Brian Greene asks Richard Dawkins ... Does God Exist?
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 12. 2013
- Richard Dawkins and Brian Greene discuss their notions on God in the context of evolution and science. Does one exist? Is God the same as science and physics but with different nomenclature, as Brian Greene implies? Or is God "the physicist to end all physicists," one that Richard Dawkins says demands an explanation?
Original Program Date: Sept. 24 2014
Watch the full here: • An Appetite for Wonder...
Subscribe to our CZcams Channel for all the latest from WSF.
Visit our Website: www.worldsciencefestival.com/
Like us on Facebook: / worldsciencefestival
Follow us on twitter: / worldscifes - Věda a technologie
“We hand over to physicists when we go from virtually nothing to absolutely nothing...” 😂😂😂
That one had me rotfl
Im clearly not scientifically literate enough to understand that joke
Shane Campbell theists like to say the universe can’t come from nothing so he is making fun of them
@@lawman34 Physicists have a different understanding of what nothing is and Dawkins is alluding to that whilst having a pop at theists too I think.
"You can't get something from nothing' seems to be a stock answer from the religious. Ignoring the fact that's what they claim about Yhwh.
Anyway, some cosmological models now infer an eternal universe so no god required anyway.
pinball1970 A few misconceptions you made:
Christians and other theists (myself included) believe that God is eternal so that would mean that God didn’t come from nothing.
Also the universe can’t be eternal and I will give you one argument for that. In order for the universe exist forever it must have been around infinitely in time. But we know time had a beginning. Time cannot exist forever because if it did there would be an infinite number of days in the past. If there were an infinite number of days in the past then we would never have gotten to this point.
God bless
I'm sorry, I was too distracted by Dawkin's awesome tie.
Didn't even look at it the whole video
you mean the fairy tales that he believe in oh yeah
What's wrong with the tie? I'd also love to have one.
NO ART WITHOUT ARTIST
NO CREATION WITHOUT CREATOR
@@Muslim_Convert_Stories WELL STATED.
NOW WHO CREATED THE CREATOR?
As a biologist, Dawkins deals with the consequences of religious thinking more directly - and it can impact the way biology is taught in schools. In contrast, every discovery that Brian Green makes can be explained away by the religious as just more evidence of God's ultimate mystery. Evolution isn't like that -- it's a much greater threat to the religious world view. That's partly why Brian Greene can afford to be nonchalant about God issues, whereas Dawkins cannot.
A good point
Pretty much sums up the video
Why would a biologist deal with the consequences of religious thinking?
@@user-is3yn7xr4c Religious Scientifically illiterate lobbyists are trying to cram stupid nonsense into the science curriculum in the US. That's a problem. Do you want a generation of idiots?
@@user-is3yn7xr4c We also have faith schools in the UK. Which teach scientifically illiterate conspiracy theory nonsense. Also a big issue. Children need to be taught what current Science agrees on.
These 2 have had several discussions you can find online, I would recommend checking them out! So intriguing and eye opening!
Love listening to them
Don’t be ignorant if you think a little bit, everything have a purpose except us and why we’re here?? just to have fun and growing old drinking beer common and die!!
* There must be a stronger entity and it is not a coincidence. Look around you the moon, the sun and what god said and you will know the truth, he said...
*
*
* ( We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth. But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is, over all things, a Witness?)
See by your self :-
God said:
1- ( [He] who created death and life to test you [as to] which of you is best in deed - and He is the Exalted in Might, the Forgiving.)
2- ( And they say, "There is not but our worldly life; we die and live, and nothing destroys us except time." And they have of that no knowledge; they are only assuming.)
3- ( And when Our verses are recited to them, they say, "We have heard. If we willed, we could say [something] like this. This is not but legends of the former peoples." @ And [remember] when they said, "O Allah, if this should be the truth from You, then rain down upon us stones from the sky or bring us a painful punishment.")
4- ( Indeed, these [disbelievers] love the immediate [ life ] and leave behind them a grave Day.)
5- (We had certainly brought you the truth, but most of you, to the truth, were averse.)
If you reached here and you didn’t believe that’s for you, god said:
( Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire, and Allah has sent him astray due to knowledge and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allah? Then will you not be reminded? )
By the way that was mentioned 1400 years ago in the Quran...
Well !!see you in the afterlife....
@@seethelight657 You sound as if you're growing old and drinking way to much beer!
@@seethelight657 these are no arguments just quotes
@@seethelight657 what do you think this mumbo jumbo proves?
@@seethelight657 how do you know what god said?
Wow...better title for this clip. "Perfect example of an informed agnostic meets a perfect example of an informed anti-theist then proceed to agree on everything, while demonstrating how different personalities approach the same problems"
@FiniteAutomaton putting people into one’s own choice of labels shouldn’t be encouraged don’t you think? Based on this brief touching upon by them on the topic, it wasn’t absolutely sure if they classify as unadulterated atheists !
@FiniteAutomaton The original comment was more about their approaches, which are definitely different. Brian Greene is the sort of atheist who is atheist because there is a lack of evidence to be theist (for him, and I happen to agree). Dawkins is atheist because he fundamentally thinks a god cannot, would not, or should not exist. He often takes this several steps further and is quite antagonistic on the subject. I respect Dawkins as an evolutionary biologist, but he is not a good advocate the subject of atheism/theism. His approach is usually quite ham-fisted, and he seems to find theism of any kind patently ridiculous. Rather ironic since, as an evolutionary biologist, he is quite familiar with how and why humans believe these things, and even believed them himself well into his teenage years.
@FiniteAutomaton I see that you have completely missed the point, which is made apparent by your last sentence. I am not trying to discredit an atheist position or Richard Dawkins or anyone for that matter. This isn't about some gotcha moment of "Oh look, see, he's not a REAL atheist." I'm staying on topic, which was the initial reply. I expounded upon that as well.
The fact that Dawkins was a practicing member of the Church of England is most definitely relevant. Just not relevant to your point, but certainly relevant to mine and the original poster. Richard Dawkins understands why people believe what they believe, and how they come to believe it. This is why it is frustrating to see him give lectures or have interviews and speak as if the idea of believing in a deity is preposterous. As if the idea is so alien to him as to feign some lack of understanding. It's incredibly disingenuous. He is entitled to his own opinion on the subject of course, but I still don't think he is a good advocate for his cause.
I support the Richard Dawkins approach when it comes to things like his discussion with Deepak Chopra. That man is a charlatan and deserves the run-down. I remember, though, an interview where he spoke with Brandon Flowers. That poor guy didn't deserve that treatment. People who are theistic don't believe these things because they are idiots or don't know any better, and Dawkins is intimately familiar with this. He certainly wouldn't be my choice as a speaker for the cause. His approach is a fantastic way to get the people you want to listen to turn off their ears completely.
@FiniteAutomaton I meant that MY position was not one of creating a gotcha moment of trying to say Dawkins or Greene weren't "real atheists", not that you were. And I did misunderstand your sentence regarding discrediting and incorrectly read it as saying you thought I was trying discredit Dawkins or an atheist position. That's my mistake.
Nothing I'm saying is attempting to gauge the degree or flavor of the kind of atheist Dawkins vs. Greene is in any other way than their approach to others, which is absolutely different. They may believe the same things regarding theism, but they definitely don't say the same things to others. That is important. Now, perhaps Richard Dawkins doesn't care about bridging gaps with other people, or creating understand. That's his choice. When you tell others they are idiots for their faith, or condescend, you're just going to push them away and confirm misconceptions they already have. He certainly wouldn't be my choice for a panel of voices to explain to others why theism may be the wrong direction.
Antitheists Are Evil,
Therefore
Richard Dawkins Is An Atheist.
This dude actually *does* have awesome ties
His wife painted them for him. All biology themed. He has one with penguins on it that I like.
@@claires9100 I like penguins and polar bears
@@claires9100 his wife is SKILLED
@@bean7496 Me too. :)
He is British 😂. Of course thats their attire
Sending good energy to everybody!
Very interesting. He respects the nothingness of origin while a theist respects the origin somethingthness. Very profound and I very much like his way of explaining it
Theist: The universe could not have come out of nothing.
Atheist: God, too, could not appear out of nothing.
Theist: God, too, could not have appeared out of nothing.
Atheist: There is no God.
Theist: But we do exist. How is it that both God and the Universe could not appear out of nothing, but we exist. Although we weren't supposed to exist.
Atheist: I don't know.
Theist: In such a case, either God must be Eternal or the Universe. We know that the Universe is not eternal and has beginnings, age and expands. In such a case, for our existence, God must be Eternal.
Theist: God exists.
Decent Atheist: God exists.
@@donttrustthem7601 There is as much evidence for God as there is for Superman, Spiderman, Tooth Fairy, Santa - sure you can believe they exist also but where does that get you? Science demands facts - evidence that can be presented for all to see before it can be called Science - all you are doing is talking to yourself
But again, you don't insist that Superman, Spiderman exist, but only God. Why?
Because with the belief in God comes the prospect of an eternal life of ease & comfort?
A lazy, idle, useless, pointless existence for eternity!
Prostitutes/gigolos/leeches/freeloaders live such a life down here - shamelessly sponging off their rich Sugar Daddies - tell them the "love" them, sing their praises and hope for a rich life of comfort
That is exactly what you are doing
These rich Sugar Daddies view their prostitutes/leeches with contempt and disgust for they know that all this "love" and high praises are for their wallet, not for them
God views you with disgust - can you not see that?
@@ramaraksha01 your sugar daddy/prostitute theory does not hold water. That is purely a business arrangement- both parties derive benefits from each other. The eternal God created the self perpetuating system that birthed us. We are part of the complex system. While we are alive we take from and feed the system. When we die we feed the system as fertilizer no longer taking. Does God derive any benefit from our existence which would make this a business dealing also? Perhaps pride or entertainment or perhaps the system was developed to feed God nutrition. Who knows? We don’t and probably never will.
@@ramblingbill9101 So you are saying we die, we are just fertilizer in the ground - no Heaven, no hell - no easy lazy life sitting about shamelessly sponging off God
No trying to live in a Childrens fantasy land
You are saying Science is right?
@@ramaraksha01 science is just the collection of knowledge so I'm not sure why you project it like it's somehow contrasting with any other knowledge
I like this Brian Green guy. It's the first time I even hear about him
He is awesome and has a brilliant mind, you should watch his ted talks and look more into him! I recommend it
You can start with his interview with joe Rohan it will give you a good idea of what he is about; I am reading his book right now, (until the end of time) this guy is absolutely fascinating
@@sbadreau blown spokane*
Read his books. They are really good!!!
Highly recomment his books too! And the 4 hours documentary "The fabric of the universe"
question: how can the original program date be after the date you published this?
@Nihal H yes we all know greene is from the future.
*Insert hulk time travel meme *
Thanking god for sparing you in a natural disaster is like sending a thank you note to a serial killer for
stabbing the family next door.
Haiti Earthquake. 100,000 plus deaths - - "Oh well. God's will is mysterious".
One baby found in the rubble - - "It's a miracle from a merciful God!!"
@@con.troller4183 Good one..
@@rick-nr8zy Till u r keeping ur belief to urself is fine, if you want to live in illusion that’s ur choice. Problem starts when people start using their money, education and other people’s pain points to convert them to Christianity. If ur religion is personal to u then keep it personal, don’t take it to public.
People in the west are leaving Christianity so don’t go to poor countries and make them fool.
Well, your comparison its not quite right. And i feel that most people think the God of Israel evil, because they dont seem to understand the position they are in, according to christianity.
It is not that a serial killer killed a family next door and you have to thank him, that would be insane.
It is more that humanity is a serial killer loose, sitting on the bench in front of a Judge and the judge its allowing the serial killer to live, and not destroying him imediatly.
People think that Christian God is evil because he allows evil to happen to them. But that believe is just as messed up as a criminal in jail believing that the judge and the cops are super evil for placing him behind bars. If we are alive, it is because of Gods mercy, and that is said clearly in Scripture " For your mercy is the reason we are not consumed everyday".
We are not neutral humans in the hands of a psycotic God. We are psycothic people in the hands of a very Merciful and pacient God, that offers redemption, yet is still the judge, who is going to bring punishment to those that are evil and want to continue that way.
It is a very sad reality, but it is the reality of humanity. Thats why Christ died in the cross, so that death and corruption would be overcomed by his cross. And he ressurect in the third day. Those who believe in him are saved from Gods righteous wrath. Those who reject him, are still enemies of God, and still are under the positiong of a criminal. The judge is pacient, but a setence will come eventualy.
S.B. that is a brilliant statement, thank you !!! please run for president of the world !!!
A cell trying to explain the whole universe.
When we die we'll see who is right, ignorant but i can God created the universe,but it doesn't say anything about reality, ignorant, you are a virus im a cell.
@george chapelle we hate virus.
What are you saying? What's your stand point?
@King Pistachion I’m not deleting anything what you talking about? Let’s see what happen after we die, it will be to late for you, I have seen UFO, And you gonna say it isn’t real? What we think doesn’t say anything about reality, You don’t like God cause you know you have to follow the commandments.
@King Pistachion If life doesn’t has a purpose for you well, I can’t do anything about it, scientists are not Going to save your soul, Cause when you die you’re body is just matter but you’re conscience is not matter that goes somewhere that’s energy, A body can’t work without that energy your soul, follow the evidence where it leads not what a scientist tells you to believe.
Just think for a moment : Stars have died so that we could live.
They never lived, so they didn't die. They just exploded ..
Stars were never alive
No... It's stars died that's why we live ..not so that
@@UFOgamers of course he doesn't mean that starts were literally alive for them to die, when people say "my phone is dead" do you think the phone was a living breathing creature for it to die
Few centuries later we would find a scientist saying:
All hail the nebula explosion for it hath died to give us life. If ye shall not believe in it you shall have eternal damnation of irrationality
There is a request to Professor Brian Greene that could you please deliver a lecture on the Mathematics of General Theory of Relativity...
He has actually in part, already did it on his official you tube channel in his video series titled "your daily dose of equation" where he covered Einstein field equations
@@danishsamir8807 Thank you:)
Both of these gentlemen are treasures
Brilliantly explained by both
I highly recommend checking out Stephen Meyer. He's a well educated and spoken lecturer who presents some brilliant arguments for intelligent design while leaving religion out of it. James Tour has also been known to take the same approach at times, and he's a world class bio-chemist and nano-technologist.
@1:07, Green's shot out to Pascal's Wager made me chuckle as well.
They call it Pascal's Wager but it's unlikely that Pascal invented it.
Here's a proof that the more intelligent a person is the better humor they have.
Cap
Is this Dawkins guy supposed to be intelligent?
So Physicists can explain and do but God can't?
LMAO!
He sounds like a village idiot that's somehow wandered on stage.
@@robertmcmillan3638 well.... Actually god explains alot in the bible, its just that you might be not too interested in it and decide to go with physicists way of explaining the world(not that i think its much more profound than god's explanation about the world)
True generally but I know some idiots who are funny af.
@@a.bagasm.7253 I think you misunderstood my comment.
I was calling out Dawkins for his sheer stoooooopidity and arrogance thinking that man is more intelligent than God, which is just laughable.
i love this man so much i don’t want him to grow older anymore :(
@@ephemeral5964 yahh!😢
@@ephemeral5964 it's not the time that makes you older
Dont worry he'll be born again.
@@mirriulahwaterdog no. He'll be dead
@@thakraken6995 Yeah mate I was a bit tongue in cheek there.
Thanks for the video.
Brian is beyond hilarious!
His tie is amazing
kedthings, where ya from
I hope in the future there are no anti-theist anymore, why would someone be called as an "anti" to something that doesn't even exist. the theist should be called as an anti-logic or anti-reality.
and your proof of "no God" is what?
What?? Did you just say anti-reality and anti-reason? Only those who don't understand theism (particulary, jedeo-christian theism) would say that.
I got confused. I thought he said atheist.
True
@@roychristopher5014 🤦why i will prove that .....like someone says anny shit....."prove there are NO aliens"
😕First proof is required then i will DISPROVE.....
No proof....and disprove...wtf
Until then n.p leave it ,ignore it👍
One thing that many people trip over, is that they believe that biological evolution is purely random, it's not. Just like we have laws of nature, laws of physics, laws of chemistry, we also have laws of biology and reproduction and evolution. Evolution occurs through natural selection and other laws, it's not purely random. So when the universe came into being, and all of these laws were inherent in it, so were the laws of biology and evolution.
Where did the laws come from? It’s not delusional to say “something” or someone created those laws and lives outside of it and cannot be blended by it. Simple answer is we don’t know.
I really like discussions like this - between great thinkers like these two.
Yea me too actually, none of them is trying to look smart. But Dawkins kinda made a fool out of himself here imo
Hahaha Brian isn’t a great thinker. He’s an adult that literally believes in talking snakes and the Virgin birth.
andy smarandescu you must be religious to say that
@@jst2889 I didn't know the guy believed in talking snakes, looked pretty agnostic to me, my ignorance though, my bad. As to being religious, no, I don't see myself as that kind of guy. I'm just saying Dawkins kinda stumbled in words there. It just shows that science doesn't help you give any verdict on the existence of God, and Dawkins said that himself (probably in a moment when he didn't feel targeted by the idea that God may actually be there)
andy smarandescu it has to be tiring though to be constantly trying to convince people that’s there’s a reality to adhere to, not this dogma that convinces people death is better than being alive. After a tragic death, for example, too many religious people say.....it’s ok that he/she suffered here cause he/she will be rewarded a better life in heaven.
I truly think this question boils down to what is the character of God. If you think God would theoretically be harsh and uncaring then it is certainly better to think that he doesn't exist. But if you approach the question with the notion that God deeply loves his creation, it becomes easy to think of the world and universe as something he's laid out for humans to discover bits of himself as Greene describes. Both are plausible but it certainly doesn't hurt man to believe that we are not the smartest in the universe.
I agree guys, his tie is awesome
It kind of bothers me how Richard says no so firmly, not 'I don't THINK so.'
He's so certain about something NOBODY is certain about. That's why it's called faith and belief.
That's because he's full of shit. he says things that are completely untrue, like 2:36
i like the dawkins tie
if it's about power , he's an egyptian
Why
Please share this brief CZcams video: Atheists and Agnostics Need This
Just love listening to scholars spitting out their intellect.
Wait a minute. This was posted Dec 16 2013, and original program date was Sept 24, 2014. Does the World Science Festival have working time travel technology?
Probably either a typo in the description or this is a clip from the discussion before it eventually aired later.
Sorry if this was a joke.
yes
Gawd done it.
I think it is entirely possible we live in a simulated universe created by "deistic" god who started it all, and maybe observes stuff without interfering... but that view really does not explain anything, because then we have an entire "outside" universe to account for and explain.
What exactly is "simulated" in our universe? As for deism, I'd have to say I'm on the fence, but I do prefer deism to theist systems of an organized nature.
@@RebuttalRecords I would say that the entire universe seems to be simulated, as it is quantified.
1. If that's what happening we should be grateful that we will be able to discover something totally new "outside of universe" what what lay beyond. You act like you are worried there will be New things to explain while most people including atheists would be stunned to discover New Field of reality.
2. Deistic "God"is basically unfalsifable, because even if we will give a philosophical conclusion that Universe is like a perfectly made clock itself then God would be literally the last explanation for that.
3. There literally no reason to believe in deistic "God" - that "God" doesnt care about life, doesnt perform miracles and other supernatural wonders, doesnt give u afterlife, doesnt answer prayers...
Its only matters if personal, theistic God exists who at least give you an afterlife.
No. The corporeal realm by definition cannot exist within another corporeal realm. There is only one corporeal realm. It is a realm, not a universe. What is 'outside' it therefore, is spiritual. Spiritually 'outside', not corporeally outside.
@@Hhjhfu247 And it's the theistic God that blames US for the mistakes in his creation, who favors a race and culture over others, who condones violent punishments, and who stays in the dark ages, this is not a God I'm interested in knowing about.
Two of my favorite human beings. I also remember Hitch another fave, dead now, poor guy, although he's not aware of it
If the possibility that no god occurred, then it's any real god's obligation to dispel such fallacies in a bid to remain relevant, or remain silent and affirm its lack of existence. What matters isn't any god's lack of existence, but lack of relevance. Irrelevant gods are inconsequential.
Brian Greene likes to play with fire 🤣
Rightfully
Mario Rugeles the trouble the fire he is talking about does not exist
O G actually the definition of closed mindedness s when one holds a position that they won’t budge from no matter what the evidence. That’s theism. Dawkins became a scientist and atheist because he has an open mind. If you have evidence that is convincing he would assess it and change his mind according to the evidence. I bet you would not .
O G I am only replying to your obviously incorrect assertion Dawkins is closed minded when being a theists is by definition a closed mind position. Theists with open minds tend to stop being believers which makes them atheists.
Why should he entertain such a ridiculous and what seems impossible idea. Since not only is there insufficient evidence any gods exist but no evidence it’s not worth addressing.
You are showing your bias by your above comment. Dawkins may not b a good debater but he is a very good writer and teacher. His knowledge of his area of expertise and other wider knowledge is impressive. You problem comes from feeling attacked when your beliefs are rejected.
O G theism is the failure to sufficiently investigate ideas, it’s closed minded by definition.
"Awareness is known by awareness alone," is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. To put forth a syllable to refute it is to concede...
English
@@lilchaos4792 "English" - It's a hellova drug
Bless them both.
2:45 The first life, at least what we believe was the first life, was itself incredibly complex.
so complex, you can't account for it!
@@DusterBooster nobody can.
Anybody who doesn't believe in evolution should at a minimum take a paleontology course at a university and learn about the evolution of more complex animals from less complex animals over time. It's all in the fossil record, including transition animals which explain how one species evolved into another. Once you complete that paleontology course, you will feel quite amazed that you ever argued that evolution is false. If you are afraid that it will contradict what you have been taught (e.g. the Bible) from the time you could first understand words, don't be. It's not scary, it's enlightening.
It's only enlightening if you believe it.
How many gaps are left to fill in on this? I recently read where only 1% of all life forms ever made it to the fossil stage and the rest is...guessing?
I watched one video on the evolution of whales from land animals to sea mammals. It was amazing because they found a piece of skull the size of a fist and from that small bone fragment came up with an animal with legs that decided one day that there was not enough food on land and it dove into the water and found it was full of fish.
It then evolved into a whale.
And then I read that someone named Lamark (sp) had a theory that would explain this that included offspring inheriting acquired traits. Others, however, found that there was no evidence that this was possible and studies on rats (or mice) confirmed that rats (or mice) could not become whales either even if they wanted to.
I'm afraid like "God did it" much better...and probably will for eternity...if God will let me...
No one has actually witnessed evolution with his/her own eyes. It’s just a theory. If you say seeing is believing, then how can you say for 100% that evolution is the real truth behind all this.
Quantum physics is more enlightening. It has proven creation is constant because energy is constantly bursting forth, spinning, rotating, oscillating, resonating, rotating, vibrating, radiating and everything else energy does.
Dear Doctor, you cannot look at ancient fossils and arrive at a metaphysical conclusion. Buckminster Fuller offered final, inarguable proof of Creationism. End Of Debate.
People often forget that there is no experimental data supporting evolution. Literally none. That doesn't mean I don't believe the theory, but maybe a pinch of salt should always be remembered.
What Dawkins is saying at the end is even if there is a deistic god who laid the fundamental laws of the universe and withdrew, he himself would need an explanation.Implying evolution.
"Who watches the watcher"
oo0olegendoo0o Simpleton Contradictory, useless question. If God is the Ultimate Cause, with no beginning and no end, asking what caused the Ultimate Cause defeats the purpose of asking the question all together and goes against the notion of Occams Razor. Richard Dawkins is still wrestling with kindergarden concepts in his head.
I pity how easily you were conned into your faith.
Alan Watts - "In other words, a person who is fanatic in matters of religion, and clings to certain ideas about the nature of God and the universe, becomes a person who has no faith at all."
I pity how easily you dismiss faith. Funny how the typical confused atheist wants the believer to use their own head and then goes onto quote other people instead of thinking for themselves. Contradict yourself and be unscientific for me some more lol.
im not an atheist or anything else for that matter, you clearly didnt understand the point of veiw i was indulging. have a nice life
Yes, niko, which is why I mentioned: Richard Dawkins is struggling with simpleton, contradictory, useless questions. If God is the Ultimate Cause, with no beginning and no end, asking what caused the Ultimate Cause defeats the purpose of asking the question all together and goes against the notion of Occams Razor. Richard Dawkins is still wrestling with kindergarden concepts in his head. I find him intellectually pathetic, and I find his british accent vile personally.
Great conversation between two intelligent men.
Brian Greene is an amazing speaker.
Greene: Asking Dawkins whether God exists
Dawkins: *Jotaro kujo's theme playing*
The creator of jojo believes in God
As always Dawkins making some great points there! If only people were more like him... that would be such an amazing planet!
@Niko If only theist can provide an acceptable evidence then there's no problem to it right? But until then don't expect to change an intellectual mind
He’s a presuppositionalist if I ever saw one. There’s nothing he could ever hear or see that he wouldn’t explain away. He isn’t an Atheist. He’s an anti-theist. He hates God. If he didn’t think there were one, he wouldn’t have such disdain for Him.
There is no evidence to prove (or even _suggest_ ) that any God exists. And as time progresses, and we learn more about the natural world with science, Gods existence is only seeming less and less likely.
They really don't care about God - there is as much evidence for God as there is for Superman, Spiderman, tooth fairy etc - but you don't see them insisting that they exist do you? only God - why?
Because they view God as a Sugar Daddy - their ticket to an eternal life of ease & comfort
Just like the likes of Putin, Saddam rewarding their loyal supporters and abusing the rest, this "God" will also reward those who believe and support him and those that do not will end up in hell!
Amazing isn't it? The very same people who teach their kids to EARN everything, never beg & grovel for anything, view Putin's supporters with contempt and disgust, now nod their heads when their religion says Heaven cannot be Earned, the only way is to kiss the right butt and they are told they are doing just that, down on their knees begging and groveling for mercy and hoping for an eternal life of ease &comfort
Just as Putin's supporters have raped, tortured and killed those suspected of not supporting Putin, religious people too have killed and mass murdered so many innocents
But they dominate the media, the moral and the educated & so the silence
Greene`s intro argumentations are absolutely top!
The religious god or deity is waaayyyy too simple. We as humans find it too easy to over simplify things that are very complex
More like we're too simple to understand a creative force.
😂brain greene should star in a sitcom
He has better things to do. He is one of the greatest physicists on the planet.
Interesting how one of the smartest people on the planet are trying to explain in different ways as simple and logical as possible their views but very few will change their mind. It's very difficult to undo it.
It is also difficult to understand. Usually happens, when there’s no thoughts at all so a person has to use lots of words to mislead the audience .
Tieodicy: the theological question of how a God assumed to be almighty and good could allow that thing around Dawkins' neck to happen.
Ha! I love that tie.
That was a wonderful question in the begining 😂😂😂
When think deeply on the universe we realize that we can't deny the existence of some intelligent, conscious and powerful thing.
shahid afwan well not really, I wouldn’t equate the shear wonder of the universe to “I don’t completely understand so there has to be a creator to all of this”. It essentially creates an imaginary cause to the many effects were able to observe in the known universe. “Can’t deny” is an absolute based on bad faith and bad evidence, could it be true, potentially but one can certainly deny based on the lack of evidence we know.
Whatever that thing is it's not from quran atleast .
Ehmmmm nop
you are a thinker I see , allow me to introduce you to more thinkers
James Tour
Stephen Meyer
Jason Lisle
Gary Habermas
John Lennox
Trey Smith “Noah” and ” Theory of everything”
Josh McDowell ” Evidence that demands a verdict”
Dr Grady Mcmurtry
J Warner Wallace
Frank Turek
Walter Veith ‘Rekindling the reformation”
David Wood “why I became a Christian”
John McArthur
CS Lewis
Mike Winger
Dr. Kurt Wise
God almighty
TWO OF MY FAVS
"Existence is one not wanting to be alone." - Wald Wassermann
, Physicist Theoretical Physics & Cosmology, Institute of Theoretical Physics (1972)
I think the problem with the so-called God is most think of "Him" as being a "Being" and having a personality and human behaviour characteristics. Wouldn't it be why both parties disagree on "His" existence?
Exactly.
The problem is that the 3000+ gods conceived by humans are TOO similar to humans. No way that any god could be possible to exist. If really, a deity created ALL, it must be damn clever, not even closer to humans, but.... we all know that ''gods'' are too similar to the average human that it's impossible to think about it without having a laugh...with respect, of course.
@@veronicagorosito187 replace "respect" with "pity" and i'm with you 100% 👍
@@FlockOfHawks No, such a word is not adecuate for what I expressed.
@@veronicagorosito187 okay , then we agree 99% ☺
@@veronicagorosito187 actually us muslims believe in the exact same god u r talkin about. A divine thing/being which is nothing like humans. A being of form which human brains cannot comprehend. It is more of like a huge light for me. One omnipotent God.
With respect , have you ever seen someone who’s not like anybody else.
Ya me this life is a circus
I love the way Brain put it tbh.
If I was a creator of a universe, I would want all my creatures to be able to create their own universes, and not have to re-lie on me for anything.
Absent parent !.....that's outrageous...😉
We might acquire that ability in the future, when we grow enough in love and truth.
@@kristijanpavlovic8605 As we are born selfish [survival of the fittest] I suggest that those words love and truth are simply words for dreamers.
Those in religion are determined to believe that a god exists that views them "personally" as the great achievers, and others as the dumbed-down losers. lol
Egoism is such human's claim to fame.
@@junevandermark952 We are not born selfish, we are taught to become selfish, mostly through our life experience with our environment or our parents. We learn that most of our real needs will not be met, particularly the need to be loved in a true sense so we become self-reliant and simply live to gratify ourselves. This all could be different as our nature has a loving potential. There is nothing dreamy about it, it is a fact of life and if we observe children, particularly the young ones, they are generally more loving than adults.
I cannot speak for the religious people as I am not religious, but I can say that God does not divide people into great achievers and dumb down losers as you put it. God loves all of us equally and wants to have a relationship with us no matter who or where we are, or how intelligent or good or evil we are.
I agree that humans are mostly egotistic.
@@kristijanpavlovic8605 Religion teaches that we are born in sin, and that translates as being born selfish, according even to the creator of the universe ... don't you agree?
Is the moon really there when no one is looking at it? Duh
Does god exist shouldn't be the question. The real question should be if there is a god and he allows all the pain and suffering to happen why should we praise him.
dougieh7
You refuse to read your bible. Let me remind you, it says: the heavens is the Lord's, the earth He has given to the children of men. God has finished His work in the physical world, and is NOT managing it. He is not involved in pains and sufferings. Those are caused by MAN and by ignorance. Blame your self and keep God out of it. You reap what you sow.
Itoro M
So no need to pray then. Yipee!
Sorry but I think you didn't study religion well enough, at least not Islam. This life is a test actually. We are all being tested at different levels.
The poor person in being tested with his poverty. The rich person is tested with the wealth he have, how he use it. Does he use it to live a materialistic lifestyle without even caring for the needy or he uses the wealth to help the poor and needy. The weak is tested with his weakness and the powerful is tested with his power.
But this test is going to end some day and one day we will have to answer God.
God says in the Quran that he does not burden a soul more than it can bear.
Peace
"God says in the Quran that he does not burden a soul more than it can bear."
I have heard Catholic priests and nuns say the same thing.
My good friend however committed suicide a few years ago which would suggest that God certainly does give some people more than they can handle.
You should question that verse as logic and reality certainly makes a mockery of it.
John Bands Sorry to hear about you friend. But this is what I believe in bro!
Maybe your friend could've lived if he didn't give up on with life no matter how hard it gets, and I'm sorry to say that.
Peace.
I was raised a Christian as a child, but as a grown man, I really like Dawkins and his lectures. I find him interesting
Music unnecessary.
Just do the very best you can towards the human race and respect and look after your earth surely that is all we can do. Forget any theories or religion s. If we spent more time doing the deed then wondering ..the world would be a kinder and better place.
Then the obvious question would be WHY?
Why should people do their best towards humanity when most people wouldn't even bother to do the same why shouldn't you cheat people or overwork them while underpaying them ( like Amazon) when it benefits you , when you can live like a king.
Not all people are good not all people have a good upbringing .
Now I know where they cherry picked the design video and didn't show the whole statement.
most people are not capable of understanding what Dawkins says, in a way,... iam one of them,... but I agree with him totally, ....religion is an insult to human intelligence.
"If those laws were cunningly designed, cunningly crafted... If the deistic God thought that all through..and setup all physics law.. and Then He would have to be damn Clever".. this is a good sentence from Dawkins that i am sure both extreme sides [theist vs atheist] surely agree :)
I fully understand your point of view. Yet as theist and a believer in science as well, I felt that science fans tends or might be taking its approach too far. I can argue that, say, an ant living on earth aren't capable to grasp well the structure of manmade roads and buildings. What if science, on its way to understand everything, be used to arrogantly claim the behavior or properties of some superior objects? And impose it that anything should be understandable to us or it is not existent? What if a clever God exists and decides not to be a voluntarily experimental objects of science?
@jqbtube why do most atheist end arguments the way you do?
Agung Dewandaru
Science has this ostensive bias, because it has no use for unfalsifiable hypothesises like the existence of a god.
It's models need to be falsifiable, because that is how science proceeds.
In my philosophy, I would state it that way: Don't make unnecessary assumptions to explain some phenomena, but use testable theories.
Don't evoke wild speculation if the answers might lie in a less wild theory.
Ah there it is again - the hatred... It's not about finding the truth, it's about going the way you like.
Very true
Brian greene is my favourite guy
Does God "The perfect way exist?" Only for those who want.
Good discussion.
Basically he is saying if you put God in the equation then he is of less importance. So sad
Exactly. He's essentially saying "if I can't explain it without God, its pointless to even try to describe it because then I can't take credit for it". Meanwhile he's presupposing that humans have some sort of value based on their ability to "explain how you get to something complicated enough to do design". But if we're just a bunch of random chemical reactions, then he has no justification to even make that claim, and let alone "believe" in it. He is putting his faith somewhere (in a deified "Science"), whether he wants to admit it or not.
Does Santa Claus exist? That's the real question.
+A Pale Blue Dot-Yes he does and I can prove it.
Lynn D. "It says so in this book. I mean, how else do you think we get our presents every Christmas?"
"Does Santa Claus exist? That's the real question."
No by definition. Though God has a much broader definition therefore it isn't that easy to prove God doesn't exists. But I believe that if we can prove that supernatural beings cannot exist, then the door will be open to dispute God.
It's not just a philosophical question. But also a physics one... Could there be something more than the laws of physics? And the laws of the laws of physics... And the laws of the laws of the ... you get the point right? Going like this we can only find more laws and nothing more than that. So in that view - you canot get to the supernatural, because there are always going to be some laws of some other laws of physics...
@@-_Nuke_- God wasn't proposed by physicists, cosmologists, astronomers, etc. it was made up by people with the scientific literacy of a kindergartner. They created the concept of a god and religious laws because of their curiousity/ignorance.
God in a broader sense is anything that can become supernatural... A supernatural being, is a definition good enough to describe a God... Sure people created all Gods, but the notion of the supernatural is more than that. Is a deep philosophical question, that we should ask ourselves deeply, if can there anything truly be supernatural in this world. Let alone a God.
Touched a nerve..."the physicist to ends all the physicists..."A superior race would be all that and he knows it.
Just a question, if there’s laws control all the universe, who set those laws ?
A counter question i want to ask...if you are saying there is someone who created those laws...then Who created the creator?... What was before the creator?
Richard the guy who rediscovered the word meme
This is worthy of Saturday Night Live.
It also stimulates the question ad absurdium that if God created everything who / what created god. If the answer is god is eternal then why not miss out the middle bit and just have the universe as eternal.
I'm not sure what you are saying or implying but I'll take a crack ..
Asking who created God is way more intelligent than asking how everything came from nothing, but it's also fallacious and redundant at the same time. Anyone who believes Dawkins and Krause, should use their god granted will along with intelligence to learn why and how such of their claims are deceptive bs
@@crazyeyedme4685 Happy to clarify. Gods are made by men not the other way round. They are myths, legends, fantasy creatures, figments of human imagination used to gain power and control over the uneducated, gullible and delusional.
Okay but that's clearly an assertion / postulation..
@@billgreen576 I understand deception far better than most. I don't care for it.
There's something greater going on with religion than simple psychological manipulation and control...
@@billgreen576 are you sure that all the compartmentalized sciences are true?
For example...
Do you believe that you exist via the big band of an infinitesimally small infintesimally dense singularity? Do you believe that you evolved from a rock and some thermodynamic action?
simple to complex is mis-leading, even a single cell has proteins, lipids, plasma, DNA, other chemicals, not that simple.
Yes but when u have billions of years and billions of genetic mutations you start to see change. The genetic mutations that help the organism survive go on because that organism was able to pass on its genes. We actually do see varying levels of complexity in cells as well such as Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic cells. Some cells have less or more complex organel systems. Eventually, these cells start to form colonies. They eventually connect to each other to form very simple microbes. These microbobes evolve and get larger over hundreds of millions of years. They eventually form jellyfish and then fish and arthropods. These go on for about 3 billion more years to form the life that we have today. We don't know what the first cells were like because they were too small to have fossilized.
Simple is stromatolites.
You started too late to mention Life's origins.
Pilbara Craton, start there, cyanobacteria are not that simple.
Look earlier than that!
@@ZeitgeistGaming69 If there is no Creator of life forms then show me some hard evidence that a living cell can be created from non life to support your naturalism beliefs.
Dawkin used intelligence to write his books. Everything else came by accidental chance.
"he would have to be damn clever" don't most people believe in an omniscient god. So he would be even more than "damn clever"
@@OG-tp6qy Demonstrate there's a hell before threatening with it. If you can demonstrate there's a hell you would have made the greatest scientific discovery of all time.
@@OG-tp6qy And I'm just saying demonstrate a hell even exists. If you can demonstrate there's a hell, you would have made the greatest scientific discovery of all time. So demonstrate it before you go around claiming it's real.
I would be very interested to know if there's a hell, because I don't believe in the Christian God. If you could demonstrate there's a hell that might cause me to re-evaluate that lack of belief.
@Halime Khaya I disagree. We think you're not looking deeply enough and we think you're the one who's lost focus.
@@OG-tp6qy dudee... You didn't understand what he meant to say, at all. Just watch it again until you understand
@Halime Khaya I can't tell if you're trolling or you're actually that incredibly stupid
As a biologist Richard Dawkins never mentions Ernst Haeckel, I wonder why?
Why would he?
From nothing nothing comes, from nothing designed, no design comes.
I love his tie! :) :)
The only reason I find scientific talks like this stimulating is because there is optimism, above all open mindedness and willingness to consider a possibility and maybe even to test it out and to try it out but once having seen it for what it really is, if found to be wrong to have the humility to change one's mind and to change one's opinion and above all to change one's ways and to change one's attitude to that possibility there and then, and to discourage and to dissuade people from going in that direction and if found to be right to encourage and to persuade and if necessary even plead with people to go in that direction, both of which is being in the character and in the nature of one who believes in and one who is endowed with the power of critical thinking and is critical minded with a scientific mindset and a scientific temperament which constitutes the foundation and the backbone of a scientific framework. But when Dawkins means that prodigious complexity can emerge even from great simplicity it gives me hope since it means neither is nothing ever really nothing nor is everything ever really everything, the latter meaning there is no limit to the possibility of growth and of self-improvement , self-betterment which is what infuses me with hope. I am not and I do not claim to be Mr. know-it-all and I do not want to be Mr. know-it-all. But my attitude is, neither is what I know really nothing, nor is what I know really everything, and neither is what I do not know, which BTW always exceeds what I do know, really nothing, nor is what I do not know really everything. There is so precious little we know about anything much more so anybody, even ourselves to begin with, yet we are certainly hot-headed all the time. If I made the audacious claim that I know you, I know all there is to know about you, your past, your present and your future, just out of sheer courtesy and out of a sense of civility and modesty you may condescend and stoop to agree with me and maybe even nod your head in acknowledgement, but on the inside you will defiantly hold and maintain and rightly so that I know absolutely nothing about you, and will be happy to dismiss me and to think of me as nothing more than an arrogant and a presumptuous fool/idiot.
then do you know how to deal with the ignorant -> someone that will against it?|
can you bring anything to make them realize - at least you have a strong argument toward it?|}
you know when they said -> they believe!!]
from my angle | do not believe something unless
you can evidentially establish it for everything
if they tell you they believe | but it's subjective -
that's why you use evidence and prove them
--> their standard should not be used
Watch from 1:20 onwards to the end to see Dawkins admit his selfish bias.
The man's career depends upon him upholding the lie that is evolution as taught.
The best thing is that science is based on fact
Love that closure
@@seasonedbeefs fact about what?
it's only a THEORY!! | someday it would CHANGE!
@@seasonedbeefs Or so they told you. 🙄
i read this as brian dawkins talks to richard greene - i have to admit that i did think it was odd that the hall of fame eagles safety would be talking to the 50s tv Robin Hood about god
When I am homeless in the wet and cold, and when my life seems more then I can hold, where can I turn to ease my plight, I’m freezing still, no hope in sight, yet still there’s evolution…..all that’s left for me…
2:00 - 2:30 first time Richard Dawkins ever made me laugh.. lol
Arcane Turbulence What
U must be dumb. He makes me laugh in nearly every vid I’ve seen him in.
Can you explain the joke please, I didn't get it.
Ron Hawk Bad Humor = Intellect? Hmmm
BibleVisual the Bible is for stupid people. Congrats tho
Haast's eagle hunting Moa on the tie, thats epic
y es más, a veces siento que a mi me han dado y bien de trompadas realmente más por las redes que a este señor se supo una vez le trompearon.
That which does not have beginning must be for something that’s dependant to exist.
Brother asked a very good question
😁😁😁😁😁 Laughed so hard on this ......
Oh crap I got the reference
Hope that answered the question lol
They work off well with each other. Sort of like Laurel and Hardy.Brilliant coupling of 2 Brilliant minds !!!!
The english accent is so nice lol
I’ve always had a problem with news stories where a tragedy survivor says god was looking out for them and ‘praise be Jesus’ - 244 others died, including 18 children - but it’s a miracle…they survived so must be god - I watch those stories with my mouth agape.
Agreed...when there are deaths, god moves in mysterious ways....pure BS !
I'm not sure that Dawkins foresaw what was about to descend on his head until Brian Greene asked him......." What do you think of that view....".
GOD CALLS THOSE THINGS THAT ARE NOT AS THOUGH THEY WERE.
Is that in scriptures????
Brian Greene, we must meet someday Professor.
Doubt, which comes later, is weaker than certainty. But to have infinite doubts make madness becomes infinity because nothing has become a certainty. Is that wrong?
'I' believed in God when I really needed a Superhero to save me. Oh God. Please make the bad situation go away.
that how all christians look at god not just atheist or should i say everybody
This world is solely the enjoyment of delusion, these fancy cars and houses does not benefit us in any way. When life gives us things we are happy but when life takes things away from us we automatically become sad. We love this world but this world does not love us back.
In fact, we would give this world everything we have and this world would give us nothing in return, there will be no true happiness for you on earth, always that feeling in your soul, the missing element that you truly try to find. In fact happiness is not how much you have, rather it is how much we can live without!
Nothing would satisfy the hunger of man in this quest for this world, except the dirt (the grave), meaning that when we enter our grave only then would we be truly satisfied. If you had a value of Gold, guess what, you would wish that you had another one. This is the reality of this world, a world where true contemptness does not exist.
I dont write much on CZcams, except that you would be deserved the truth!
As Professor John Lennox says whenever I ask these atheists how you came into existence, they say ''mindless unguided process...''
It astonishes me that these so called rationalists could make such an unrational statement...
And yet they demand to be treated as persons. Note: there is not hard, objective, empirical evidence for Personhood. It's entirely subjective and anecdotal.
What makes it unrational (irrational)? I understand what they mean and it is perfectly rational if you posses enough knowledge about nature.
@con.troller
The poster is either a troll or just another poor mind unable to accept the unimportance of humanity on a big scale.
Considering he is quoting a proponent of intelligent design with an emphasis on "Professor", it is probably the latter.
He can believe it if it makes him feel important or special. He probably needs that.