their own fair share of atrocities and I see no reason to assume they wouldn't do so again given the opportunity, the difference between now and then is that now we live in a society that wouldn't tolerate it.
+Chris Whinery bulkshit. We live in a society that has this new agenda of egalitarianism pushed by the communists/socialists all throughout the 20th century. As a result, in this regressive left, PC culture, we have plenty of having retsrded atheist liberals completely tolerant of Islam for the sake of being PC or "progressive". Islam is the true BENIGN cancer that is more controlling than Christianity has ever been. You do realize that "separation of church and state" is a doctrine established by Christianity during its reformation in medieval Europe correct?
+Latent Soul Sure, NOW. But when the Crusades were in full swing, you might not have said that. And FYI - - - I'm an Atheist who detests all religions. But I do agree that yes, in 2016, izzlam and the moozlems are a world wide danger of the highest magnitude.
I'd ask for evidence. They would most likely have DNA specimens that we could test to verify their claim. For example, today, 1 to 2 percent of the DNA in non-African people comes from Neanderthals.
+Coouge I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure I would believe them. They did fly all the way here. Planting life is fairly trivial compared to that task.
This whole convo is proof that being an atheist isn't a guarantee of intellectual honesty or skepticism. And I say this as a classical liberal atheist. Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative, which means his view of government isn't theocratic. Way to misrepresent your adversary. Also, there's plenty for people to hate about both Trump and Bernie that has nothing to do with religious beliefs. They also totally missed the point about communism being religion/cult-like in the behavior of its mass-murdering adherents. Speaking of Trump & religious laws, he complained about the Draw Muhammad competition, like, what are they doing drawing Muhammad?
"Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative, which means his view of government isn't theocratic. Way to misrepresent your adversary. " False. What you have claimed about Ted Cruz runs counter to Ted Cruz's claims about himself. He has made it very clear that his beliefs are more important to him than the constitution and country both. “I’m a Christian first, I’m an American second, I’m a conservative third, and I’m a Republican fourth" - Ted Cruz on his priorities. "Well, the reality is that this idea of the separation of church and state is a myth. " Ted Cruz's campaign on how he parses his faith with his responsibilities. "“Our rights don’t come from man. They come from God Almighty.”" Ted Cruz on rights. This is not a man who cares about the constitution or any other laws, he cares only about his religion.
+Midna “I’m a Christian first, I’m an American second, I’m a conservative third, and I’m a Republican fourth" This statement doesn't say anything about whether or not Cruz thinks government should be limited by the Constitution. "Well, the reality is that this idea of the separation of church and state is a myth." What he means by this is that he doesn't want anyone telling _him_ that he cannot acknowledge his god publicly just because he's employed by the government, as the left constantly does lately. Do I find his statement hyperbolic? Sure, but if you read the first amendment carefully, you'll see that the translation I have given you is correct. The first amendment begins "Congress shall make no law..." It does not say "government officials shall not talk about gods or hang religious artwork in their offices or pray in public." The latter is an erroneous fabrication of the left and a complete misunderstanding of the intent of the amendment. The intent of the amendment was to restrain _legislation,_ not individuals. Religious individuals don't cease being religious simply because they work for the government, nor should we expect them to. I suspect that if this quote was in proper context, he would make the same point that I have made here. “Our rights don’t come from man. They come from God Almighty.” What a religious person means when they say this is that rights are inherent in our nature; they don't come from a document written by men, and therefore cannot be taken away by men with the stroke of a pen. I agree with this sentiment, and I don't believe in a god. Again, this statement says nothing about whether Cruz thinks that government should be limited by a Constitution. To a religious citizen (and to the men who wrote it), the Constitution is the _recognition_ of those rights. As an atheist, I start with "man has rights," and then see that the Declaration of Independence says "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men," and I understand that that is the purpose of the Constitution. Cruz starts with "God made man," then says "man has rights, and to secure these rights... etc." It doesn't change a single thing to add on the bit about God to the beginning. We all arrive at the same place. "This is not a man who cares about the constitution or any other laws, he cares only about his religion." If you don't think that Ted Cruz cares about the Constitution, you haven't spent much time listening to anything he has said, aside from religious statements quote-mined and misinterpreted by leftist atheist websites. Either that, or you have serious misconceptions about what the Constitution says. Do I think that there will be times we'll need to be vigilant to prevent him from making a mistake? Yes, just as with any politician. Do I think he's a religious zealot who will stomp all over the Constitution to convert the whole country to Christianity? Absolutely not. Having watched him for months now, I find the idea utterly ridiculous. Ted Cruz is the closest thing to a Libertarian who has ever come this close to the presidency. It will be a sad day for our republic if an authoritarian like Trump (who _actually_ doesn't give a shit about the Constitution) defeats him.
+Uranie I haven't tried ayahuasca, but I experienced similar clarity on during the second half of a mushroom trip. It seems that at the word "god" has been stretched a bit thin - it can mean so many things that it's lost it's power and has just become a sort of filler word. I would suggest the word you want is pantheist.
Come on Dave, get Karen Straughan on. I know you were talking to her in the beginning before your channel blew up and since then silence has reigned. She cannot afford to fly all the way down to L.A. and you have already had people on via Skype so why not just do it that way, via the internet? She probably would have some of the most counterintuitive things to say of any of your guests. Please do not ignore this.
+Thinking-Ape Agreed. No one takes SJWs to the woodshed like Straughan. She deserves a bigger platform too. This Honey Badger stuff is falling short. Her GirlWritesWhat material was legendary.
+runreilly I do not think it will happen. Karen is not big enough at this stage to warrant Dave inviting her and perhaps he thinks her views are too controversial as well. Also he prefers to have live guests so that may be part of it too but I hope he changes his mind on not inviting her.
Thinking-Ape I hope you're wrong. He's had very controversial guests before. And they've been ones that don't back up their claims with *any* research (Karen often does) or fall back on weak logic. You're definitely right in your second point. In Rubins's mind, Karen Straughan probably isn't a big enough name for anything but a face to face. I still think it's possible. She's perfect for his show. I wonder if he knows who she is.
Incredible interview, extremely pertinent and relevant.. it's great to see intelligent, free-thinking minds interact in such an honest and organic manner. I absolutely loved what Paul said at the end, essentially describing the message of Pantheism... the "higher power" that they are all advocating against in its fictional, personified form, is really Nature... and I'm so thankful David is doing what he's doing and with such passion and conviction.. we need him. Kudos to all of you gentlemen for the work you do!
Hi Rubin, I love watching your interviews and hearing your perspective on things. You have helped me appreciate more difference between the left and liberal values. I appreciate the space in the media of having honest and real conversations with people of different views without demonising them, and yet challenging them when it is needed. Thank you. I just wanted to try and challenge you on a couple of things in your opening statement. As a disclaimer, I am a Christian, but am not arguing for belief in God by what I say in this post. Firstly, you say, "If we can start at a point in not believing in ideas until they are proven to be true, then we can start having conversations about how to live as people and to make our world a better place." We all believe in unprovable ideas; we cannot function without some basic ones. For example, for Liberal values to be true, you have to believe that all people have equal value and that there is such a thing as decent (right and wrong) behaviour. Where is the evidence to prove such basic assumptions? These are just two; there are many others. I am not saying I disagree with those values only that they are not able to be "proven" only agreed subjectively if you have a purely materialistic world view. Also, you say, "When you're beliefs impede on the lives of other people, I have a problem with religion." What about liberal values that impede values of faith? For example, a Christian doctor who believes in the sanctity of life from conception is told he must keep his "unprovable" Christian values from impeding on the rights of a woman's choice. But is the woman's right to choose not an unprovable assumption? Isn't the "belief" that an unborn baby has no "human rights" an unprovable assumption? Are any level human rights provable? Why do unprovable liberal values such as this trump religious based ones? I am not arguing for a God, Christianity or anti-abortion here, just challenging the argument you make. I think we need a better defence of liberal values that "values must be provable". In reality, neither of the values I quote here can be proven either. The argument is simply not feasible.
***** agreed. Knowing that the universe is extremely complex, and life took BILLIONS of years of chemicals and atoms and meteors and all these things just for us to get here. thats more beautiful than a jealous god would ever be.
+Kyrie Irving I went through the same thing, and also felt liberated. It's partly because faith in God gives people a set of beliefs without which they fear their world will fall apart. I pretended to believe for several years towards the end before I finally admitted it, and when I saw that the sky didn't fall down, I felt relieved. Finally, I could find things out and enjoy the world for myself, and I had no afterlife destiny or superpowerful surveyor to worry about anymore.
erosmangr74 a lot of things i felt shameful about because i believed there was a guy above me, shaking his head and thinking about whether i should be sent to hell or not. As Hitchens says, Theism is really like a divine North Korea.
I know what you mean. I didn't realize until afterwards just how much the surveillance from the heavens really disturbed me. Since you referenced the late, great Hitchens, permit me then to say that we at least didn't have to die to leave the celestial North Korea.
@@Nirvana7734 in the UK i've NEVER had to worry about being atheist, in fact most believers only take the bible as "guidelines" we have very few "fundamental" believers, darwin and dawkins are heroes even to the church, in fact that applies to most of europe too. in the US religion has been hijacked for political gain, if it weren't politicians using religion to divide people people like ken ham wouldn't get funding for nonsense like the ark.
@@HarryNicNicholas Yes, I have become familiar with the fortunate plight of atheists in the UK. This, too, is cause for celebration. The rest of the world, however, has a long way to go. Even in my own country of Canada, and in my own family, religion (in my family's case, Christianity) has cleaved both my nuclear and extended family due to intolerant, dogmatic practices. I have no issue with the positive communal aspects that religious affiliation can brings to peoples' lives, but I look forward to a time when nonsensical intolerance, of the sort that many people and families experience, to become a thing of the past.
Greetings from Costa Rica. Fucking love your show. This kind of topics are truly important, not only in the states but specially here in the 3rd world. Keep the good work
I'd hate to correct you guys, but ABB was Norwegian, he bombed the governmental buildings in Oslo, shot up a summer camps for leftists and he was a Christian saying that he was defending Norway against the islamization of Norway and killing traitors... He was religious. You could have used Stalin as an example even though I would say that he was religious in a way as he was part of a cult of personality ala the regressives where ideologies or leaders cannot be critiqued.
Thank you David Silverman was speaking the truth about being "Jewish"...its like the only religion where you can become part of the faith and suddenly gain an ethnicity.
I'm not necessarily Christian but I get that it's a huge relief to know for a fact that you were put on earth for a reason, you are loved, and even if you die you will have a home to come back to.
I couldn't agree more about the "spiritual" connection Provenza attributed having with music. The vibrations, the feel, the emotional connection to it. It's very profound whether you're just an average listener, a beginner at playing music, or and advanced amateur/professional musician how so many people of different walks of life all connect with music, and throughout the ages, have created their own styles of human expression through it.
Very much enjoy your discussions Dave, looking forward to more from you. I argue in one of my videos that atheists and agnostics should consider supporting freedom of religion/belief because I believe it is a cornerstone of natural rights and a free society.
If you look on the surface it's an easy question. Islam is way more damaging then Christianity. The question is if this is because of the holy books, the institutions themselves or if this is because the society we live in. By far the majority of Christians have little knowledge of the bible. They can maybe recall four disciples and know a summery of a few stories. These people take their morals from the law and church society not from the bible. The bible is just as evil only the society around it has changed due to the enlightenment. We don't stone people to death anymore but it's a common habbit in the bible for all types of crimes (working on Sabbath, believing in other gods). In the middle east the type of enlightenment we experienced never came. Science is underrated and religion is dominant. As a side note America kills way more women and children by drone strikes then terrorist from the middle east have killed in the Western World.
It's really sad to see these intelligent people scoff at the idea of God. Some of the most brilliant minds that have existed have found sufficient evidence for belief in God. Also, the belief in a God who created you is not the height of hubris. It actually requires great humility to believe your life is not your own. Arrogance is actually the key obstacle to believe you need salvation, forgiveness etc. I absolutely relate to constantly searching for evidence. I can't see the intelligence in scoffing at ultimate questions you cannot possibly dismiss.
+Aaron M He believes in the pay gap bullshit? I mean it does exist but there is no evidence to suggest it is because of some sort of weird sexist conspiracy.
Looks like Silverman is a typical atheist who believes in the sacred religious like values of the regressive left. He should spend a few hours reading up on Jonathan Haidt. Its only recently I have been wary about admitting I am an atheist. Back when it was politically INCORRECT to admit I was an atheist I was proud of it, but now?
for a long time I thought because I couldn't prove there wasn't a god, i had to remain silent. I'm slowly speanking out about my lack of belief these days. great discussion Dave. wish you could ramp up your production to a few videos each week 😀
Sorry but I am agnostic. You don't dictate how people think of themselves dude. It is exactly that attitude that makes so many people not want to be atheists.
Ryodakun My point wasn't so much that I am agnostic as this pushy attitude that some atheists have is off putting needlessly. The way he treats atheism he might as well be a televangelist.
MarkR1957 Out of curiosity did you actually read what I wrote or just decide you wanted to be angry at something? Frankly you don't seem to get my point I am not trying to define atheist. I am saying that a disturbing amount of people mostly on TH-cam are making atheism into a sort of religion. My criticism of that behavior is not meant to criticize atheism or to tell people what to believe or not believe. It is just to point out that if you are trying to convince someone who believes in a religion that they are wrong, it's probably better not to act like a dick. Hey I don't need help figuring out when to tell people to fuck off and walk away. So hey fuck off, and this is my equivalent to walking away.
Every single video is amazing and informative... Keep that perspective! Good ideas can come from anyone, anywhere. You just have to actually listen to them. ...
Seriously, this opened with "All we're saying is we don't know. That's really all it comes down to: We. Don't. Know." ... And then ended with "It's all a scam! It's a lie! It's child abuse!" It's not a fact. It's a worldview, and it's hatred. You're just as bad as those you rally against. Way to be a hero.
@daverubin was fortunate to have stumbled upon this video. really like the topic and you guys really summaries how i feel about atheism. Keep up the great work! you have just got yourself a new subscriber!
There is no pay gap. That is to say, if you work just as hard, and just as well, a woman will get the same wage as a man in almost all cases. The "gap" in earnings (not wages) is because of choices women tend to make to balance work and life, such as avoiding overtime, and avoiding dirty jobs that tend to pay more. When I hear people complaining that there are not enough female lumberjacks, then maybe I'll pay attention. but as it is, they only seem to want to focus on the upper end of jobs.
There certainly is a pay gap it is caused by women taking up lower paying jobs (like education or nursing-jobs) and child leave . Generally speaking personal preference creates the wage gap.
Hey Rick, I just wanted to say thank you for being one of the very few, multi-topic show (unlike say, something specific like The Atheist Experience) that gives Atheism a serious platform with real discussion. You are one of the few people who have interviewed Sam Harris without distorting his views in some way, plus atheism even with aside; the whole Young Turks bullshit and the way you handled the Israel situation: *hats off you you my friend* Keep it up and thank again!
“Frederick Douglass told in his Narrative how his condition as a slave became worse when his master underwent a religious conversion that allowed him to justify slavery as the punishment of the children of Ham. Mark Twain described his mother as a genuinely good person, whose soft heart pitied even Satan, but who had no doubt about the legitimacy of slavery, because in years of living in antebellum Missouri she had never heard any sermon opposing slavery, but only countless sermons preaching that slavery was God's will. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg
Dave, IF he was up for it, I'd love for you to have the chance to interview Nabeel Qureshi! He is battling cancer right now so I'm not sure he would be able....but it would be AMAZING! I think you two would really enjoy talking as well!
Silverman is a conservative. He doesn't vote for conservatives due to religious and social issues, but he believes in small government. He talks about it on the you tube videos about American Atheists at CPAC.
Dee Anna Nice contradiction there. Silverman is a conservative but doesn't vote conservative. Silverman attacks conservatives in the video. Perhaps you should watch it.
this was absolutely brilliant simply brilliant amazing he stated I would love to see Ruben sit down with David Silverman Alone David is extremely bright and smart I can't wait to read his book
Dave Rubin! Look up Ayn Rand. I have a feeling you will like her ideas. She was an Atheist that created a philosophical system that made a moral code based on objective reality.
+The Rubin Report Interesting... however, I must admit that where I used to regard classical liberalism (libertarianism) as something you would arrive as based on objective reality, I've lately grown more and more skeptical about how many who call them selves classical liberals or libertarians actually are capable of applying objective thought to their ideology. Way too many libertarians have via their response to the problem of climate change revealed them selves to simply just be dogmatic anarcho-capitalists. As a libertarian it has been appalling to me how many have turned to science denial in order to not have their policy-ideas challenged. Not all though... You should consider having Jerry Taylor of the Niskanen Center on, for an example of a libertarian with a real objective rational approach to the ideology.
Although I'm not a religious person and identify as an agnostic, this show bothered me on a number of levels. Among other things, there was way too much painting everything with a broad brush, disrespecting people with different beliefs and stating opinion as fact especially on the part of David Silverman. He is quite full of himself and authoritarian in his demeanor. Who is he to tell people what they should and should not believe? And no, all religions are not equally "bad" by any stretch of the imagination, in fact there is quite a lot of good done by some religions. And I'm not denying the fact that there are numerous negative aspects of organized religion. But my opinion is to live and let live as long as you're not hurting, disrespecting or discriminating against anyone. I think that's a liberal stance to take.
Shame you didn't bring anyone religious to push back against the platitudes and add adversity to the mix. Three atheists nodding heads hardly gets anywhere interesting.
+Nick Rhodes Uhhh, because the discussion was about Atheists explaining Atheism from their point of view. If you want religious push-back on Atheists just look to an enormous majority of the population that continue to demonize them or go to church!
***** Oops you missed the context of that post because I posted it in the wrong conversation :-s ... your comment was in line with my point in the other conversation
2 big reasons as to why atheists are a disliked group: 1. attacking people's most personal beliefs is going to cause allot of blowback. 2. assuming that you are more enlightened or intelligent because you figured out there isn't any gods
+Michael Gray It is actually proven that atheists are more intelligent than believers. ;) ...but it was done by scientists so I guess it doesn't count. :P
+ulverop No they aren't. Only on average. and it's a extremely trivial difference. It doesn't even take into account other factors, so it's about as much of a "proven fact" as the wage-gap feminists throw out.
No beliefs are above criticism. If you believe in a sky daddy without any evidence your ideas deserve to be mocked. Modify your beliefs based on evidence and you won't be mocked by any rational person.
Dave, in a spirit of allowing ideas to each have their day, I hope you could one day have someone like Edward Feser (or some other classical theist) on your show. You have been willing to have persons with differing viewpoints on before and I hope this will be no exception.
I think a conversion with Jonathan Haidt would be helpful. Religion does many things, some good and some bad. If religion is eliminated, something must replace the good things that it did (group/community cohesion, working together for common goals,...). The Sam Harris podcast with Jonathan Haidt was very insightful but I want more objective discussion about what religion is.
+The Rubin Report Hurray! The Righteous Mind is a great book. You gotta hit him on the neuroscience surrounding the topic, that's where the meat of Haidts argument exists.
+dlmetzger Since when is religion needed for "group/community cohesion" or "working together for common goals"? It isn't. If all religions instantly vanished overnight, everyone would still get things done. Religion offers nothing that is needed for society to function, to continue, and to evolve.
+MarkR1957 Not long ago I would have agreed with you. However, the more I learn about how humans interact, I can't agree with that statement. I find Jonathan Haidt's research very insightful on this topic. Even he and Sam Harris agree that if religion is eliminated, secularism can't fully replace it. We seem to need something more to bring us together. My hope is that it will be based on reality/truth.
dlmetzger Think about if there never was any religion of any kind, at all, ever on Earth at any time. I am sure that things would still get done. Religion offers nothing that is needed.
That's not proof. I can write a book and write in that book that everything in it is a fact. That doesn't make it a fact...You've been indoctrinated. Go grab some critical thinking skills, quick.
+FallingGalaxy The bible is a compilation of 66 books by 40 different authors that tell us the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This book gave us laws that still to this day governs modern society. Please give me another book that has such a record
I'm an LDS ("mormon") Christian, and found it interesting to be able to hear the perspectives of some prominent atheists. I was, however, hoping to hear more about why these guys don't believe in God and less about what bad people, or those whom Silverman calls "good people" do in the name of religion 4:21. I don't like it when atheists say that the only thing that can brainwash people into thinking that killing other people is good--ever heard of politics? Stalin? Mao? Hitler (Silverman says he was "Catholic," but, really, he was what Rubin would call an "atheist Catholic"... which Silverman would call an atheist... wait a second...)? Anyway, last time I checked, children in the USSR weren't ratting on their parents to have them sent to the gulags in the name of God, and German officers weren't gassing Jews in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, Amen. Generally I take the same route that Provenza talks about in the video of only discussing these matters with people who genuinely are seeking for the truth, but I guess I'm breaking my rule by throwing this out into the youtube comments. Anyway, it's like Jesus said: "Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled." If you made it this far into my comment, hoorah for you! :) Here's a link to what I would argue is the truth: discover.mormon.org/en-us/
+Alexandre Gareau At 50:40 in the video he says that Christianity causes the pay gap, and it's the responsibility of atheists to prevent it. Utter bollocks.
+Alexandre Gareau Those religions are certainly patriarchal, but to suggest that American Christianity is responsible for women being paid less for the same work as men is ridiculous. Doubly ridiculous because women ARE paid the same for the same work. What I commented is not an exact quote, but it is accurate. You can see the video as well as I can. That is what he said.
+Medard Stello Anti-meritocratic bullshit, the point of equality is to give everyone the same opportunities, not to try and force everything to be equal like the eastern european communist hellholes.
I'm agnostic and still in search for an atheist that isn't trying to "convert" me 6 minutes in and i already got a headache something is telling me that they have a problem with churches and religion..not god only because you read something doesn't mean you understand it
+Robert Channels Not quite. A-theist. It means non-theist. The ones that do make the claim that there is no god are indeed atheists. So far you are correct. But the people who do not make a claim about the existence or non-existence of god (agnostics) are technically atheists as well. A-gnostic. It means not having/claiming (spiritual) knowledge. This implies they are non theists, and therefore atheists. This means all agnostics are atheists. But not all atheists are agnostics. You just need to take a look at the origin of each term.
+Athera Both theism & atheism are a claim to knowledge either positive or negative, but both are a declaration. A common attempt of atheists is to feign agnosticism, while simultaneously drawing a conclusion.
Provenza: *opening statement* "People smear atheists by saying we claim positively there is no God. It's really just a lack of belief." Silverman: *literally 2 seconds earlier* "Everyone is godless because there are no gods. I'm smart enough to realize that there are actually no gods." By all means, be an atheist out of honest conviction. Do your best reasoning and accept the conclusions with a readiness to update them. But metaphysics is too complicated to tolerate this much smugness.
silverman is worried about numbers, he is trying to get people who sit on the fence, and particularly people who get POLLED as "believers" when they aren't, to come out as atheist, if ALL non religious people lumped themselves in as atheist that would be 27% - a number that has a voice, that's all he's trying to do, atm atheists, any non believer, gets discounted, if you want to continue to be dominated by religion not calling yourself atheist, when you pretty much are, is the way to do it.
One of Dave's best shows ever. I am now inspired to truly come out as an unapologetic atheist. While I do support Donald Trump, I don't buy his new-found religion for a second!
Hi Dave, i like your episodes with Blair White and Milo Yiannopoulos. What do you think of the fine tuning argument (based on scientific data), and the resurrection argument (based on historical data)? I don't know if they work ultimately, but they have been defended successfully in debates.
There is no reason to think that life isn't fined tuned to fit into it's environment, quite the opposite of the universe being fine tuned for life. Historical arguments in no way validate the supernatural claims such as a resurrection.
Hi Blademaster, We can look into that. From what i heard, fine tuning makes some sense because the cosmic values of gravity, etc were inside the narrow range for life to be viable.
No, i do not. What we call life could appear under conditions we still don't understand. It's possible (who knows). And i think we should go deeper into it for a proper idea. But the theory is that there are cosmic values, gravity, etc, that the life we know of requires to exist. I.e. they are needed for matter to form, then collect into stars for planets. Something like that. Eg. Check out Dr Craig's debates with Lawrence Krauss and Sean Carroll. In that sense, i think there is at least some reason to support the idea of design behind the universe. But do share your thoughts. And happy holidays btw.
I found listening to these three such a breath of fresh air compared to the science versus religion zealots who get so much of the attention "atheism" wise these days (they know who I mean).
Here's a thought. Interview a theistic philosopher/apologist like William Lane Craig or something to broadcast the intellectual defense FOR the existence of God
@Ellisar Atranimus You say "Gnostic" as if it matter, I'm pretty sure you're a Gnostic Voldermort's nonexistence?, you see, is really not that important to be Gnostic about the nonexistence of something, is just that Atheists don't talk about Voldemort because they are not surrounded by Voldermort followers.
@Ellisar Atranimus ??? Lol!, take it easy, try not to ask me something and then go answering yourself. First of all, your logic tells me you are agnostic in regards to Superman, Voldermort, Yahwe(Christian God), etc. and that's fine, just letting you know your own posture. Also, if you're agnostic in regards to Gods then I have "bad" news for you, You're an Atheist, yup, I know you don't like the label, I don't like it either. Let me explain... Agnostic is in regards to Knowledge, not beliefs. So you're an Agnostic Atheist, me too. You're an Atheist because you go with your life absent of Gods or reject proposals about existence of Gods. If you think that "to reject" means to claim it false then you're logically wrong, this is a very important logical point you have to take into consideration. If someone tells me "The car is red" and I don't accept it, it doesn't mean necessarily I believe is not red, that'd be a logical fallacy. All the definitions of Atheism usually fall into 2 types of definitions, one's a good definition and the other is a bad definition, those who don't want to be labeled as Atheist or want to debunk Atheist posture ...do like very much the bad definition of Atheism. Bad definition of Atheism: Someone who believes a God(s) doesn't exist. You, and also most Christians, need to rely on this poor definition to have something weak to debunk, "you Atheists have faith too etc. etc." Lol!, right?, am I right or am I right? Good definition of Atheism: Someone who doesn't believe in Gods This means, someone who doesn't accept ideas, beliefs, proposals about Gods existing is an Atheist Someone who doesn't build their life or don't validate important stuff with beliefs about Gods. THEN, an Atheist can optionally believe there is no God, but this is optional, as you can logically see, this is not what ends up making someone an Atheist. Just as when I reject the proposal of a Car being Red, not because I believe is not Red but because I don't see enough valid reason to accept is Red, and OPTIONALLY I can believe is not Red, but again, this doesn't mean I rejected it because I believe is not red but because I don't see enough reason to accept it as true.(this part is not a belief). So yeah, I'm an Agnostic Atheist, but because Agnostic is redundant, is obvious we don't know, then the label Atheist is enough.
@Ellisar Atranimus _"Oh also Voldemort, Super Man, all of that could actually exist even by their own canon. Just saying. I personally don't believe them but I will never say there is no possible way wizards who had the means to completely fool our perceptions don't exist or that alternate realities where in a super powered alien fights people in spandex don't exist. "_ You're applying criteria that is not useful to a SIGNIFICANT LEVEL. Is not about being 100% sure to be false in order to put something in the same group as Fantasy, "THINGS" that someone has described that are not coherent to what we know so far about how Reality works and doesn't show any evidence for it is logically INDISTINGUISHABLE from Fantasy, is that simple, check how I'm not saying "...is false", because is not logically required nor useful to be false for one to discard it as made up stuff. Another thing, by your own criteria, you will not be able to accept evidence either, because you can't know if you're being delusional, you can't know if you're being delusional while verifying that you're not being delusional, etc. etc. So that level of criteria is not useful for real life results towards Reality. When I believe that whatever God doesn't exist is not that I'm sure that it doesn't exist, is just a level of certainty, it is not about 100% or 0%. I do know that some people(like you) need us(Atheists) to be believers too like religious people so we can also be "wrong" about our posture when I already explain that what I believe about whatever someone wrote about is not important for my life, but for religious people that INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MYTHOLOGY stuff means basically EVERYTHING to their existence, without it they'll feel invalid creatures, I don't, you don't' either I think.
@Ellisar Atranimus _"Mainly by the fact that you think others need you"_ What?, no, you didn't understand, ENglish is not my main language You need(want) Atheists to have certain posture for you to have something to debunk, that's what I meant, so you define your own brand of Atheism to label us and such. I think you do realize that you need/want us to be "religious fanatic" for you to be right.
@Ellisar Atranimus _"So I say again; prove your position."_ I explained my position at the beginning, but you conveniently seem to ignore it and stick to only one part. So, tell me what do I need to prove in order to my posture to be valid.
Dave. Been watching a lot of your stuff lately. Love your perspective. Been an atheist since 85 when I read Cosmos as a treeplanter in northern B.C. I'm Canadian. I guess I will be a New atheist if I clarify that on my facebook profile. I am really looking into the Libertarian thing, because so many free and deep thinkers like yourself seem to be leaning that way. My concern is this . I don't have much faith that corporate America can value anything other than the bottom line. Also, so many US states (I'm Canadian) would find ways to advance the corporate agenda if given more freedom. Given the growing wealth divide, I'm not seeing it. It doesn't seem like democracy.
Instead of using old Greek words which are easily misunderstood by the general public, what is so terrible about calling ourselves non-believers. When someone asks me, that's the term I use. It's clear, concise and there's no ambiguity about what it means.
Dave you should invite Adam Kokesh on. He's an anarchist and might have an interesting perspective that hasn't been on your show before. Plus I think he's based out of Arizona now so he could probably get to LA for a studio visit.
Atheist here. I'll take Christianity over Islam 1000x over, day after day, 365 days a year
+Latent Soul Just don't get too comfy with them. The reason Christianity is largely benign these days has more to do with the fact that most majority Christian countries are secular rather than any virtues inherent in the faith. When the Christian church has wielded state power in the past they've committed their own fair share of atrocities and I see no reason to assume they wouldn't do so again given the opportunity, the difference between now and then is that now we live in a society that wouldn't tolerate it.
+Chris Whinery bulkshit. We live in a society that has this new agenda of egalitarianism pushed by the communists/socialists all throughout the 20th century. As a result, in this regressive left, PC culture, we have plenty of having retsrded atheist liberals completely tolerant of Islam for the sake of being PC or "progressive". Islam is the true BENIGN cancer that is more controlling than Christianity has ever been. You do realize that "separation of church and state" is a doctrine established by Christianity during its reformation in medieval Europe correct?
+Latent Soul You wouldn't of been saying that 500 years ago living in Europe.
+kwj171068 Martin Luther was.
+Latent Soul Sure, NOW. But when the Crusades were in full swing, you might not have said that. And FYI - - - I'm an Atheist who detests all religions. But I do agree that yes, in 2016, izzlam and the moozlems are a world wide danger of the highest magnitude.
"Watered down Bud-Light."
I had no idea it was possible to water down water itself.
+Victor Trejo yeah, you can, but it's actually called Rolling Rock.
+Jae Waitwhat lol
I think that was the joke.
+Bioshyn LOL !!!
+Demian Haki Thankfully we have craft beer that's bringing that back around
If an advanced civilization came to visit Earth and told us that they created us, would we believe them or ask for evidence?
+Coouge evidence.
I'd ask for evidence, which would be easy enough to produce and verify of they're capable of engineering a sapient species.
+Coouge I'd ask for evidence but refer to them as "human makey makey space gods" just to be safe.
I'd ask for evidence. They would most likely have DNA specimens that we could test to verify their claim. For example, today, 1 to 2 percent of the DNA in non-African people comes from Neanderthals.
+Coouge I'm an atheist, but I'm pretty sure I would believe them. They did fly all the way here. Planting life is fairly trivial compared to that task.
This whole convo is proof that being an atheist isn't a guarantee of intellectual honesty or skepticism. And I say this as a classical liberal atheist.
Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative, which means his view of government isn't theocratic. Way to misrepresent your adversary.
Also, there's plenty for people to hate about both Trump and Bernie that has nothing to do with religious beliefs.
They also totally missed the point about communism being religion/cult-like in the behavior of its mass-murdering adherents.
Speaking of Trump & religious laws, he complained about the Draw Muhammad competition, like, what are they doing drawing Muhammad?
Ted Cruz does not give a shit about the constitution .
"Ted Cruz is a constitutional conservative, which means his view of
government isn't theocratic. Way to misrepresent your adversary. "
False. What you have claimed about Ted Cruz runs counter to Ted Cruz's claims about himself. He has made it very clear that his beliefs are more important to him than the constitution and country both.
“I’m a Christian first, I’m an American second, I’m a conservative third, and I’m a Republican fourth" - Ted Cruz on his priorities.
"Well, the reality is that this idea of the separation of church and state is a myth. " Ted Cruz's campaign on how he parses his faith with his responsibilities.
"“Our rights don’t come from man. They come from God Almighty.”" Ted Cruz on rights.
This is not a man who cares about the constitution or any other laws, he cares only about his religion.
+Midna
“I’m a Christian first, I’m an American second, I’m a conservative third, and I’m a Republican fourth"
This statement doesn't say anything about whether or not Cruz thinks government should be limited by the Constitution.
"Well, the reality is that this idea of the separation of church and state is a myth."
What he means by this is that he doesn't want anyone telling _him_ that he cannot acknowledge his god publicly just because he's employed by the government, as the left constantly does lately. Do I find his statement hyperbolic? Sure, but if you read the first amendment carefully, you'll see that the translation I have given you is correct. The first amendment begins "Congress shall make no law..." It does not say "government officials shall not talk about gods or hang religious artwork in their offices or pray in public." The latter is an erroneous fabrication of the left and a complete misunderstanding of the intent of the amendment. The intent of the amendment was to restrain _legislation,_ not individuals. Religious individuals don't cease being religious simply because they work for the government, nor should we expect them to. I suspect that if this quote was in proper context, he would make the same point that I have made here.
“Our rights don’t come from man. They come from God Almighty.”
What a religious person means when they say this is that rights are inherent in our nature; they don't come from a document written by men, and therefore cannot be taken away by men with the stroke of a pen. I agree with this sentiment, and I don't believe in a god. Again, this statement says nothing about whether Cruz thinks that government should be limited by a Constitution. To a religious citizen (and to the men who wrote it), the Constitution is the _recognition_ of those rights. As an atheist, I start with "man has rights," and then see that the Declaration of Independence says "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men," and I understand that that is the purpose of the Constitution. Cruz starts with "God made man," then says "man has rights, and to secure these rights... etc." It doesn't change a single thing to add on the bit about God to the beginning. We all arrive at the same place.
"This is not a man who cares about the constitution or any other laws, he cares only about his religion."
If you don't think that Ted Cruz cares about the Constitution, you haven't spent much time listening to anything he has said, aside from religious statements quote-mined and misinterpreted by leftist atheist websites. Either that, or you have serious misconceptions about what the Constitution says.
Do I think that there will be times we'll need to be vigilant to prevent him from making a mistake? Yes, just as with any politician.
Do I think he's a religious zealot who will stomp all over the Constitution to convert the whole country to Christianity? Absolutely not. Having watched him for months now, I find the idea utterly ridiculous. Ted Cruz is the closest thing to a Libertarian who has ever come this close to the presidency. It will be a sad day for our republic if an authoritarian like Trump (who _actually_ doesn't give a shit about the Constitution) defeats him.
Kuoxsr
Lmfao, the amount of mental gymnastics you just pulled off should land you a gold medal.
+Midna Not an argument
Well done Dave. This is one of the best videos on the topic I've seen in a while. Keep up the great content.
+Jae Waitwhat Thanks Jae!
+Uranie sorry for my English. I'm American.
+Uranie Taking a hallucinogen seems to encourage the view of consciousness that you describe - but how does it make you a theist?
+Uranie I haven't tried ayahuasca, but I experienced similar clarity on during the second half of a mushroom trip.
It seems that at the word "god" has been stretched a bit thin - it can mean so many things that it's lost it's power and has just become a sort of filler word.
I would suggest the word you want is pantheist.
+Uranie Yeah, it's basically DMT isn't it? I'll be giving it a go one day for sure. I'm just not so keen on the vomiting aspect that I've heard about.
Come on Dave, get Karen Straughan on. I know you were talking to her in the beginning before your channel blew up and since then silence has reigned. She cannot afford to fly all the way down to L.A. and you have already had people on via Skype so why not just do it that way, via the internet? She probably would have some of the most counterintuitive things to say of any of your guests. Please do not ignore this.
dudeschmock Never would get invited.
+Thinking-Ape Agreed. No one takes SJWs to the woodshed like Straughan. She deserves a bigger platform too. This Honey Badger stuff is falling short. Her GirlWritesWhat material was legendary.
+runreilly I do not think it will happen. Karen is not big enough at this stage to warrant Dave inviting her and perhaps he thinks her views are too controversial as well. Also he prefers to have live guests so that may be part of it too but I hope he changes his mind on not inviting her.
Thinking-Ape I hope you're wrong. He's had very controversial guests before. And they've been ones that don't back up their claims with *any* research (Karen often does) or fall back on weak logic.
You're definitely right in your second point. In Rubins's mind, Karen Straughan probably isn't a big enough name for anything but a face to face.
I still think it's possible. She's perfect for his show. I wonder if he knows who she is.
runreilly He does. When he was smaller they had some dialogue but I guess she got lost in the woodwork.
God didn't create people, people created God.
edgy boi
all of them.
Prove it.
+um broog
Read about mormonism and scientology. Known frauds creating fiction.
"If you want to get rich, you start a religion."
- L. Ron Hubbard
+Enrique Rivera You sound upset.
Incredible interview, extremely pertinent and relevant.. it's great to see intelligent, free-thinking minds interact in such an honest and organic manner. I absolutely loved what Paul said at the end, essentially describing the message of Pantheism... the "higher power" that they are all advocating against in its fictional, personified form, is really Nature... and I'm so thankful David is doing what he's doing and with such passion and conviction.. we need him. Kudos to all of you gentlemen for the work you do!
thanks so much for these interviews Rubin! always great to watch
Hi Rubin,
I love watching your interviews and hearing your perspective on things. You have helped me appreciate more difference between the left and liberal values. I appreciate the space in the media of having honest and real conversations with people of different views without demonising them, and yet challenging them when it is needed. Thank you.
I just wanted to try and challenge you on a couple of things in your opening statement. As a disclaimer, I am a Christian, but am not arguing for belief in God by what I say in this post.
Firstly, you say, "If we can start at a point in not believing in ideas until they are proven to be true, then we can start having conversations about how to live as people and to make our world a better place."
We all believe in unprovable ideas; we cannot function without some basic ones. For example, for Liberal values to be true, you have to believe that all people have equal value and that there is such a thing as decent (right and wrong) behaviour. Where is the evidence to prove such basic assumptions? These are just two; there are many others.
I am not saying I disagree with those values only that they are not able to be "proven" only agreed subjectively if you have a purely materialistic world view.
Also, you say, "When you're beliefs impede on the lives of other people, I have a problem with religion." What about liberal values that impede values of faith? For example, a Christian doctor who believes in the sanctity of life from conception is told he must keep his "unprovable" Christian values from impeding on the rights of a woman's choice. But is the woman's right to choose not an unprovable assumption? Isn't the "belief" that an unborn baby has no "human rights" an unprovable assumption? Are any level human rights provable?
Why do unprovable liberal values such as this trump religious based ones?
I am not arguing for a God, Christianity or anti-abortion here, just challenging the argument you make.
I think we need a better defence of liberal values that "values must be provable". In reality, neither of the values I quote here can be proven either. The argument is simply not feasible.
Raised Christian-just turned Atheist. It's a liberating experience. I'm much happier knowing there is no God for reasons I can't explain.
***** agreed. Knowing that the universe is extremely complex, and life took BILLIONS of years of chemicals and atoms and meteors and all these things just for us to get here. thats more beautiful than a jealous god would ever be.
+Kyrie Irving I went through the same thing, and also felt liberated. It's partly because faith in God gives people a set of beliefs without which they fear their world will fall apart. I pretended to believe for several years towards the end before I finally admitted it, and when I saw that the sky didn't fall down, I felt relieved. Finally, I could find things out and enjoy the world for myself, and I had no afterlife destiny or superpowerful surveyor to worry about anymore.
erosmangr74 a lot of things i felt shameful about because i believed there was a guy above me, shaking his head and thinking about whether i should be sent to hell or not. As Hitchens says, Theism is really like a divine North Korea.
I know what you mean. I didn't realize until afterwards just how much the surveillance from the heavens really disturbed me. Since you referenced the late, great Hitchens, permit me then to say that we at least didn't have to die to leave the celestial North Korea.
In other words you were never a Christian no Christian would ever have an issue with God punishing evil or have an issue with worshipping God.
Silverman is spot on!
Facts and logic destroys theist nonsense every time.
I am atheist and I don't care who knows !
That's awesome, and is exactly how I hope we can all feel one day for being an atheist. Sadly, this is nowhere near the case for all atheists yet.
@@Nirvana7734 in the UK i've NEVER had to worry about being atheist, in fact most believers only take the bible as "guidelines" we have very few "fundamental" believers, darwin and dawkins are heroes even to the church, in fact that applies to most of europe too. in the US religion has been hijacked for political gain, if it weren't politicians using religion to divide people people like ken ham wouldn't get funding for nonsense like the ark.
@@HarryNicNicholas Yes, I have become familiar with the fortunate plight of atheists in the UK. This, too, is cause for celebration. The rest of the world, however, has a long way to go. Even in my own country of Canada, and in my own family, religion (in my family's case, Christianity) has cleaved both my nuclear and extended family due to intolerant, dogmatic practices. I have no issue with the positive communal aspects that religious affiliation can brings to peoples' lives, but I look forward to a time when nonsensical intolerance, of the sort that many people and families experience, to become a thing of the past.
Mr. Rubin, I'm very impressed by your cogent logic, succinct communication, and subtle satire. Great work.
Excellent conversation, more please.
What Rubin says is logical and concise. Rubin is my kind of people.
Your monologues at the start of your videos are truly fantastic. Well written, well said. Motivational!
This show is so important. Tremendous amount of respect for Dave Rubin.
Anyone ever imagine a world populated only with hardworking freethinkers?
+Aditya Nayak I may as well believe in GOD. That will NEVER happen. Sigh.
Daniel A :/ I hope we find an inhabitable planet to colonize, and make absolutely sure religion doesn't creep into it.
+Aditya Nayak that's like imagining the mind of god. I can't even.
Jae Waitwhat *goes to kitchen and fetches spoon*
yeah, keep talking bro..
*Sits near electrical socket*
stick it in
3 Atheist sat down and agreed on everything. wow, how fascinating!!
So much awesome. Great talk! I wish it had been much longer!
Greetings from Costa Rica. Fucking love your show. This kind of topics are truly important, not only in the states but specially here in the 3rd world.
Keep the good work
Have Penn Jilette on your show!
I get much of my atheist knowledge from David Silverman, thank you for sharing David! Respect
David Silverman is brutal. And I love him.
I'd hate to correct you guys, but ABB was Norwegian, he bombed the governmental buildings in Oslo, shot up a summer camps for leftists and he was a Christian saying that he was defending Norway against the islamization of Norway and killing traitors... He was religious. You could have used Stalin as an example even though I would say that he was religious in a way as he was part of a cult of personality ala the regressives where ideologies or leaders cannot be critiqued.
Thank you David Silverman was speaking the truth about being "Jewish"...its like the only religion where you can become part of the faith and suddenly gain an ethnicity.
I'm not necessarily Christian but I get that it's a huge relief to know for a fact that you were put on earth for a reason, you are loved, and even if you die you will have a home to come back to.
That's it! The subscriber number finally went above 200 000 :D
Dave, please never stop doing what you're doing
An athiest who believes in the pay gap, ironic. Didn't you just have Christina Hoff Sommers on?
The pay gap exists, just not for the reason modern feminists like to propose it does.
I couldn't agree more about the "spiritual" connection Provenza attributed having with music. The vibrations, the feel, the emotional connection to it. It's very profound whether you're just an average listener, a beginner at playing music, or and advanced amateur/professional musician how so many people of different walks of life all connect with music, and throughout the ages, have created their own styles of human expression through it.
I get a semi every time a new Rubin Report comes out.
Very much enjoy your discussions Dave, looking forward to more from you. I argue in one of my videos that atheists and agnostics should consider supporting freedom of religion/belief because I believe it is a cornerstone of natural rights and a free society.
I couldn't stop giggling when they said "reason rally." Thunderf00t would probably have loved to step in at that moment lol.
*cringe rally
Tadokat i cringe everytime i see people on their knees during church services lol
Great job and congrats on breaking past 200k subs. Keep up the good interviews.
Disappointed that Silverman thinks all religions are equal. That's Cenk talk.
Mike Calhoun cenk?
The young Turks
Yeah. Cause they are all wrong and cause problems in the world. Is that hard to understand?
If you look on the surface it's an easy question. Islam is way more damaging then Christianity. The question is if this is because of the holy books, the institutions themselves or if this is because the society we live in.
By far the majority of Christians have little knowledge of the bible. They can maybe recall four disciples and know a summery of a few stories. These people take their morals from the law and church society not from the bible.
The bible is just as evil only the society around it has changed due to the enlightenment. We don't stone people to death anymore but it's a common habbit in the bible for all types of crimes (working on Sabbath, believing in other gods).
In the middle east the type of enlightenment we experienced never came. Science is underrated and religion is dominant.
As a side note America kills way more women and children by drone strikes then terrorist from the middle east have killed in the Western World.
It's really sad to see these intelligent people scoff at the idea of God. Some of the most brilliant minds that have existed have found sufficient evidence for belief in God.
Also, the belief in a God who created you is not the height of hubris. It actually requires great humility to believe your life is not your own. Arrogance is actually the key obstacle to believe you need salvation, forgiveness etc.
I absolutely relate to constantly searching for evidence. I can't see the intelligence in scoffing at ultimate questions you cannot possibly dismiss.
please share the mountains of evidence for this god.....
Hey Silverman the pay gap is a myth. Sincerely an atheist calling you on your bs
+Aaron M He believes in the pay gap bullshit? I mean it does exist but there is no evidence to suggest it is because of some sort of weird sexist conspiracy.
Looks like Silverman is a typical atheist who believes in the sacred religious like values of the regressive left. He should spend a few hours reading up on Jonathan Haidt. Its only recently I have been wary about admitting I am an atheist. Back when it was politically INCORRECT to admit I was an atheist I was proud of it, but now?
for a long time I thought because I couldn't prove there wasn't a god, i had to remain silent.
I'm slowly speanking out about my lack of belief these days.
great discussion Dave. wish you could ramp up your production to a few videos each week 😀
Sorry but I am agnostic. You don't dictate how people think of themselves dude. It is exactly that attitude that makes so many people not want to be atheists.
+Skittles McStabbypants Being agnostic is almost the same as being an atheist anyways. Just makes less sense.
Ryodakun
My point wasn't so much that I am agnostic as this pushy attitude that some atheists have is off putting needlessly. The way he treats atheism he might as well be a televangelist.
+Skittles McStabbypants Personally not believing in a god is the only thing that makes you an Atheist, not the attitudes of other people.
MarkR1957
And I have had Atheist yell at me and try to convince me like it was a religion.
MarkR1957
Out of curiosity did you actually read what I wrote or just decide you wanted to be angry at something? Frankly you don't seem to get my point I am not trying to define atheist.
I am saying that a disturbing amount of people mostly on TH-cam are making atheism into a sort of religion.
My criticism of that behavior is not meant to criticize atheism or to tell people what to believe or not believe. It is just to point out that if you are trying to convince someone who believes in a religion that they are wrong, it's probably better not to act like a dick.
Hey I don't need help figuring out when to tell people to fuck off and walk away.
So hey fuck off, and this is my equivalent to walking away.
As someone who doesn't believe in god, and doesn't like the word atheist, I've still gotta concede that I'm an atheist! Gosh darn it Silverman!
Sad to see Silverman has drank the wage gap kool-aid.
ZetaOfS there is evidence of the wage gap lol
@@MrAndrew201 it's been debunked by feminist economists
Every single video is amazing and informative... Keep that perspective! Good ideas can come from anyone, anywhere. You just have to actually listen to them. ...
Seriously, this opened with "All we're saying is we don't know. That's really all it comes down to: We. Don't. Know."
... And then ended with "It's all a scam! It's a lie! It's child abuse!"
It's not a fact. It's a worldview, and it's hatred. You're just as bad as those you rally against. Way to be a hero.
@daverubin was fortunate to have stumbled upon this video. really like the topic and you guys really summaries how i feel about atheism. Keep up the great work! you have just got yourself a new subscriber!
Pay gap dont exist.
There is no pay gap. That is to say, if you work just as hard, and just as well, a woman will get the same wage as a man in almost all cases. The "gap" in earnings (not wages) is because of choices women tend to make to balance work and life, such as avoiding overtime, and avoiding dirty jobs that tend to pay more.
When I hear people complaining that there are not enough female lumberjacks, then maybe I'll pay attention. but as it is, they only seem to want to focus on the upper end of jobs.
There certainly is a pay gap it is caused by women taking up lower paying jobs (like education or nursing-jobs) and child leave . Generally speaking personal preference creates the wage gap.
TheKahn14 Then it isn't a wage gap. It is an earnings gap. A totally different thing.
Timothy Zyg Exactly
→ to the knee Look up "CONSAD wage gap report" on google and read it.
Hey Rick,
I just wanted to say thank you for being one of the very few, multi-topic show (unlike say, something specific like The Atheist Experience) that gives Atheism a serious platform with real discussion. You are one of the few people who have interviewed Sam Harris without distorting his views in some way, plus atheism even with aside; the whole Young Turks bullshit and the way you handled the Israel situation: *hats off you you my friend*
Keep it up and thank again!
Next thing you should knock down is ethnic tribalism...if you dare.
I am a Atheist and i agree ,,,,the best show i ever seen about religion ??????
Im athiest, there we go, a second time out of the closet 😂
“Frederick Douglass told in his Narrative how his condition as a slave became worse when his master underwent a religious conversion that allowed him to justify slavery as the punishment of the children of Ham. Mark Twain described his mother as a genuinely good person, whose soft heart pitied even Satan, but who had no doubt about the legitimacy of slavery, because in years of living in antebellum Missouri she had never heard any sermon opposing slavery, but only countless sermons preaching that slavery was God's will. With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.”
― Steven Weinberg
You don't have to be religious to be anti-abortion
+ALLAH THE MERCILESS or if you're just naturally compelled to protect the lives of infants if you see their safety in jeopardy.
Dave, IF he was up for it, I'd love for you to have the chance to interview Nabeel Qureshi! He is battling cancer right now so I'm not sure he would be able....but it would be AMAZING! I think you two would really enjoy talking as well!
I wonder how many of your viewers are conservative atheists like me.
+iYelawolf David doesn't have conservative atheists on. It would defeat his aim to have liberal atheists on to mock conservative Christians.
Silverman is a conservative. He doesn't vote for conservatives due to religious and social issues, but he believes in small government. He talks about it on the you tube videos about American Atheists at CPAC.
Dee Anna Nice contradiction there. Silverman is a conservative but doesn't vote conservative. Silverman attacks conservatives in the video. Perhaps you should watch it.
+The Serf he attacks the religious right, not conservatives. He is a conservative.
+Dee Anna I believe he'd vote Trump, because I think most of us know Trump isn't really Christian.
this was absolutely brilliant simply brilliant amazing he stated I would love to see Ruben sit down with David Silverman Alone David is extremely bright and smart I can't wait to read his book
Dave Rubin! Look up Ayn Rand. I have a feeling you will like her ideas. She was an Atheist that created a philosophical system that made a moral code based on objective reality.
The head of the Ayn Rand institute is coming on next week...
+The Rubin Report You'll apply scepticism to those nutcases, I hope!
+The Rubin Report
Interesting... however, I must admit that where I used to regard classical liberalism (libertarianism) as something you would arrive as based on objective reality, I've lately grown more and more skeptical about how many who call them selves classical liberals or libertarians actually are capable of applying objective thought to their ideology.
Way too many libertarians have via their response to the problem of climate change revealed them selves to simply just be dogmatic anarcho-capitalists.
As a libertarian it has been appalling to me how many have turned to science denial in order to not have their policy-ideas challenged. Not all though...
You should consider having Jerry Taylor of the Niskanen Center on, for an example of a libertarian with a real objective rational approach to the ideology.
+The Rubin Report Remember to read Hume beforehand. Moral objectivists tend to play fast and loose on the Naturalistic fallacy.
Asha2820
That discussion is really a secondary academic exercise (which btw. have more than 2 sides).
Although I'm not a religious person and identify as an agnostic, this show bothered me on a number of levels. Among other things, there was way too much painting everything with a broad brush, disrespecting people with different beliefs and stating opinion as fact especially on the part of David Silverman. He is quite full of himself and authoritarian in his demeanor. Who is he to tell people what they should and should not believe? And no, all religions are not equally "bad" by any stretch of the imagination, in fact there is quite a lot of good done by some religions. And I'm not denying the fact that there are numerous negative aspects of organized religion. But my opinion is to live and let live as long as you're not hurting, disrespecting or discriminating against anyone. I think that's a liberal stance to take.
Shame you didn't bring anyone religious to push back against the platitudes and add adversity to the mix.
Three atheists nodding heads hardly gets anywhere interesting.
+Nick Rhodes he had Milo on for example.
+Nick Rhodes He wanted a rational discussion
+Nick Rhodes That's part two ;) ... and what Manmohan Singh just said.
+Nick Rhodes Uhhh, because the discussion was about Atheists explaining Atheism from their point of view. If you want religious push-back on Atheists just look to an enormous majority of the population that continue to demonize them or go to church!
***** Oops you missed the context of that post because I posted it in the wrong conversation :-s ... your comment was in line with my point in the other conversation
Congratulations on reaching 200k subscribers. You really deserve it.
If your brother turned water into Bud Light, how would you know?
at 2:30 "magical Apple elves singing "😂😆😂
Becoming an atheist: Realizing the universe isn't a tyrannical dictatorship.
This was a wonderful program, bravo to all of you!
2 big reasons as to why atheists are a disliked group:
1. attacking people's most personal beliefs is going to cause allot of blowback.
2. assuming that you are more enlightened or intelligent because you figured out there isn't any gods
+Michael Gray It is actually proven that atheists are more intelligent than believers. ;)
...but it was done by scientists so I guess it doesn't count. :P
I don't doubt that at all. It's just people get mad when you point it out! haha.
+ulverop No they aren't. Only on average. and it's a extremely trivial difference.
It doesn't even take into account other factors, so it's about as much of a "proven fact" as the wage-gap feminists throw out.
No beliefs are above criticism. If you believe in a sky daddy without any evidence your ideas deserve to be mocked. Modify your beliefs based on evidence and you won't be mocked by any rational person.
you realise you proved the initial point dude, right?... just sayin'
Dave, in a spirit of allowing ideas to each have their day, I hope you could one day have someone like Edward Feser (or some other classical theist) on your show. You have been willing to have persons with differing viewpoints on before and I hope this will be no exception.
I enjoy the show but these guys don't know much about theology.
You mean mythology?
Sh! Sch? Well Christianity is true at least
@@mmaphilosophytheologyscien4578 That is a claim... Let's see the evidence?
@@shsch492 buuuurrrrn
@@shsch492 Woah!! I never realized how similar the words theology and mythology were! You've just single-handedly destroyed all of Theism! Checkmate!
1:10 Anyone can turn water into beer.... it's called brewing...
"Deconstructed" should be removed from the language.
+Islet of Langerhans huh
+Islet of Langerhans taken apart works
it's a stupid word coined by a pseudoscientist called Jacques Derrida.
Sam Barkley I thought it was Heidegger, but it's postmodernist lingo all the same. A cancer on human thought.
I think a conversion with Jonathan Haidt would be helpful. Religion does many things, some good and some bad. If religion is eliminated, something must replace the good things that it did (group/community cohesion, working together for common goals,...). The Sam Harris podcast with Jonathan Haidt was very insightful but I want more objective discussion about what religion is.
He's coming on in a few weeks!
+The Rubin Report Hurray! The Righteous Mind is a great book. You gotta hit him on the neuroscience surrounding the topic, that's where the meat of Haidts argument exists.
+dlmetzger Since when is religion needed for "group/community cohesion" or "working together for common goals"? It isn't. If all religions instantly vanished overnight, everyone would still get things done. Religion offers nothing that is needed for society to function, to continue, and to evolve.
+MarkR1957 Not long ago I would have agreed with you. However, the more I learn about how humans interact, I can't agree with that statement. I find Jonathan Haidt's research very insightful on this topic. Even he and Sam Harris agree that if religion is eliminated, secularism can't fully replace it. We seem to need something more to bring us together. My hope is that it will be based on reality/truth.
dlmetzger
Think about if there never was any religion of any kind, at all, ever on Earth at any time. I am sure that things would still get done. Religion offers nothing that is needed.
Well we do have proof it's called the Bible
And the proof for Kylo Ren is Star Wars VII.
Best Documentary
That's not proof. I can write a book and write in that book that everything in it is a fact. That doesn't make it a fact...You've been indoctrinated. Go grab some critical thinking skills, quick.
+FallingGalaxy The bible is a compilation of 66 books by 40 different authors that tell us the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This book gave us laws that still to this day governs modern society. Please give me another book that has such a record
+Aecy A. Make your jokes all you want, when the real enemy comes for you that's gonna be your only defense friend
I'm an LDS ("mormon") Christian, and found it interesting to be able to hear the perspectives of some prominent atheists. I was, however, hoping to hear more about why these guys don't believe in God and less about what bad people, or those whom Silverman calls "good people" do in the name of religion 4:21.
I don't like it when atheists say that the only thing that can brainwash people into thinking that killing other people is good--ever heard of politics? Stalin? Mao? Hitler (Silverman says he was "Catholic," but, really, he was what Rubin would call an "atheist Catholic"... which Silverman would call an atheist... wait a second...)? Anyway, last time I checked, children in the USSR weren't ratting on their parents to have them sent to the gulags in the name of God, and German officers weren't gassing Jews in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, Amen.
Generally I take the same route that Provenza talks about in the video of only discussing these matters with people who genuinely are seeking for the truth, but I guess I'm breaking my rule by throwing this out into the youtube comments. Anyway, it's like Jesus said: "Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled." If you made it this far into my comment, hoorah for you! :) Here's a link to what I would argue is the truth: discover.mormon.org/en-us/
The pay gap is atheists fault!!! hahaha
I'm not sure what you're on about. I agree with you. I was making fun of Silverman for saying that atheists are responsible for the mythical wage gap.
+Alexandre Gareau At 50:40 in the video he says that Christianity causes the pay gap, and it's the responsibility of atheists to prevent it. Utter bollocks.
+Alexandre Gareau Those religions are certainly patriarchal, but to suggest that American Christianity is responsible for women being paid less for the same work as men is ridiculous. Doubly ridiculous because women ARE paid the same for the same work. What I commented is not an exact quote, but it is accurate. You can see the video as well as I can. That is what he said.
I never said that it hasn't been. Cheers
+Medard Stello Anti-meritocratic bullshit, the point of equality is to give everyone the same opportunities, not to try and force everything to be equal like the eastern european communist hellholes.
loved this. it's refreshing to hear people who think like me. one day i hope to have a friday night chat with people like this
Lol I got an Christian Ad
I'm agnostic and still in search for an atheist that isn't trying to "convert" me
6 minutes in and i already got a headache
something is telling me that they have a problem with churches and religion..not god
only because you read something doesn't mean you understand it
Atheism proper is a claim to knowledge, it is the assertion that there is no god(s).
+Robert Channels no it is not. i am an atheist, but i don't know if there is a god or not, i am just not convinced there is one.
+Robert Channels
Not quite. A-theist. It means non-theist.
The ones that do make the claim that there is no god are indeed atheists. So far you are correct.
But the people who do not make a claim about the existence or non-existence of god (agnostics) are technically atheists as well.
A-gnostic. It means not having/claiming (spiritual) knowledge. This implies they are non theists, and therefore atheists.
This means all agnostics are atheists. But not all atheists are agnostics.
You just need to take a look at the origin of each term.
+Aanthanur DC Then you are an agnostic.
+Athera Both theism & atheism are a claim to knowledge either positive or negative, but both are a declaration. A common attempt of atheists is to feign agnosticism, while simultaneously drawing a conclusion.
+Alexandre Gareau Sorry words have meanings
Great video, now can we get Colion Noir on the show to discuss the 2nd Amendment?
This is the first time I have ever seen this guy. First few minutes are interesting and so far, I think I will be stopping in again.
This is my favorite episode so far!
Provenza: *opening statement* "People smear atheists by saying we claim positively there is no God. It's really just a lack of belief."
Silverman: *literally 2 seconds earlier* "Everyone is godless because there are no gods. I'm smart enough to realize that there are actually no gods."
By all means, be an atheist out of honest conviction. Do your best reasoning and accept the conclusions with a readiness to update them. But metaphysics is too complicated to tolerate this much smugness.
silverman is worried about numbers, he is trying to get people who sit on the fence, and particularly people who get POLLED as "believers" when they aren't, to come out as atheist, if ALL non religious people lumped themselves in as atheist that would be 27% - a number that has a voice, that's all he's trying to do, atm atheists, any non believer, gets discounted, if you want to continue to be dominated by religion not calling yourself atheist, when you pretty much are, is the way to do it.
Dave Rubin, the closest thing to a real god!
Still way better than any/all god or gods made by 'humanes'.
The best conversation so far about atheism.
Now that you mentioned George Carlin you got my respect :D And subscription :D
@45:27 Just correcting that Hitchens was only quoting Steven Weinberg when he said this quote, it was not from Hitchens.
Derek Lemon lmao, but who has time to be factually accurate when you have an agenda
one of the better shows...
One of Dave's best shows ever. I am now inspired to truly come out as an unapologetic atheist. While I do support Donald Trump, I don't buy his new-found religion for a second!
Hi Dave, i like your episodes with Blair White and Milo Yiannopoulos. What do you think of the fine tuning argument (based on scientific data), and the resurrection argument (based on historical data)? I don't know if they work ultimately, but they have been defended successfully in debates.
There is no reason to think that life isn't fined tuned to fit into it's environment, quite the opposite of the universe being fine tuned for life. Historical arguments in no way validate the supernatural claims such as a resurrection.
Hi Blademaster,
We can look into that. From what i heard, fine tuning makes some sense because the cosmic values of gravity, etc were inside the narrow range for life to be viable.
Misakichifan So you know all the conditions that life can form under? Because that's the only way you could determine such a thing.
No, i do not. What we call life could appear under conditions we still don't understand. It's possible (who knows). And i think we should go deeper into it for a proper idea. But the theory is that there are cosmic values, gravity, etc, that the life we know of requires to exist. I.e. they are needed for matter to form, then collect into stars for planets. Something like that. Eg. Check out Dr Craig's debates with Lawrence Krauss and Sean Carroll. In that sense, i think there is at least some reason to support the idea of design behind the universe.
But do share your thoughts. And happy holidays btw.
Misakichifan What would a non designed universe look like?
Thank you so much for your clear explanation. I’m with you, guys!
I found listening to these three such a breath of fresh air compared to the science versus religion zealots who get so much of the attention "atheism" wise these days (they know who I mean).
I DON'T KNOW.......what more can you say really....great interview..
Here's a thought. Interview a theistic philosopher/apologist like William Lane Craig or something to broadcast the intellectual defense FOR the existence of God
@Ellisar Atranimus You say "Gnostic" as if it matter, I'm pretty sure you're a Gnostic Voldermort's nonexistence?, you see, is really not that important to be Gnostic about the nonexistence of something, is just that Atheists don't talk about Voldemort because they are not surrounded by Voldermort followers.
@Ellisar Atranimus ??? Lol!, take it easy, try not to ask me something and then go answering yourself.
First of all, your logic tells me you are agnostic in regards to Superman, Voldermort, Yahwe(Christian God), etc. and that's fine, just letting you know your own posture.
Also, if you're agnostic in regards to Gods then I have "bad" news for you, You're an Atheist, yup, I know you don't like the label, I don't like it either.
Let me explain...
Agnostic is in regards to Knowledge, not beliefs. So you're an Agnostic Atheist, me too.
You're an Atheist because you go with your life absent of Gods or reject proposals about existence of Gods.
If you think that "to reject" means to claim it false then you're logically wrong, this is a very important logical point you have to take into consideration.
If someone tells me "The car is red" and I don't accept it, it doesn't mean necessarily I believe is not red, that'd be a logical fallacy.
All the definitions of Atheism usually fall into 2 types of definitions, one's a good definition and the other is a bad definition, those who don't want to be labeled as Atheist or want to debunk Atheist posture ...do like very much the bad definition of Atheism.
Bad definition of Atheism:
Someone who believes a God(s) doesn't exist.
You, and also most Christians, need to rely on this poor definition to have something weak to debunk, "you Atheists have faith too etc. etc." Lol!, right?, am I right or am I right?
Good definition of Atheism:
Someone who doesn't believe in Gods
This means, someone who doesn't accept ideas, beliefs, proposals about Gods existing is an Atheist
Someone who doesn't build their life or don't validate important stuff with beliefs about Gods.
THEN, an Atheist can optionally believe there is no God, but this is optional, as you can logically see, this is not what ends up making someone an Atheist.
Just as when I reject the proposal of a Car being Red, not because I believe is not Red but because I don't see enough valid reason to accept is Red, and OPTIONALLY I can believe is not Red, but again, this doesn't mean I rejected it because I believe is not red but because I don't see enough reason to accept it as true.(this part is not a belief).
So yeah, I'm an Agnostic Atheist, but because Agnostic is redundant, is obvious we don't know, then the label Atheist is enough.
@Ellisar Atranimus _"Oh also Voldemort, Super Man, all of that could actually exist even by their own canon. Just saying. I personally don't believe them but I will never say there is no possible way wizards who had the means to completely fool our perceptions don't exist or that alternate realities where in a super powered alien fights people in spandex don't exist. "_
You're applying criteria that is not useful to a SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.
Is not about being 100% sure to be false in order to put something in the same group as Fantasy, "THINGS" that someone has described that are not coherent to what we know so far about how Reality works and doesn't show any evidence for it is logically INDISTINGUISHABLE from Fantasy, is that simple, check how I'm not saying "...is false", because is not logically required nor useful to be false for one to discard it as made up stuff.
Another thing, by your own criteria, you will not be able to accept evidence either, because you can't know if you're being delusional, you can't know if you're being delusional while verifying that you're not being delusional, etc. etc.
So that level of criteria is not useful for real life results towards Reality.
When I believe that whatever God doesn't exist is not that I'm sure that it doesn't exist, is just a level of certainty, it is not about 100% or 0%. I do know that some people(like you) need us(Atheists) to be believers too like religious people so we can also be "wrong" about our posture when I already explain that what I believe about whatever someone wrote about is not important for my life, but for religious people that INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MYTHOLOGY stuff means basically EVERYTHING to their existence, without it they'll feel invalid creatures, I don't, you don't' either I think.
@Ellisar Atranimus _"Mainly by the fact that you think others need you"_
What?, no, you didn't understand, ENglish is not my main language
You need(want) Atheists to have certain posture for you to have something to debunk, that's what I meant, so you define your own brand of Atheism to label us and such.
I think you do realize that you need/want us to be "religious fanatic" for you to be right.
@Ellisar Atranimus _"So I say again; prove your position."_
I explained my position at the beginning, but you conveniently seem to ignore it and stick to only one part.
So, tell me what do I need to prove in order to my posture to be valid.
Your intros are the best
Dave. Been watching a lot of your stuff lately. Love your perspective. Been an atheist since 85 when I read Cosmos as a treeplanter in northern B.C. I'm Canadian. I guess I will be a New atheist if I clarify that on my facebook profile. I am really looking into the Libertarian thing, because so many free and deep thinkers like yourself seem to be leaning that way. My concern is this . I don't have much faith that corporate America can value anything other than the bottom line. Also, so many US states (I'm Canadian) would find ways to advance the corporate agenda if given more freedom. Given the growing wealth divide, I'm not seeing it. It doesn't seem like democracy.
The idea that there is something good and moral about being convinced of something that REQURES faith and belief vs knowing, is absurd...and common.
Instead of using old Greek words which are easily misunderstood by the general public, what is so terrible about calling ourselves non-believers. When someone asks me, that's the term I use. It's clear, concise and there's no ambiguity about what it means.
Dave, your chanel is amazing!
Religion was invented the day the 1st Con-Man met the 1st Fool. - Mark Twain
Great show!!!
Dave you should invite Adam Kokesh on. He's an anarchist and might have an interesting perspective that hasn't been on your show before. Plus I think he's based out of Arizona now so he could probably get to LA for a studio visit.