@@rickagfoster Even she denied the existence of God later in life. “If there be no God -- there can be no soul -- if there is no Soul then Jesus -- You also are not true.”
You're right--believing that American exceptionalism is the most toxic secular religion is not only ignorant, but unjust to humanity. Communism has resulted in millions more deaths than all the deaths involved in wars motivated in part for religious reasons. Anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant beyond belief.
I love Chomsky’s description in the very final seconds here of American exceptionalism as a secular religion. That’s absolutely correct, and I don’t think I’ve heard it put that way before, so I wish this continued at least until the topic changed. But I certainly thank you for sharing this. I’m sure he expands on this theme in some of his books, and that Google will help me locate those writings. But if anyone knows of anything offhand, I’d love to hear about it. Thanks.
@@chomskysphilosophy I am ill-educated and not particularly intelligent but sometimes I’m creative. I believe I have something to share obviously I don’t believe its scientific pretentions toward the beginning of creation and the flood, but hear me out. If energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system as the first law of thermodynamics proposes, and it is in infinite regress in this universe, then the fact that it goes in tandem with cause and effect (not the principle of causality, just the colloquial notion that things that happen require things to have happened before to cause them) and in infinite regress would have produced a mind capable of controlling the entire universe since we know it can create minds like ours, and yet we cannot observe one. This means that cause and effect and energy are not in infinite regress, or that the two eternal natures of cause and effect and energy must have been joined, by choice, since eternal natures require a will to change. To sum up: A G-d will exist in all three instances, and this gets you to a minimum of Deism. If you ever want more just ask. My arguments are in general based on intuition, as that is the real tell of where your heart points in religion.
Chessie Pique This dude made me think. I am an atheist. At times I can be a bit rude about it. Sometimes we MUST live and let live. Unless of course some nutcase cult tries to draw my 17 year old in. Then its time to get rough.
@@11-3ENGLISHCLASS The real fool is the one who believes and considers as sacred the supernatural stories of a book just because the book claims itself to be the holy truth.
Voltaire was a critic of slavery. But, the person who ended slavery in the West was a CHRISTIAN named William Wilberforce. Christians act for good while fools are quoted.
@@11-3ENGLISHCLASSThank you for proving two things: 1. Christians use circular logic to feel better about their cult. 2. There is a reason you call yourselves “believers” and not “thinkers”…
Right! Dr. Krauss was probably thinking that if Chomsky is an atheist, then Chomsky would back his argument against religion. No disrespect to Krauss and his fans in the audience, but Chomsky has true intellect that doesn't just follow many of the typical arguments made by other atheist thinkers.
Jerome Danner Chomsky is intelligent, but so is Krauss. Chomsky did say that if religion is attempting to suppress truth, or deny truth, then we should correct that. He was also saying that if a person who had a hard life or has lost hope uses religion to cope, then we should not go out of our way to lecture this person on why they shouldn't believe in religion. We should allow them to use it as a coping mechanism. I both agree and disagree with Chomsky's notion of "secular religion." You don't necessarily have to be religious to commit atrocities on a large scale, but what Chomsky fails to acknowledge is that much of America is still religious and the biases against other cultures and religions partly stem from that.
@@Azurian123 That isn't the point Chomsky was making. He was saying, something which he has in other lectures, is that religion, given it's long and vast history, plays itself out on people in a myriad of ways. I have to say that Krauss, like many in the new atheist movement, pick the low hanging fruit in caricaturing religion. If you see actually how it shapes people's actions, it is far far complicated. There is a lot of bad and lot of good and everything in between. Krauss has built his reputation and brand for going after religion, not for his contributions to physics. Chomsky on the other hand is a true intellectual, and has supremely more nuanced takes on most matters. To blame all the world's ills on religion is lazy at best.
When the most powerful person in the world starts quoting the Bible and talking about his messianic mission, it’s time to put that person into an asylum and elect someone else.
God told my sister to flee her home in the middle of the night with her 2 dogs at 130 mph. She was put in a hospital and received meds. President Bible Belt hears God and we give him the nuclear codes. Can someone make it make sense to me?
@@mickeyhadley4281 lol Nuclear codes? Do Not Exist ! hahaha Presidents are mere Carnival Barkers... Voting is for the People who are Registered. Registered Sheep. Blinded dumb downed indoctrinated institutionalized registered goyim gullibles. Make sense? Truth cannot be taught.
And Plato was religious himself you fucking idiot 😂 both you and Chomsky are retarded he promotes socialism after seeing for DECADES that it doesn’t work and you gobble up everything he says
Speaking of behaviours, Chomsky had integrity to point out to the "host" that atheists need to be reminded that there is a distinction between criticizing religion and there is being anti-religion.
@@AlexanderShamov Right/Wrong? My observation was not a moral one. It was just that, an observation. Again, Chomksy held the "host" accountable, who made a broad sweeping point in the attempt to gain favor with Chomsky. But Chomsky to his credit had the integrity to push back.
No one is opposed to moral values, no one should be taught that some guy will judge and eternally torture you if you don't follow his rules from now until you die.
Why does everyone seem to think that he'll is about torture Just for the record this is misquoted .The main difference between heaven and hell is that those in heaven spend eternity in god's presence.those in hell are separated from god .and the Bible says they will be TORMENTED.What does this mean well imagine dwelling on the regrets of the past and being consumed with worry .That is the nearest analogy I can give !!!
@@davidmccarroll8274 Maybe because the very definition of torment is "sever physical or mental suffering" ? Maybe because absolutely every single popular depiction of hell down to the beautiful work of Dante describes Hell as a place where you will suffer for eternity ? Maybe because it's never presented as a place of introspection but rather as a placer of actual torture and it's only your personal interpretation of it that says otherwise ? And your personal opinion is nonsensical since most people wh'od go to hell by biblical standards would look back at their life with joy and pride.
@@khorneflakes2175 If you can find the verse in the Bible that says torture please let me know.meanwhile I will relate to what is said not what atheists think is said.
@@davidmccarroll8274 Relate to the definition of the word instead of your own interpretation, by the way, a 5 sec google search resulted in this : Hell is a place where our bodies and souls will be destroyed (Matthew 10:28) so shove your attitude up there.
You arw absolutely right in saying this. Not what the bible and especially the New testament teach anyway. The doctrine of eternal torment sprang out of the augustinian understanding of the texts , which was distorted by mistranslations of the bible and some cover pagan influences . Eternal punishment is strictly unbiblical , morally reprehensible and logically absurd and irreconcilable with the concept of an infinitely benevolent god . That is simply why its trash . It is a tradition of the latin speaking roman catholic church that was "refined" by even more GARBAGE doctrines like Calvinism. A tradition inhereted by the protestants . I urge you to look into the history of the early church and the eastern orthodox teachings on salvation . They were very VERY clearly universalists. They believed in the eventual restoration of EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE . Gods love does not fail brother . I send you my blessings and prompt you to discover what god really is by studying the doctrine of universal salvation as taught by the apostles jesus himself and early church fathers . It drew me closer to him than ever . If you are to do so avoid reading commercial versions of the bible (kjv ect). Find a more reliable and accurate translation like Rotherham's literal worked on by erudite scholars .
The problem I see with religion is exactly what chomsky differentiates between, the moral values can be great, it's the supernatural bullcrap that's needs to be dispelled
Whenever someone talks about an issue, Chomsky at least says: "Ok maybe, but let's not forget: f*ck the US and the West!". It is pure Whataboutism. The problems that are caused by religion in all societies of the world have nothing to do with "american exceptionialism". This video is an intellectual certificate of poverty.
Chomsky notes that American exceptionalism is a secular religion. Here I must point out a truism he does not address. While it may not be explicitly religious, the right-wing Christian segments of the population hold an ideology that closely intertwines Christian supremacy and American supremacy over the whole of the Earth. Thus, American exceptionalism is largely associated with religious beliefs by a significant population.
+Johny, Jesus didn't even condemn slavery or any of the other atrocities of the Old Testament. I guess he felt moralizing about sex was more important.
Yes, it is a heretical teaching called Dominionism, now guilded with the euphanism "The Seven Mountain Mandate." What that says in essence is that so called Christian self appointed Leaders claim a mandate from God to control governments, economics, education, entertainment, media, etc. It is fascism, pure and simple. Democracy is the enemy of ambitions of world domination. This is completely contrary to the teachings of Christ. Christ invites us in to have a real relationship with the creator of the universe, to experience His love, mercy, compassion, acceptance. Religion, on the other hand, limits access to God by insisting on strict legalistic rules, and rituals to be acceptable to a Holy God. That's why the Religious hierarchy in His day were so threatened by Him. To reject God because some misinterpret and misrepresent Him is to cut off one's nose to spite one's face. Get to know this wonderful Creator. He is love, personified by His Son, Immanuel, meaning God with us. Noam Chompski is an intelligent man,, but just think, to have all that acclaim but miss the boat entirely is sad. In the end, all of the philosophies, while interesting and thought provoking, do not produce anything that will last. Truth is not subjective, it is personified in Jesus. No man comes to the truth but by Him.
@@AlexanderShamov Except, Jesus didn't moralize about sex. Paul is much more often misinterpreted and hijacked to support moralizing about sex than is Jesus.
What is Christian supremacy? Don’t attribute that to God, but man, if that’s even a thing. Even Jesus attacked the phony religious. Better to call it catholic supremacy. It has nothing to do with Christ.
@@danielwilliams1921 Leave him alone already. He is probably 200 years old. I think old people are wise rather than smart according to your distinction, but we can agree to disagree if you like.
Yes, I agree. I've always found that trying to explain to the atheist that matter + chance + time cannot produce life is an obstacle because their religion just gets in the way of science and rational thinking.
Most atheists are so prejudiced against religion that they ignore its intellectual tradition. There are good arguments for God’s existence. Anyone who studies them seriously-including serious atheist philosophers-admits that
"American Exceptionalism is a secular religion." I agree, and when it's mixed with the fact that everyone's God thinks a lot like they do, it becomes very dangerous all around us.
Whenever someone talks about an issue, Chomsky at least says: "Ok maybe, but let's not forget: f*ck the US and the West!". It is pure Whataboutism. The problems that are caused by religion in all societies of the world have nothing to do with "american exceptionialism". This video is an intellectual certificate of poverty.
In ancient times, there was no unemployment insurance. No retirement fund. If you were an old, tired man, you had to come up with a hustle, and fast! Everybody knew about the "Sacred Knowledge" that was circulating all over the Empire. Old men called "Wandering Holy Men" were in every corner of the Mediterranean. Every town had a resident Wandering Preacher, who carried scrolls under his arms. Such men were in great demand. The wealthy loved to invite them into their parlours, so they could watch and hear their wild stories, about demons, and angels, and mighty heroes who fought for "Salvation". They often sang, and danced around, while reading their poems. A crippled old man could make a decent living at it! By the time the 4th Century rolled around, hundreds of "Gospels" had accumulated within the Empire. It was time somebody collected them, and tried to make coherent sense of them. Constantine ordered a "cannon" be put together. About 80% of these fables were discarded, or destroyed. The "Holy Trinity" had to be quickly invented, so as to prevent "Christians" from being accused of Blasphemy. In no time, we had a new religion centered around a "Man-God" who violated the First Commandment. But the Jews immediately condemned it all. They had strict control over their "Holy Scrolls". And so you see: Old men got room and board, and we got a "Holy Christ Savior"!
@@johnmolina3284 Because he refused to get on board with the current ideological dogma. The thing is, Chomsky is much more nuanced and rigorous than the average leftist. To call him a genius is an understatement given his intellectual achievements. I question whether he was ever a leftist in the conventional sense of the word.
Whenever someone talks about an issue, Chomsky at least says: "Ok maybe, but let's not forget: f*ck the US and the West!". It is pure Whataboutism. The problems that are caused by religion in all societies of the world have nothing to do with "american exceptionialism". This video is a certificate of intellectual poverty.
@@Mushin367 he opposes the post-modernists and French theory (as does Paglia) so I very much respect him for that. But I notice much dismissiveness among the woke SJW's today. LIsten to this, I was arguing with a wokester over "trans theory" and finally I posted a video link to a BBC interview with Germaine Greer. The wokester mocked the video and said he never even heard of Greer before! I mean, even if you've never read her or accept her writings, most informed people know of her!
@@johnmolina3284 Wokesim is a very curious superset ideology. I don't think many intellectuals give it as much attention and study as it deserves (and Chomsky certainly doesn't). Even Trumpists, for all their faults, are somewhat more nuanced thinkers than wokeists. I think wokeists believe that they stand at the very pinnacle of human wisdom, beyond which nothing exists. They've found the Holy Grail or the Philosopher's Stone. Jordan Peterson led a team of researchers who found out that political correctness has a negative correlation with verbal intelligence. It's probably the case that religious fundamentalism in general has a negative correlation with verbal intelligence. To these kinds of individuals, rigorous philosophic reasoning is simply not fun, so when faced with a simple algorithm that purports to be the Holy Grail or the Philosopher's Stone, the incentive to latch onto it very, very high. They get to be wise, moral, and not experience the negative emotions associated with a lack of competence in critical thinking/philosophic reasoning.
Indeed there are multiple wars humans force on each other and are told to endure. American exceptionalism is easily the most corrosive and most modern but is hardly alone. Humans if they are to survive must abandon religion, dependency and the outdated concepts of race and nationality. No small task. American-led western dominance and presumption of superiority is toxic and demonstratably false - particularly in the realm of medicine and social control. Humanity has always been the oppressor vs the oppressed and America is just the latest form.
You mean like all the Muslim-hating new atheists I’ve ever seen ? People like Sam Harris and Bill Maher and Hitchens and Dawkins who talk like they want to bomb them back to the Stone Age ? THOSE “ enlightened intellectuals ?”
2:49 so chomsky's excuse is that religion is exempt from being called out if it piggybacks on something that works on its own I can donate things to the poor and help the needy without invoking religious bullshit, and I would still be donating things to the poor and helping the needy
Chomsky says American exceptionalism is a "secular religion" but it actually has it's roots in the Bible and early colonial days. For example, John Winthrop's call to build a shining city on a hill in 1630 is a progenitor of American exceptionalism and has been cited many times by U.S.presidents, not least of whom is George W. Bush, to assert America's special role in the world.
Yeah. It doesn’t exclusively hinge on a religion, but even today there are plenty of people who say that America is a christian nation blessed and protected by god, and that it’s “greatness” is because it was founded on the bible
how about someone born and raised in the states who was indoctrinated since childhood with the christian religion, whose beliefs give them comfort and courage in facing the world? would he give _them_ a lecture on epistemology? at what point do you expose religious people to free-thought and skepticism?
@@lesliewilliam3777 Krauss criticized Arizona State’s handling of the allegations, saying that the university didn’t examine *“all evidence, including the evidence I had prepared.”* “The nature of the review process I experienced included incomplete access to evidence and accusations during the investigation, no opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or be represented by a lawyer during the investigation interviews, and no option to directly appeal the subsequent determinations made by the investigators.”
@@BeachsideHank It's good that he has a supporter. You do know there were signs of smoke down in Australia? You do know he stepped in to defend his pal Epstein, even when Jeff E. had confessed his crime and went to jail? Look, maybe you're right and all this is a bunch of lies from desperate women who didn't have THEIR advances reciprocated. And maybe, just maybe, this is all a prophetic working out of his last book's title, 'Something from Nothing'. Who knows, but, as I said, it's great that he has finally one supporter amidst all those liars.
@@lesliewilliam3777 You missed some other "tainted" luminaries in your shotgun blast: Stephen Hawking, Lisa Randall, Jim Peebles from Princeton University, Alan Guth from MIT, Kip Thorne from Caltech, and Nobel laureates Gerardus‘t Hooft, David Gross, Frank Wilczek. All were guests and or personal friends of Epstein at one time or another. Epstein's alleged defense by Krauss was couched in the words of a scientist: he personally observed no wrongdoing, and being of an evidence- based mind, he made no judgement call on what he directly beheld. Epstein's subsequent confession/ conviction taints only himself, no one else. But for the "sleazy", mishandled "investigation" of Krauss by A.S., this would simply be much ado about nothing.
Most believers don't really believe what they claim to believe. For example, if Christians really believed in the day of judgment they would behave differently.
Religion without philosophy is sentiment, philosophy without religion is mental speculation. Religion means to know God and to love Him but who knows God, what to speak of loving Him. - Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
The title of this video says that Noam Chomsky exposes religion, but I never heard even one argument that does so. Besides, all religion is false. However, a relationship with Yeshua has nothing to do with war - only love. Remember, when Yeshua was confronted by Pilate he exclaimed, “My kingdom is not of this world; if it were my servants would be fighting.”
To be honest , chomsky made a great point . Is that religion if done right does offer things modern societies can't offer . Compassion. Even if we democratize the economy and everyone is living in an a ideal socialist society. Poeple still need compassion and prayers even if they are un answered
It will never happen. Religion is based on values and beliefs, and as there are so many beliefs in the world, there will never be "compassion" as compassion is subjective.
To religious people where god is the ultimate authority: There is one religious person who says that murder is wrong because god told him and another religious person of the same religion comes and says that murder is good because god told him. In your presuppositions worlds, who is right?
The subtitle of his book "God is not great!" Which is a "great" book. Read it and you will understand what complete and dangerous nonsense organized religion is.
Christopher Hitchens certainly couldn't place the stars , planets and the Earth where they are , God did it . God is great , Hitchens is not .@@erikswanson5753
It's even more sinister and disturbing than that, because many of them, like my mother, actually believe the crap they come out with so don't even recognize their BS as lies.
Organized religions are political movements pure and simple about power and control. Tell you you're a sinner and with gaudy robes convince you they represent God, that's power.
He got the beginning of the world date wrong as supposedly believed by a large chunk of the USA population. It is not 2000 years ago. That would be sixteen years after the resurrection. I understand the figure is something like 4500 years ago.
I was in the audience for this discussion. The playbill included brief bios of both Chomsky and Krauss. The one for Chomsky just said that he was on the faculty at MIT and had written such and such books. Krauss's explicitly called him a "public intellectual." I thought "Well, that's a little arrogant." At some point in the night Krauss mentioned that MIT (his alma mater) has the "wisdom" not to require their doctoral students to do coursework. As a doctoral student myself, i think that it is incredibly foolish, and may explain Krauss's overbearing arrogance.
That last point about secularism as religion is a huge point. Not just exceptionalism but practically every other belief based on rejection of explicitly religious moral values contains a religious element that gets hidden by contrasting it with a corresponding religious value. A prime example would be current sexual values that presume pride in sexuality is virtuous in opposition to traditional religious morality that views sexuality as an impediment to higher spiritual attainment. Generally, celebration and pride in material/sexual indulgence is a feature of pre-Christian Roman culture, yet few people deem themselves 'new Romans' in the way that WWII era nazis branded themselves as a 'third reich' with regard to previous iterations of the Roman empire.
Religion and spirituality are two seperate things . Religions whole purpose was and is to control but with that said there is power in prayer or manifesting which ever you want to believe in..
Near the end... It seems some how Krauss forgot about Maoism, Stalinism... And even Italy's dictatorship period were based on secular ideologies and there are others. Some of them were bent upon persecuting specific religious groups
I'd argue that proseltyzing to the sick and vulnerable is a horrible thing to do. Believers wouldn't like it if atheists went to help the sick but while doing that explained why their religious beliefs are likely wrong and why they shouldn't believe it.
'Religion without science is ignorance, science without religion is lame.' - Einstein. A religious person can be scientific and not fool himself in the belief of unscientific reality. The principles in the harmony between science and religion is what drives me as a human being. I am religious but I am aware of the physical reality and its truth so I wouldn't claim to say the earth was created 5000 years ago. Nonetheless, Religion has been renewed, and it is now more than ever committed to the reality that humanity is one, religion is one, and God is one. This is all set out in the Bahai Faith which seeks to rectify the state of religion, and to grab it from the hands of clergy (which is has now been abolished) among other things.
You surely figured it out by now, but that is Lawrence Krause interviewing Chomski. Krause is a well known theoretical physicist, but is unafraid to delve into other areas for discussion.
It's unfortunate how the word 'religion' has been dragged through the mud. If we say, "American Exceptionalism is a secular religion", this is true in the sense that it is a dogma, but the proper meaning of "religion" does not simply reduce to "dogma". Religion is not reducible to "philosophy", "ritual", or "superstition", either. I feel it's about resolving existential angst and suffering in a direct (not just theoretical) way. The ancient Greek philosophers were explicitly striving for this, but now we wrongly regard them only as intellectuals interested in ideas.
+FrogmortonHotchkiss Hrm, I didn't like that equation either but for very different reasons. I seems your defining that which you cannot define as divine. Which really is sort of a negative, and we can indeed, and probably should, confine religion to philosophy or psychology because it is 100% subjective and in the mind. What you describe as resolving existential angst in meaningful way is also achieved by considering reason as your only absolute. Also religions manifestation are primarily dogmatic and it makes perfect sense to reduce them to such things. Perhaps spirituality, and the experience of it, should not be religiously pursued. There was a comment I just read where a guy said he believed in a god but didn't subscribe to any religion, that is the kind of faith I can respect and is something you can almost equate to atheism. I like how it entertains all possibilities yet asserts and merits none, you can also do that as atheist.
WRONG WRONG WRONG ALL OF THIS WRONG Religion comes from religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via the notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods” and then in the 14c english “"recognition of and allegiance in manner of life (perceived as justly due) to a higher, unseen power or powers" So it totally appropriate to equate it in the context used. Chomsky is a linguist so I dont think he would have his semantics or etymology broken in a tie in this situation.
@@sonnyobrien I don't care about the etymology of the word. My comment is from seven years ago, but looking at it now: "I feel it's about resolving existential angst and suffering in a direct (not just theoretical) way." That's what it is TO ME and where I think the real value of it is. The word has specific origins, but the actual substance of religion is reshaped with each generation and has the potential to be more than we currently make it.
well you should fucking care because it shows that our language is NOT ARBITRARY and that when people say stuff like “oh the word ‘hat’? Or ‘war’? No I dont care about the etymology of that word: war means this to me: … you see, meaning is subjective, we live in a relativistic world’. Which is something any linguist would be able to explain to you is nonsense Im pointing out to you that your language of “the proper meaning of religion” is your own definition of it masquerading as ‘proper’. Etymology is important as is genealogy and philology, especially if you ever want to make an argument. You need to a read a dictionary so there is common understanding about WHAT we are talking about. Then we don’t have to have stupid comments like “oh thats not what that word means to me: it means this. See, its all just semantics and its subjective, so I cant agree with your statement because that’s not what religion means” Time or generations do not change the original meaning of words. Stupidity does- by those who block their ears and say “NAH NAH IM NOT LISTENING” which is also equivalent to those who do not want to learn or educate themselves. The word you are looking for is SOMETHING ELSE so go find a dictionary and discover what it is instead of appropriating the word religion for your own uses and meanings.
Yes we may all be "in this together" what have you, however religion does not have anything to do with this if only because historically as now religion has been and is a source of division for humanity...take the crusades or ISIS for example... Secondly I don't know how to tell you this other then to say that perhaps some of the worst cruelty known to man kind has been done in the name of religion/god etc. the intentional infection of the "native" Americans via the giving of small pox laced blankets to the "heathens" to "cleans gods land" or (I don't want to use ISIS again because it's too easy and I want to be more creative then that so) the Zionists (I think I spelt that properly) (business men and alike) making a deal with various nations (notably England) to have the united nations annex (or if you prefer simply steal) Palestinian territory to create the nation of Israel... And FYI apparently (from various sources) the Dali Lama (I think that's how you spell it) is the head of a tyrannical ragtime comparable to China or North Korea that many in Tibet do not wish returned to them...
No we don’t,but we need someone or something to point it out for us. I’m religious and I don’t think we need religion to be moral,I actually cringe when somebody says that especially when they’re Muslims because it was our prophet who said that *we need to be moral in order to become religious*
CommanderLVJ1 the logic the if something is done in the name of God is because of God is very absurd in my opinion. The Iraq invasion and the Iraq war were in the name of freedom,liberation and democracy!!
2000+ years ago a portion of people wanted to get rid of "the lie" so they murdered THE TRUTH. To this day there are still people who have the desire to do that. The battle is real. There are two stations broadcasting. *Good* Evil *Light* Darkness *God* Satan *Truth* Lies *Love* Hate. The Infinite Creator has created us with a free will. HIS DESIRE is for you to..... USE your free gift of free will for Good, Light, God, Truth and.......... *Love*
And the biggest lies comes from the church teaching, that Jesus declared that by his blood he redeemed human race ruined by humanity sins (superimposed guilt). These false interpreters would have us believe that this is Christ teaching whereas in reality there is not a word about any of it in his teaching incl. confessions, communions, sacraments, sacrifices and the rest of their lies. Isn't strange that religious person would not enquire whether those teachings are consistent with their Prophet? Could it be because the Bible says so?
Religion is not the source of morality according to every testament. No god ever said "I'm going to teach you something new, what it means to be good." They just said they are all good or just the goodest. Do you know what I mean?
I think some Atheist's need to look at the sky and let there imagination conjure up some existential threats. The possibilities of Human spirit outside the rails of indoctrination need to be explored. A bit of humility and recognition of our huge ignorance about life on a planet in a universe where we are currently alone. Militant atheism is fast going out of fashion.
+Reid Lutman Yes, because we must have come from something! And that something... Well... Well... Well, it came from nothing but only because that something is the exception to all other somethings! What wonderful mind gymnastics theist are able to play to maintain their delusions.
+sorrybadbeat I am atheist so hopefully you'll take me more seriously, but that's just a total strawman. That something does not come from nothing, it is eternal and always existed as a necessary being. And it's also not an arbitrary differentiation (ie special pleading claims) because the cosmological argument takes one type of thing, a premise about that thing, and validly deduces the existence of a different type of thing (which, being different, the rule does not apply to). Theists are wrong but it's at least worthwhile to attack the nonstrawman form of their arguments.
... It's true enough, as Chomsky points out, that the secular concept of " America Exceptionalism " is not as overtly based upon Christianity as, say, " Manifest Destiny " was, but it is ALSO fair to say that - secular or not - it's strength as an idea is BOLSTERED by the same emotional appeal. Nationalism, - whether British, German, French OR American, is one of the root causes of Empire and Domination and it has been HISTORICALLY justified by the cynical use of Faith-Based " Evidence " of " Superiority " in the eyes of a God. In fact, as any student of History knows, the conviction predates the European and American Empires by millennia ... ☮
People can do good in spite of religion. Good point Mr. Chomsky.
Who decides what's good?
@@dareletSociety. "Good people do good things. Evil people do evil things. For good people to do evil things, it takes religion." Richard Dawkins.
Like Mother Teresa? Right. As long as he doesn't use her as an example. She "cared" for the sick, denying medical care.
@@rickagfoster Even she denied the existence of God later in life. “If there be no God -- there can be no soul -- if there is no Soul then Jesus -- You also are not true.”
I watched this clip in spite of Krauss. Keep up the good work, Dr. Krauss.
Trading ignorance for belief has been a great injustice to humanity.
You're right--believing that American exceptionalism is the most toxic secular religion is not only ignorant, but unjust to humanity. Communism has resulted in millions more deaths than all the deaths involved in wars motivated in part for religious reasons. Anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant beyond belief.
Good thing the trends show that atheism continues to rise. As of 2023, that is. Let's keep that trend going.
@@mism847 we should have faith. faith in development, technology, medicine. not imaginary things written in outdated book.
@@ImotekhtheStormlord-tx2it...The immaterial world is not " imaginary ". It takes a lot of stupidity to denigrate Spirituality. And immaturity.
@@mism847Atheism is an ignorant and arrogant attitude. And atheists are simple-minded materialists.
"I'm not gonna read her a lesson on epistemology" brilliant and hilarious!
Whoever said that was a rule for being an atheist?
I love Chomsky. But I think he was being defensive here; not his best moment.
I think he likes littlexguels
I think he likes little girls
I think he likes little girls 2
I love Chomsky’s description in the very final seconds here of American exceptionalism as a secular religion. That’s absolutely correct, and I don’t think I’ve heard it put that way before, so I wish this continued at least until the topic changed.
But I certainly thank you for sharing this.
I’m sure he expands on this theme in some of his books, and that Google will help me locate those writings. But if anyone knows of anything offhand, I’d love to hear about it.
Thanks.
th-cam.com/video/ql7wgqmtSv4/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/7bsYOQltflA/w-d-xo.html
Stuart is in love everyone 💕 congratulations 👏 Stuart for coming out being in love with another man
@@chomskysphilosophy I am ill-educated and not particularly intelligent but sometimes I’m creative. I believe I have something to share obviously I don’t believe its scientific pretentions toward the beginning of creation and the flood, but hear me out.
If energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system as the first law of thermodynamics proposes, and it is in infinite regress in this universe, then the fact that it goes in tandem with cause and effect (not the principle of causality, just the colloquial notion that things that happen require things to have happened before to cause them) and in infinite regress would have produced a mind capable of controlling the entire universe since we know it can create minds like ours, and yet we cannot observe one. This means that cause and effect and energy are not in infinite regress, or that the two eternal natures of cause and effect and energy must have been joined, by choice, since eternal natures require a will to change.
To sum up: A G-d will exist in all three instances, and this gets you to a minimum of Deism.
If you ever want more just ask. My arguments are in general based on intuition, as that is the real tell of where your heart points in religion.
Another secular religion is woke progressivism, but that's too close to Satanism to call secular.
@@melchiel4413what is this 👉 "G-d"
I would love to have Chomsky and Sanders as neighbors.
+QueenFanPiper62 I'd move into that neighborhood.
Chessie Pique This dude made me think. I am an atheist. At times I can be a bit rude about it. Sometimes we MUST live and let live. Unless of course some nutcase cult tries to draw my 17 year old in. Then its time to get rough.
dynamic of freedom is such that ur powerless.
Could you elaborate?
They would share your home if they had their way :P
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." *Voltaire*
Voltaire was anti-clerical though not an atheist.
“The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1)
@@11-3ENGLISHCLASS
The real fool is the one who believes and considers as sacred the supernatural stories of a book just because the book claims itself to be the holy truth.
Voltaire was a critic of slavery. But, the person who ended slavery in the West was a CHRISTIAN named William Wilberforce. Christians act for good while fools are quoted.
@@11-3ENGLISHCLASSThank you for proving two things: 1. Christians use circular logic to feel better about their cult. 2. There is a reason you call yourselves “believers” and not “thinkers”…
What a practical and sensible answer! Clearly the interviewer was flabbergasted as he didn't seem to see that one coming.
Right! Dr. Krauss was probably thinking that if Chomsky is an atheist, then Chomsky would back his argument against religion. No disrespect to Krauss and his fans in the audience, but Chomsky has true intellect that doesn't just follow many of the typical arguments made by other atheist thinkers.
Jerome Danner Chomsky is intelligent, but so is Krauss. Chomsky did say that if religion is attempting to suppress truth, or deny truth, then we should correct that. He was also saying that if a person who had a hard life or has lost hope uses religion to cope, then we should not go out of our way to lecture this person on why they shouldn't believe in religion. We should allow them to use it as a coping mechanism. I both agree and disagree with Chomsky's notion of "secular religion." You don't necessarily have to be religious to commit atrocities on a large scale, but what Chomsky fails to acknowledge is that much of America is still religious and the biases against other cultures and religions partly stem from that.
@@Azurian123 That isn't the point Chomsky was making. He was saying, something which he has in other lectures, is that religion, given it's long and vast history, plays itself out on people in a myriad of ways. I have to say that Krauss, like many in the new atheist movement, pick the low hanging fruit in caricaturing religion. If you see actually how it shapes people's actions, it is far far complicated. There is a lot of bad and lot of good and everything in between. Krauss has built his reputation and brand for going after religion, not for his contributions to physics. Chomsky on the other hand is a true intellectual, and has supremely more nuanced takes on most matters. To blame all the world's ills on religion is lazy at best.
Dr. Krauss and Chomsky are friends! Dr. Krauss took a class under Chomsky when he was an undergraduate student at MIT.
@@TejasM14 'To blame all the world's ills on religion is lazy at best.'
You weren't introduced to irony as a child, were you.
Thank you Mr. Chomsky!
When the most powerful person in the world starts quoting the Bible and talking about his messianic mission, it’s time to put that person into an asylum and elect someone else.
God told my sister to flee her home in the middle of the night with her 2 dogs at 130 mph. She was put in a hospital and received meds. President Bible Belt hears God and we give him the nuclear codes. Can someone make it make sense to me?
Could it be that people decide to take the path of least resistance when making their decisions? Kinda lazy.
@@mickeyhadley4281 lol Nuclear codes? Do Not Exist ! hahaha Presidents are mere Carnival Barkers... Voting is for the People who are Registered. Registered Sheep. Blinded dumb downed indoctrinated institutionalized registered goyim gullibles. Make sense? Truth cannot be taught.
You are talking about Vladimir Putin and his crusade against the 5%,?
Too late.
False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil. - Plato
And Plato was religious himself you fucking idiot 😂 both you and Chomsky are retarded he promotes socialism after seeing for DECADES that it doesn’t work and you gobble up everything he says
Wasn't Plato quoting Socrates?
Speaking of behaviours, Chomsky had integrity to point out to the "host" that atheists need to be reminded that there is a distinction between criticizing religion and there is being anti-religion.
There is definitely a difference, but so what? There's nothing wrong with opposing religion.
@@AlexanderShamov Right/Wrong? My observation was not a moral one. It was just that, an observation. Again, Chomksy held the "host" accountable, who made a broad sweeping point in the attempt to gain favor with Chomsky. But Chomsky to his credit had the integrity to push back.
No one is opposed to moral values, no one should be taught that some guy will judge and eternally torture you if you don't follow his rules from now until you die.
Why does everyone seem to think that he'll is about torture Just for the record this is misquoted .The main difference between heaven and hell is that those in heaven spend eternity in god's presence.those in hell are separated from god .and the Bible says they will be TORMENTED.What does this mean well imagine dwelling on the regrets of the past and being consumed with worry .That is the nearest analogy I can give !!!
@@davidmccarroll8274 Maybe because the very definition of torment is "sever physical or mental suffering" ? Maybe because absolutely every single popular depiction of hell down to the beautiful work of Dante describes Hell as a place where you will suffer for eternity ? Maybe because it's never presented as a place of introspection but rather as a placer of actual torture and it's only your personal interpretation of it that says otherwise ?
And your personal opinion is nonsensical since most people wh'od go to hell by biblical standards would look back at their life with joy and pride.
@@khorneflakes2175 If you can find the verse in the Bible that says torture please let me know.meanwhile I will relate to what is said not what atheists think is said.
@@davidmccarroll8274 Relate to the definition of the word instead of your own interpretation, by the way, a 5 sec google search resulted in this : Hell is a place where our bodies and souls will be destroyed (Matthew 10:28) so shove your attitude up there.
You arw absolutely right in saying this. Not what the bible and especially the New testament teach anyway. The doctrine of eternal torment sprang out of the augustinian understanding of the texts , which was distorted by mistranslations of the bible and some cover pagan influences . Eternal punishment is strictly unbiblical , morally reprehensible and logically absurd and irreconcilable with the concept of an infinitely benevolent god . That is simply why its trash . It is a tradition of the latin speaking roman catholic church that was "refined" by even more GARBAGE doctrines like Calvinism. A tradition inhereted by the protestants . I urge you to look into the history of the early church and the eastern orthodox teachings on salvation . They were very VERY clearly universalists. They believed in the eventual restoration of EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE . Gods love does not fail brother . I send you my blessings and prompt you to discover what god really is by studying the doctrine of universal salvation as taught by the apostles jesus himself and early church fathers . It drew me closer to him than ever . If you are to do so avoid reading commercial versions of the bible (kjv ect). Find a more reliable and accurate translation like Rotherham's literal worked on by erudite scholars .
The problem I see with religion is exactly what chomsky differentiates between, the moral values can be great, it's the supernatural bullcrap that's needs to be dispelled
Foolish
That's dumb. Moral values without God are just some results of thought intercourse, coherent to its adherents and blathering for others.
There are no metaphysical underpinnings behind what is and isn't considered moral then.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.
And what are you?
@@matthews7805 I'm highly educated and wise. What about you?
atheism is used by capitalists to make one a brainless consumer and by communists to establish a complete own ideology with its motivations.
@@Fanboy1222 What is this nonsense? You are too funny.
Define communism for me, dummy.
Yeeeeesssss!
By far, the best answer to this question I’ve ever encountered. Dr. Chomsky is a true intellectual hero!
Whenever someone talks about an issue, Chomsky at least says: "Ok maybe, but let's not forget: f*ck the US and the West!". It is pure Whataboutism. The problems that are caused by religion in all societies of the world have nothing to do with "american exceptionialism". This video is an intellectual certificate of poverty.
How we need the steady, sober voice of Mr Chomsky.
Love has no religion ❤
Religion exploits it.
@@silence8806
Yes! Religion exploits the weak and the fearful
And religion has no love.
@@huascar66 religion uses the carrot and a stick. Obey or go to hell. If obey you may end up, big maybe. LOL.
TOTAL BS!!!
2:56 on the screen in the background you can see that the guy that writes the subtitles doesn't know the word epistemology lol
Chomsky is a national treasure.
old, irrelevant and overrated? Sure.
He is a global treasure.
+Dryfee he is an inspiration for the young. now what are you?
An international treasure indeed. @@DanWilan
planetary treasure
Chomsky notes that American exceptionalism is a secular religion. Here I must point out a truism he does not address. While it may not be explicitly religious, the right-wing Christian segments of the population hold an ideology that closely intertwines Christian supremacy and American supremacy over the whole of the Earth. Thus, American exceptionalism is largely associated with religious beliefs by a significant population.
+Aaron Ward Very true
+Johny, Jesus didn't even condemn slavery or any of the other atrocities of the Old Testament. I guess he felt moralizing about sex was more important.
Yes, it is a heretical teaching called Dominionism, now guilded with the euphanism "The Seven Mountain Mandate." What that says in essence is that so called Christian self appointed Leaders claim a mandate from God to control governments, economics, education, entertainment, media, etc. It is fascism, pure and simple. Democracy is the enemy of ambitions of world domination. This is completely contrary to the teachings of Christ. Christ invites us in to have a real relationship with the creator of the universe, to experience His love, mercy, compassion, acceptance. Religion, on the other hand, limits access to God by insisting on strict legalistic rules, and rituals to be acceptable to a Holy God. That's why the Religious hierarchy in His day were so threatened by Him. To reject God because some misinterpret and misrepresent Him is to cut off one's nose to spite one's face. Get to know this wonderful Creator. He is love, personified by His Son, Immanuel, meaning God with us. Noam Chompski is an intelligent man,, but just think, to have all that acclaim but miss the boat entirely is sad. In the end, all of the philosophies, while interesting and thought provoking, do not produce anything that will last. Truth is not subjective, it is personified in Jesus. No man comes to the truth but by Him.
@@AlexanderShamov Except, Jesus didn't moralize about sex. Paul is much more often misinterpreted and hijacked to support moralizing about sex than is Jesus.
What is Christian supremacy? Don’t attribute that to God, but man, if that’s even a thing. Even Jesus attacked the phony religious. Better to call it catholic supremacy. It has nothing to do with Christ.
Lies should be exposed except those I've cherry picked as being permissible.
The only thing that surpasses Chomsky's intellect is Chomsky's compassion
One of the wisest people on the planet.
Smart does not mean wise.
@@danielwilliams1921 Leave him alone already. He is probably 200 years old. I think old people are wise rather than smart according to your distinction, but we can agree to disagree if you like.
only wisdom and its maker are wise....
wisdom is a (temporary?) gift....depending on how its used....
Nonsense
Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.
You can't convince religious people with logic. They're logic proof.
Long live to Prof. Chomsky
Yes, I agree. I've always found that trying to explain to the atheist that matter + chance + time cannot produce life is an obstacle because their religion just gets in the way of science and rational thinking.
@@lesliewilliam3777 excellent
Most atheists are so prejudiced against religion that they ignore its intellectual tradition. There are good arguments for God’s existence. Anyone who studies them seriously-including serious atheist philosophers-admits that
To be carnally minded, is death
@@lukeabbott3591 There are way more and better reasons to not be religious. Your just too prejudiced to see them.
Chomsky is the best.
"American Exceptionalism is a secular religion." I agree, and when it's mixed with the fact that everyone's God thinks a lot like they do, it becomes very dangerous all around us.
Whenever someone talks about an issue, Chomsky at least says: "Ok maybe, but let's not forget: f*ck the US and the West!". It is pure Whataboutism. The problems that are caused by religion in all societies of the world have nothing to do with "american exceptionialism". This video is an intellectual certificate of poverty.
Lawrence Krauss speaks to N. Chomsky here, by the way. (Didn't see this info anywhere.)
The most religious in America are those who believe in American exceptionalism more than anyone else!
Borders are likely the largest or one of the largest secular religions in many countries such as the USA, U.K.
The Biggest Secular Religion is MONEY. The top 1 % controls everything ...
In ancient times, there was no unemployment insurance. No retirement fund. If you were an old, tired man, you had to come up with a hustle, and fast! Everybody knew about the "Sacred Knowledge" that was circulating all over the Empire. Old men called "Wandering Holy Men" were in every corner of the Mediterranean. Every town had a resident Wandering Preacher, who carried scrolls under his arms. Such men were in great demand. The wealthy loved to invite them into their parlours, so they could watch and hear their wild stories, about demons, and angels, and mighty heroes who fought for "Salvation". They often sang, and danced around, while reading their poems. A crippled old man could make a decent living at it! By the time the 4th Century rolled around, hundreds of "Gospels" had accumulated within the Empire. It was time somebody collected them, and tried to make coherent sense of them. Constantine ordered a "cannon" be put together. About 80% of these fables were discarded, or destroyed. The "Holy Trinity" had to be quickly invented, so as to prevent "Christians" from being accused of Blasphemy. In no time, we had a new religion centered around a "Man-God" who violated the First Commandment. But the Jews immediately condemned it all. They had strict control over their "Holy Scrolls". And so you see: Old men got room and board, and we got a "Holy Christ Savior"!
Legend
Its almost a sin or crime in America to think America isn’t the greatest country in the world!
This guy is a genius he is a light in the darkness of ignorance
so why do many on the Left today call him "irrelevant."
@@johnmolina3284 Because he refused to get on board with the current ideological dogma. The thing is, Chomsky is much more nuanced and rigorous than the average leftist. To call him a genius is an understatement given his intellectual achievements. I question whether he was ever a leftist in the conventional sense of the word.
Whenever someone talks about an issue, Chomsky at least says: "Ok maybe, but let's not forget: f*ck the US and the West!". It is pure Whataboutism. The problems that are caused by religion in all societies of the world have nothing to do with "american exceptionialism". This video is a certificate of intellectual poverty.
@@Mushin367 he opposes the post-modernists and French theory (as does Paglia) so I very much respect him for that. But I notice much dismissiveness among the woke SJW's today. LIsten to this, I was arguing with a wokester over "trans theory" and finally I posted a video link to a BBC interview with Germaine Greer. The wokester mocked the video and said he never even heard of Greer before! I mean, even if you've never read her or accept her writings, most informed people know of her!
@@johnmolina3284 Wokesim is a very curious superset ideology. I don't think many intellectuals give it as much attention and study as it deserves (and Chomsky certainly doesn't). Even Trumpists, for all their faults, are somewhat more nuanced thinkers than wokeists. I think wokeists believe that they stand at the very pinnacle of human wisdom, beyond which nothing exists. They've found the Holy Grail or the Philosopher's Stone. Jordan Peterson led a team of researchers who found out that political correctness has a negative correlation with verbal intelligence. It's probably the case that religious fundamentalism in general has a negative correlation with verbal intelligence. To these kinds of individuals, rigorous philosophic reasoning is simply not fun, so when faced with a simple algorithm that purports to be the Holy Grail or the Philosopher's Stone, the incentive to latch onto it very, very high. They get to be wise, moral, and not experience the negative emotions associated with a lack of competence in critical thinking/philosophic reasoning.
What an answer! ❤
Indeed there are multiple wars humans force on each other and are told to endure. American exceptionalism is easily the most corrosive and most modern but is hardly alone. Humans if they are to survive must abandon religion, dependency and the outdated concepts of race and nationality. No small task. American-led western dominance and presumption of superiority is toxic and demonstratably false - particularly in the realm of medicine and social control. Humanity has always been the oppressor vs the oppressed and America is just the latest form.
I'm curious what an outspoken atheist if who was POTUS when 9/11 happened, how this person would respond
Hitchens was on Bush’s side lol
You mean like all the Muslim-hating new atheists I’ve ever seen ? People like Sam Harris and Bill Maher and Hitchens and Dawkins who talk like they want to bomb them back to the Stone Age ? THOSE “ enlightened intellectuals ?”
Noam thank you for your wisdom,you are an example to all of us
2:49 so chomsky's excuse is that religion is exempt from being called out if it piggybacks on something that works on its own
I can donate things to the poor and help the needy without invoking religious bullshit, and I would still be donating things to the poor and helping the needy
Chomsky says American exceptionalism is a "secular religion" but it actually has it's roots in the Bible and early colonial days. For example, John Winthrop's call to build a shining city on a hill in 1630 is a progenitor of American exceptionalism and has been cited many times by U.S.presidents, not least of whom is George W. Bush, to assert America's special role in the world.
Yeah. It doesn’t exclusively hinge on a religion, but even today there are plenty of people who say that America is a christian nation blessed and protected by god, and that it’s “greatness” is because it was founded on the bible
Great point!
how about someone born and raised in the states who was indoctrinated since childhood with the christian religion, whose beliefs give them comfort and courage in facing the world? would he give _them_ a lecture on epistemology? at what point do you expose religious people to free-thought and skepticism?
Thank God for Chomsky..
Lol
You are the funniest man on earth my friend. Love this comment 😂😂
mymother
my 😂🎉😢😢😮😅andthe
1:38 the🎉of the9
"Beliefs influence actions", who is this wise interviewer, i freaking love him!
It's the guy who was sacked from 2 universities because he touched up too many females.
'Sleazy' comes to mind rather than 'wise'.
@Get Zappéd 1974 Should tell that to Krauss's victims.
@@lesliewilliam3777 Krauss criticized Arizona State’s handling of the allegations, saying that the university didn’t examine *“all evidence, including the evidence I had prepared.”*
“The nature of the review process I experienced included incomplete access to evidence and accusations during the investigation, no opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or be represented by a lawyer during the investigation interviews, and no option to directly appeal the subsequent determinations made by the investigators.”
@@BeachsideHank It's good that he has a supporter.
You do know there were signs of smoke down in Australia? You do know he stepped in to defend his pal Epstein, even when Jeff E. had confessed his crime and went to jail?
Look, maybe you're right and all this is a bunch of lies from desperate women who didn't have THEIR advances reciprocated. And maybe, just maybe, this is all a prophetic working out of his last book's title, 'Something from Nothing'.
Who knows, but, as I said, it's great that he has finally one supporter amidst all those liars.
@@lesliewilliam3777 You missed some other "tainted" luminaries in your shotgun blast: Stephen Hawking, Lisa Randall, Jim Peebles from Princeton University, Alan Guth from MIT, Kip Thorne from Caltech, and Nobel laureates Gerardus‘t Hooft, David Gross, Frank Wilczek. All were guests and or personal friends of Epstein at one time or another. Epstein's alleged defense by Krauss was couched in the words of a scientist: he personally observed no wrongdoing, and being of an evidence- based mind, he made no judgement call on what he directly beheld. Epstein's subsequent confession/ conviction taints only himself, no one else.
But for the "sleazy", mishandled "investigation" of Krauss by A.S., this would simply be much ado about nothing.
Most believers don't really believe what they claim to believe. For example, if Christians really believed in the day of judgment they would behave differently.
@gibbogle this is exactly my first point about the stupidity and hypocrisy of almost all Christians.
Gib ogle
Most modern thinking intelligent Christians might say that’s medieval thinking.
This devalues Chomsky with such puerile stuff.
@@janel342 All religion is medieval thinking, or earlier, IMO. These days we know a lot more about reality.
1:33
"Beliefs influence actions".
Actually, ACTIONS DEFINE BELIEFS.
Well said- actions dont follow reason. And actions louder than words (written or spoken)
"Secular religions" are called ideologies.
Yea, his phrasing was odd.
@@josephine4s i think he meant theology vs ideology.
Love of the inner heart should be our enlightenment candle in this dark world.
I'm Christian but still love him.
Chomsky has said positive things about religion too. You should hear what he has to say on liberation theology.
Keep you're watery love
@@matimus100come on that's a bit rude
Religion without philosophy is sentiment, philosophy without religion is mental speculation.
Religion means to know God and to love Him but who knows God, what to speak of loving Him. - Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
This guy and Christopher Hitchens....❤
Hitchens couldn’t hold a candle to Chomsky. It’d be like asking Mohammad Ali in his boxing years to fight a drunk.
Hey...isn’t this the guy in UP?
Knowledge is priceless- I love it
No at all - - wisdom is
One only works with the other @@rob5197
The title of this video says that Noam Chomsky exposes religion, but I never heard even one argument that does so. Besides, all religion is false. However, a relationship with Yeshua has nothing to do with war - only love. Remember, when Yeshua was confronted by Pilate he exclaimed, “My kingdom is not of this world; if it were my servants would be fighting.”
I love to watch these two talking ❤️
3:10
"Many wars are justified by religious arguments".
Otherwise known as propaganda.
Deflect the focus of attention of the 'cattle'.
His answer shocked Lawrence Krauss. That is what will happen when an antitheist scientist faces an atheist philosopher.
To be honest , chomsky made a great point . Is that religion if done right does offer things modern societies can't offer . Compassion. Even if we democratize the economy and everyone is living in an a ideal socialist society. Poeple still need compassion and prayers even if they are un answered
It will never happen. Religion is based on values and beliefs, and as there are so many beliefs in the world, there will never be "compassion" as compassion is subjective.
secular religion. this is the most dangerous. this man has the best words 😉
Dylan Whitney The Chinese government is a perfect example.
Sager Islam is nothing compared to the secular religion. Secular religion killed hundreds of millions in the 20th century.
you missed the point, stupid ideas or dogma like nationalism are dangerous.
To religious people where god is the ultimate authority:
There is one religious person who says that murder is wrong because god told him and another religious person of the same religion comes and says that murder is good because god told him. In your presuppositions worlds, who is right?
"Religion Poisons Everything" by the great Christopher Hitchens. 🌍🌎🌏✝️☄️
The subtitle of his book "God is not great!" Which is a "great" book. Read it and you will understand what complete and dangerous nonsense organized religion is.
Christopher Hitchens certainly couldn't place the stars , planets and the Earth where they are , God did it .
God is great , Hitchens is not .@@erikswanson5753
Isn’t anyone going to say anything about his comment in reference to American exceptionalism?
Nobody lies as often or as easily as people who claim to be religious.
It's even more sinister and disturbing than that, because many of them, like my mother, actually believe the crap they come out with so don't even recognize their BS as lies.
I think Darwin was the biggest liar in history .
How do you expose religious lies, to turn atrocious intentions around given the rampant religious fervour in societies .. ?
Good God Almighty! Did Bush really spout all that rubbish???
Yes, he absolutely did.
Most of the world has brainwashed to believe that America has always been the greatest country since it’s inception!
chomsky shouldve been the president
Organized religions are political movements pure and simple about power and control. Tell you you're a sinner and with gaudy robes convince you they represent God, that's power.
People who adhere to secular religion r usually resistant to logic
He got the beginning of the world date wrong as supposedly believed by a large chunk of the USA population. It is not 2000 years ago. That would be sixteen years after the resurrection. I understand the figure is something like 4500 years ago.
What is god but a fear of death, or desire to be immortal?
Who is the interviewer?
this atheist stole prof Noam Chomsky's gravity, actually.
the title has nothing to do with what he said here...he actually pointed to more dangerous thing
I was in the audience for this discussion. The playbill included brief bios of both Chomsky and Krauss. The one for Chomsky just said that he was on the faculty at MIT and had written such and such books. Krauss's explicitly called him a "public intellectual." I thought "Well, that's a little arrogant."
At some point in the night Krauss mentioned that MIT (his alma mater) has the "wisdom" not to require their doctoral students to do coursework. As a doctoral student myself, i think that it is incredibly foolish, and may explain Krauss's overbearing arrogance.
I’ll never understand why anyone pays attention to Krauss about anything . Chomsky is sitting across from a real intellectual lightweight here .
That last point about secularism as religion is a huge point. Not just exceptionalism but practically every other belief based on rejection of explicitly religious moral values contains a religious element that gets hidden by contrasting it with a corresponding religious value.
A prime example would be current sexual values that presume pride in sexuality is virtuous in opposition to traditional religious morality that views sexuality as an impediment to higher spiritual attainment. Generally, celebration and pride in material/sexual indulgence is a feature of pre-Christian Roman culture, yet few people deem themselves 'new Romans' in the way that WWII era nazis branded themselves as a 'third reich' with regard to previous iterations of the Roman empire.
pepelapiu2004 Exactly.
The flag itself, is a religion
Don't waste C-12, as Mr. Gurdjieff would say.
Religion and spirituality are two seperate things .
Religions whole purpose was and is to control but with that said there is power in prayer or manifesting which ever you want to believe in..
Near the end... It seems some how Krauss forgot about Maoism, Stalinism... And even Italy's dictatorship period were based on secular ideologies and there are others.
Some of them were bent upon persecuting specific religious groups
Well werent they basically religions themselves though thats the main point unquestioning dogma is bad whether atheistic religious or neither one
I'd argue that proseltyzing to the sick and vulnerable is a horrible thing to do. Believers wouldn't like it if atheists went to help the sick but while doing that explained why their religious beliefs are likely wrong and why they shouldn't believe it.
Yeah, I agree.
Krauss is a zealot. Bush justified his actions one way whilst Obama used a secular justification to do the same thing in Libya, Syria etc.
But religion is used to support the delusion of American exceptionalism. They are a bit intertwined sometimes.
Go to 2 MINUTES to get rid of puffed up "host."
'Religion without science is ignorance, science without religion is lame.' - Einstein. A religious person can be scientific and not fool himself in the belief of unscientific reality. The principles in the harmony between science and religion is what drives me as a human being. I am religious but I am aware of the physical reality and its truth so I wouldn't claim to say the earth was created 5000 years ago. Nonetheless, Religion has been renewed, and it is now more than ever committed to the reality that humanity is one, religion is one, and God is one. This is all set out in the Bahai Faith which seeks to rectify the state of religion, and to grab it from the hands of clergy (which is has now been abolished) among other things.
Sanders wanted to hear a diss from chomsky on religion.........but chomsky didn't give him that.........because he was realistic.......
You surely figured it out by now, but that is Lawrence Krause interviewing Chomski. Krause is a well known theoretical physicist, but is unafraid to delve into other areas for discussion.
Scenna:
Religion is regarded by common people as true,
By the wise as false and by dictators as useful!!!!
It's unfortunate how the word 'religion' has been dragged through the mud. If we say, "American Exceptionalism is a secular religion", this is true in the sense that it is a dogma, but the proper meaning of "religion" does not simply reduce to "dogma". Religion is not reducible to "philosophy", "ritual", or "superstition", either. I feel it's about resolving existential angst and suffering in a direct (not just theoretical) way. The ancient Greek philosophers were explicitly striving for this, but now we wrongly regard them only as intellectuals interested in ideas.
+FrogmortonHotchkiss Hrm, I didn't like that equation either but for very different reasons.
I seems your defining that which you cannot define as divine. Which really is sort of a negative, and we can indeed, and probably should, confine religion to philosophy or psychology because it is 100% subjective and in the mind.
What you describe as resolving existential angst in meaningful way is also achieved by considering reason as your only absolute.
Also religions manifestation are primarily dogmatic and it makes perfect sense to reduce them to such things.
Perhaps spirituality, and the experience of it, should not be religiously pursued.
There was a comment I just read where a guy said he believed in a god but didn't subscribe to any religion, that is the kind of faith I can respect and is something you can almost equate to atheism.
I like how it entertains all possibilities yet asserts and merits none, you can also do that as atheist.
WRONG WRONG WRONG ALL OF THIS WRONG
Religion comes from religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via the notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods” and then in the 14c english “"recognition of and allegiance in manner of life (perceived as justly due) to a higher, unseen power or powers"
So it totally appropriate to equate it in the context used. Chomsky is a linguist so I dont think he would have his semantics or etymology broken in a tie in this situation.
@@sonnyobrien I don't care about the etymology of the word. My comment is from seven years ago, but looking at it now:
"I feel it's about resolving existential angst and suffering in a direct (not just theoretical) way."
That's what it is TO ME and where I think the real value of it is. The word has specific origins, but the actual substance of religion is reshaped with each generation and has the potential to be more than we currently make it.
well you should fucking care because it shows that our language is NOT ARBITRARY and that when people say stuff like “oh the word ‘hat’? Or ‘war’? No I dont care about the etymology of that word: war means this to me: … you see, meaning is subjective, we live in a relativistic world’. Which is something any linguist would be able to explain to you is nonsense
Im pointing out to you that your language of “the proper meaning of religion” is your own definition of it masquerading as ‘proper’.
Etymology is important as is genealogy and philology, especially if you ever want to make an argument. You need to a read a dictionary so there is common understanding about WHAT we are talking about. Then we don’t have to have stupid comments like “oh thats not what that word means to me: it means this. See, its all just semantics and its subjective, so I cant agree with your statement because that’s not what religion means”
Time or generations do not change the original meaning of words. Stupidity does- by those who block their ears and say “NAH NAH IM NOT LISTENING” which is also equivalent to those who do not want to learn or educate themselves.
The word you are looking for is SOMETHING ELSE so go find a dictionary and discover what it is instead of appropriating the word religion for your own uses and meanings.
Very True.
Regions ARE lies. By definition, they incessantly tell lies.
Like what?
@@davidlafleche1142
You are kidding, right?
The operative term here (third word) is "reportedly."
You don't need religion to care about the sick or poor etc.
What have you...
Yes we may all be "in this together" what have you, however religion does not have anything to do with this if only because historically as now religion has been and is a source of division for humanity...take the crusades or ISIS for example... Secondly I don't know how to tell you this other then to say that perhaps some of the worst cruelty known to man kind has been done in the name of religion/god etc. the intentional infection of the "native" Americans via the giving of small pox laced blankets to the "heathens" to "cleans gods land" or (I don't want to use ISIS again because it's too easy and I want to be more creative then that so) the Zionists (I think I spelt that properly) (business men and alike) making a deal with various nations (notably England) to have the united nations annex (or if you prefer simply steal) Palestinian territory to create the nation of Israel... And FYI apparently (from various sources) the Dali Lama (I think that's how you spell it) is the head of a tyrannical ragtime comparable to China or North Korea that many in Tibet do not wish returned to them...
No we don’t,but we need someone or something to point it out for us.
I’m religious and I don’t think we need religion to be moral,I actually cringe when somebody says that especially when they’re Muslims because it was our prophet who said that *we need to be moral in order to become religious*
CommanderLVJ1 the logic the if something is done in the name of God is because of God is very absurd in my opinion.
The Iraq invasion and the Iraq war were in the name of freedom,liberation and democracy!!
The first ‘question’ was a confab of nonsense
From where do our inalienable rights come from?
The people with the pen.
@@christianboehlefeld5168
Cute
Never read the Declaration of Independence?
Ohhh! So many Gods, and so little time.
2000+ years ago a portion of people wanted to get rid of "the lie" so they murdered THE TRUTH.
To this day there are still people who have the desire to do that.
The battle is real. There are two stations broadcasting.
*Good*
Evil
*Light*
Darkness
*God*
Satan
*Truth*
Lies
*Love*
Hate.
The Infinite Creator has
created us with a free will.
HIS DESIRE is for you to.....
USE your free gift of free will for
Good, Light, God, Truth and.......... *Love*
I think he is one of smartest men in America 🇺🇸 🤔
And the biggest lies comes from the church teaching, that Jesus declared that by his blood he redeemed human race ruined by humanity sins (superimposed guilt). These false interpreters would have us believe that this is Christ teaching whereas in reality there is not a word about any of it in his teaching incl. confessions, communions, sacraments, sacrifices and the rest of their lies. Isn't strange that religious person would not enquire whether those teachings are consistent with their Prophet? Could it be because the Bible says so?
الله أكبر .. سبحان الله وبحمده سبحان الله العظيم
Religion is not the source of morality according to every testament. No god ever said "I'm going to teach you something new, what it means to be good." They just said they are all good or just the goodest. Do you know what I mean?
A succinct, erudite and sensible response from Chomsky. A welcome antidote to Krauss's childish new atheist shtick.
That guy there looks like Dr. Lawrence Krouse! Is that Dr. Lawrence Krouse?
I think some Atheist's need to look at the sky and let there imagination conjure up some existential threats.
The possibilities of Human spirit outside the rails of indoctrination need to be explored.
A bit of humility and recognition of our huge ignorance about life on a planet in a universe where we are currently alone.
Militant atheism is fast going out of fashion.
+Reid Lutman Yes, because we must have come from something! And that something... Well... Well... Well, it came from nothing but only because that something is the exception to all other somethings! What wonderful mind gymnastics theist are able to play to maintain their delusions.
+sorrybadbeat I am atheist so hopefully you'll take me more seriously, but that's just a total strawman. That something does not come from nothing, it is eternal and always existed as a necessary being. And it's also not an arbitrary differentiation (ie special pleading claims) because the cosmological argument takes one type of thing, a premise about that thing, and validly deduces the existence of a different type of thing (which, being different, the rule does not apply to).
Theists are wrong but it's at least worthwhile to attack the nonstrawman form of their arguments.
+Reid Lutman This reads like four separate, unrelated comments
Like your horse shit virgin birth nonsense isn't going out of fashion?
Good god, reading your first sentence hurt my head. Why do you think Christian dropouts are at such a high rate these days?
... It's true enough, as Chomsky points out, that the secular concept of " America Exceptionalism " is not as overtly based upon Christianity as, say, " Manifest Destiny " was, but it is ALSO fair to say that - secular or not - it's strength as an idea is BOLSTERED by the same emotional appeal.
Nationalism, - whether British, German, French OR American, is one of the root causes of Empire and Domination and it has been HISTORICALLY justified by the cynical use of Faith-Based " Evidence " of " Superiority " in the eyes of a God.
In fact, as any student of History knows, the conviction predates the European and American Empires by millennia ... ☮
Charity does not come from religion and many times its an excuse religion uses to try to cover the damage it does.