A surprise stream out of the blue that became a full-blown chat about popular Indian TH-camrs and the many emotions they inspire among those who like and dislike them.
When there will be no religion on earth what will the earth's place be like... and then the humans would be spending their time for solving real issues which could actually affect humans...
Vimoh I don't know if you have anything against watching videos and reacting to them on stream for the midweek stream but I would really love it if you would. You're the closest thing to hasanabi for us Indians
We are more related to the Americans because of modern values but that doesn't mean we aren't related to ancient ancestors people can be more related to our ancestors if we followed their culture and less of anerucan values that's what people are related to thruer ancestors
Vimoh I still am not sure about the "caste/community pride" issue. Do you really think there can be no nuance in this on behalf of the majority communities? Especially when there are overlapping structures in the society - for example, there is stratification even within minority communities. In this context, "majority" and "minority" also change right? So in this structural context, the majority/upper caste would be perceived as bigoted or racist for having communal pride, but then within the larger societal structure they would be minority so it is more acceptable? And ofc individual can't turn on/off their feelings towards community/caste just based on context. Don't know if you have addressed this in more detail in other episode but would love to hear you address these nuances.
18:11 You just said "Attended Jagar in our Uttarakhand" Are you from uttarakhand too? I am from Pithoragarh district in uttarakhand. मेरे मम्मी-पापा को भी मेरे ताऊजी-ताईजी के कहने पर गांव जाना पड़ा जागर के लिए। आज उसका दूसरा दिन है। एक नास्तिक के तौर पर मैं अपनी मम्मी को तो सुनाते रहते हूं पर इन सबको रोक नहीं सकता😓
Sir Agar Dhruv Rathee genuine Atheist hai to kabhi Infuture Religions ko criticized karega ya Humesha Twisted Whatsapp facts se Tunni Munni sunni Chunniyo ko khush karte rahega?🤓👍
hey vimoh I noticed this, when many people said that they experience certain states while in meditation or spontaneously, you talk about falsifiability and reproducibility of such claims and even though it doesnt prove existence of anything supernatural, there is nothing defined like trans-sophia(state where one experiences things that defy logic). Instead, we put a label of some psychiatric condition like psychosis or something. What makes gender identity different from that? Like what is it really feel like to be a certain gender? for eg, and totally being genuine here, say I really like dressing in a skirt and feel cute but since I have never done that/I will get ridicule, so I don’t know. But if I did and found comfort, equally if not more.. what does that say? Am I gender fluid or I am just cis- gender who just liked/likes being in a woman’s attire? it’s also a lot about the social structure.. so a trans woman today might relate to a male sx who likes wearing heels, but two centuries ago, she would be just a cis man in that regard. I know this sounds very reductionist, but I hope you get what I mean
and I am sure, that for a lot of trans people it just comes naturally to them, like belonging to girls group in kindergarten, I am talking about cases other than that where the distinction is not very clear to them
I have never said that people's experience is not real. I have only questioned their interpretation that it is god or something adjacent. When someone says they want to be identified as a certain gender, there is no need for me to deny that either. Especially since it makes zero difference to me and my life. That said, there is significant research that says gender identities matter and people with non-binary genders can have their lived experience improved greatly by being acknowledged as themselves. It doesn't take a lot to be compassionate, especially in a climate where Trans people are being dehumanised every day.
1)atheist: i believe god doesn't exist- claim so needs evidence 2)atheist: i do not believe god exists - it can be that god exists we are not saying god doesn't exist ,but i don't believe it until evidence 3)theist: i believe god exists- claim so needs evidence 4)theist: i do not believe god doesn't exist- it can be that god doesn't exist we are not saying god exists ,but i don't believe it until evidence i understand all are saying the 2nd definition not the 1st please give it a read i'm just sad people are not understanding this simple thing please see , 1 and 2 if they are both not the same definition, don't mean the same thing then 3 and 4 are also not the same definition , don't mean the same thing , 3 and 4 if they are the same definition, if they mean the same thing then 1 and 2 are also the same definition , mean the same thing generally, 2 is saying i'm the one who does not believe god exists and 3 is the one who believes god exists, so they must provide the evidence the exact same way, 4 is saying i'm the one who does not believe god doesn't exist and 1 is the one who believes god doesn't exist, so they must provide the evidence for 4 and 2 , if we think 4) is saying god exists then 2) is also saying god doesn't exist. if we think, 2) is just saying "i do not believe god exists" until evidence, i have the "lack of belief" that god exists ,i'm not claiming god doesn't exist, i'm just saying "i lack the belief that god exists" if they give me evidence i'm ready to accept god exists, so don't ask me for evidence for it ask the other. then 4) is also saying "i do not believe god doesn't exist" until evidence, i have the "lack of belief" that god doesn't exist, i'm not claiming god exists i'm just saying "i lack the belief that god doesn't exist" if they give me evidence i'm ready to accept god doesn't exist, so don't ask me evidence for it ask the other. for 1 and 3 atleast we can say that they are "believing" in a)god exists or b)god doesn't exist for 2 and 3 we are unable to make them see they "believe" too, they are thinking they "do not believe"- both the theist and the atheist. for 1 and 3 we can ask for evidence cause the made a claim for 2 and 4 we cannot ask for evidence as they are not making the claim, they both will just say i don't believe until the other give me evidence. please see, who can we ask for evidence then ,if they both can give they're definition respectively as 2 and 4 u can neither ask a theist nor an atheist for evidence if this is the case both can say, we are not making the claim we are just saying we do not believe the other until evidence using the same logic both are coming to two different conclusions. the same logic and definition of 2) is used by 4) too but both are coming to two different conclusions after all this if we are still seeing it as "lack of belief" logic for 2) then, we must agree to the same "lack of belief" logic for 4) as we already agree to the same logic for 2) if we see ourself as an atheist using the logic of 2) then using the same logic we can see ourself as a theist 4) if we see ourself as a rational for using the logic to come to 2) then even 4) is rational as it uses the same logic. if we see 4) as irrational for using that logic then even 2) is irrational for using that logic. how can we say one(2) is rational and another(4) is irrational when both use the same logic? even after all this if someone wants to disagree they are welcome to, but it just means they are not seeing the logic of they're own definition. and i mean it for all the 1,2,3,4 people
All up for a tour to Vimoh's library. 👍
Need to see all the books you have in your library, Vimoh!
When there will be no religion on earth what will the earth's place be like... and then the humans would be spending their time for solving real issues which could actually affect humans...
Vimoh I don't know if you have anything against watching videos and reacting to them on stream for the midweek stream but I would really love it if you would. You're the closest thing to hasanabi for us Indians
TH-cam presents tons of copyright issues. We can do that on Twitch if you like.
comparing vimoh- the literal critical thinker to hasan- the anti-capitalism capitalist.
Always enjoy listening you😊
Nice to know you also vibed with firefly and serenity. Very few fans out there 😅
49:00
Dog Willing 😂😂😂
My takeaway from this video
😂😂😂😂😂
Somehow I always miss you live😂
i m binging Vimoh. thanks to Meghnerd that I stumbled upon yout channel
Thanks
Brother you can try ginger chocolate for your throat..... while doing this talk...
We are more related to the Americans because of modern values but that doesn't mean we aren't related to ancient ancestors people can be more related to our ancestors if we followed their culture and less of anerucan values that's what people are related to thruer ancestors
Ramayan and a new hope have damsel in distress kind of story
Lots of stories have that.
@@vimohlive yes that is what I meant too characters are inspired by Arthurian legend
Vimoh I still am not sure about the "caste/community pride" issue. Do you really think there can be no nuance in this on behalf of the majority communities? Especially when there are overlapping structures in the society - for example, there is stratification even within minority communities. In this context, "majority" and "minority" also change right? So in this structural context, the majority/upper caste would be perceived as bigoted or racist for having communal pride, but then within the larger societal structure they would be minority so it is more acceptable? And ofc individual can't turn on/off their feelings towards community/caste just based on context. Don't know if you have addressed this in more detail in other episode but would love to hear you address these nuances.
Feel free to come on the live stream next Saturday at 8 pm. In the meantime, watch the playlist "caste conversations" on this channel.
@@vimohlive ok I will try to catch up. I am new to your channel but finding it very mentally stimulating
18:11
You just said "Attended Jagar in our Uttarakhand"
Are you from uttarakhand too?
I am from Pithoragarh district in uttarakhand.
मेरे मम्मी-पापा को भी मेरे ताऊजी-ताईजी के कहने पर गांव जाना पड़ा जागर के लिए। आज उसका दूसरा दिन है।
एक नास्तिक के तौर पर मैं अपनी मम्मी को तो सुनाते रहते हूं पर इन सबको रोक नहीं सकता😓
I don't know where vimoh lives now ,but he's from Odisha.
@@atheist1013 oh thanks
Book podcast
You don't look 40 at all. You'll look like a 25 year old guy if you colour your hair.😅
12:06
Sir Agar Dhruv Rathee genuine Atheist hai to kabhi Infuture Religions ko criticized karega ya Humesha Twisted Whatsapp facts se Tunni Munni sunni Chunniyo ko khush karte rahega?🤓👍
Sham Sharma ki jagah Dhruv Rathi likha hai 😂😂😂😂
hey vimoh I noticed this, when many people said that they experience certain states while in meditation or spontaneously, you talk about falsifiability and reproducibility of such claims and even though it doesnt prove existence of anything supernatural, there is nothing defined like trans-sophia(state where one experiences things that defy logic). Instead, we put a label of some psychiatric condition like psychosis or something. What makes gender identity different from that? Like what is it really feel like to be a certain gender? for eg, and totally being genuine here, say I really like dressing in a skirt and feel cute but since I have never done that/I will get ridicule, so I don’t know. But if I did and found comfort, equally if not more.. what does that say? Am I gender fluid or I am just cis- gender who just liked/likes being in a woman’s attire? it’s also a lot about the social structure.. so a trans woman today might relate to a male sx who likes wearing heels, but two centuries ago, she would be just a cis man in that regard. I know this sounds very reductionist, but I hope you get what I mean
and I am sure, that for a lot of trans people it just comes naturally to them, like belonging to girls group in kindergarten, I am talking about cases other than that where the distinction is not very clear to them
I have never said that people's experience is not real. I have only questioned their interpretation that it is god or something adjacent. When someone says they want to be identified as a certain gender, there is no need for me to deny that either. Especially since it makes zero difference to me and my life.
That said, there is significant research that says gender identities matter and people with non-binary genders can have their lived experience improved greatly by being acknowledged as themselves. It doesn't take a lot to be compassionate, especially in a climate where Trans people are being dehumanised every day.
Robo vimoh
1)atheist: i believe god doesn't exist- claim so needs evidence 2)atheist: i do not believe god exists - it can be that god exists we are not saying god doesn't exist ,but i don't believe it until evidence 3)theist: i believe god exists- claim so needs evidence 4)theist: i do not believe god doesn't exist- it can be that god doesn't exist we are not saying god exists ,but i don't believe it until evidence
i understand all are saying the 2nd definition not the 1st
please give it a read i'm just sad people are not understanding this simple thing
please see , 1 and 2 if they are both not the same definition, don't mean the same thing then 3 and 4 are also not the same definition , don't mean the same thing
, 3 and 4 if they are the same definition, if they mean the same thing then 1 and 2 are also the same definition , mean the same thing
generally, 2 is saying i'm the one who does not believe god exists and 3 is the one who believes god exists, so they must provide the evidence
the exact same way, 4 is saying i'm the one who does not believe god doesn't exist and 1 is the one who believes god doesn't exist, so they must provide the evidence
for 4 and 2 , if we think 4) is saying god exists then 2) is also saying god doesn't exist.
if we think,
2) is just saying "i do not believe god exists" until evidence, i have the "lack of belief" that god exists ,i'm not claiming god doesn't exist, i'm just saying "i lack the belief that god exists" if they give me evidence i'm ready to accept god exists, so don't ask me for evidence for it ask the other.
then 4) is also saying "i do not believe god doesn't exist" until evidence, i have the "lack of belief" that god doesn't exist, i'm not claiming god exists i'm just saying "i lack the belief that god doesn't exist" if they give me evidence i'm ready to accept god doesn't exist, so don't ask me evidence for it ask the other.
for 1 and 3 atleast we can say that they are "believing" in a)god exists
or
b)god doesn't exist
for 2 and 3 we are unable to make them see they "believe" too, they are thinking they "do not believe"- both the theist and the atheist.
for 1 and 3 we can ask for evidence cause the made a claim
for 2 and 4 we cannot ask for evidence as they are not making the claim, they both will just say i don't believe until the other give me evidence.
please see, who can we ask for evidence then ,if they both can give they're definition respectively as 2 and 4
u can neither ask a theist nor an atheist for evidence if this is the case
both can say, we are not making the claim we are just saying we do not believe the other until evidence
using the same logic both are coming to two different conclusions.
the same logic and definition of 2) is used by 4) too but both are coming to two different conclusions
after all this if we are still seeing it as "lack of belief" logic for 2) then, we must agree to the same "lack of belief" logic for 4)
as we already agree to the same logic for 2)
if we see ourself as an atheist using the logic of 2) then using the same logic we can see ourself as a theist 4)
if we see ourself as a rational for using the logic to come to 2)
then even 4) is rational as it uses the same logic.
if we see 4) as irrational for using that logic then even 2) is irrational for using that logic.
how can we say one(2) is rational and another(4) is irrational when both use the same logic?
even after all this if someone wants to disagree they are welcome to, but it just means they are not seeing the logic of they're own definition. and i mean it for all the 1,2,3,4 people
Itna bada message to hi padh😂
@@slaer lekin ismein sach hai aur aap usko padna nhi chahte to mein kya karu
Bhai agle saal mujhe pdhke bta dena kya likha h....GN ❤
@@how-to-use padne ke liye hi mene yaha likha chahe to padlo warn rehne do teek hai
We'll talk about this on Saturday face to face. There is no need to harp on the same comment over and over and over again here.