Talk Heathen 09.26 with Richard Gilliver and @EmmaThorneVideos ​ 2025-06-29

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello. Too many times I've seen Christians on social media
say people are disrespectful to them. Too many times have
I invited people to call where they have said we've
seen shows like yours where you don't let people speak
and just abuse them. I say to those people, just
like you wouldn't want to be lumped in with the
Reverend Thornton Stringfellow who wrote books promoting slavery. I ask

(00:22):
you not to throw us on the garbage pile of
angry atheist call in shows. I'm not going to insult you.
I'm not going to abusia. I'm going to meet you
exactly where you are, with exactly the same energy you
bring to the call. So, if you believe in God
or the supernatural, if you want to discuss philosophy or
ethics in a safe environment where we can really dig

(00:44):
down to the core of the ideas, give us a
call because the show is coming right now. Hello, Hello, Hello, Hello.
I don't know what I'm t because I've got emma
and I think i'm posture than I am. Welcome everybody.
Today is June twenty nine, twenty twenty five. I'm your host,

(01:06):
Richard Deliver and with me today is absolutely fantastic. Emma Phone, Emma,
how are you? Thank you for being here. It is
an absolute pleasure to be working with you once again.
I don't think we've worked together for a couple of years.
I think it was a nonprofits last time we did
anything together. It's going to be fun, right, it's going
to be grand.

Speaker 2 (01:26):
Very happy to be here, happy to be working with
you again. Good old UK takeover.

Speaker 1 (01:31):
Yeah, absolutely, And it's a total one because even our
backup post is from the UK today, so representing and
and and if you are a theist, if you are
a religious person and you we invite lots of you
to call the shows, and not many of your takers
up on it. I don't know whether it's intimidated because

(01:51):
Emma's an attractive girl who kind of looks like a boy.
A bit ish maybe eat in your mind, and it's
kind of stirring feelings you don't want. Don't let that
put you off. Give us a call. It's fine, it's fine.
You're not going to be struck down for it. I
can guarantee it. Give us a call. Let's do the
important stuff. Tolki Then is a production of the eighties

(02:13):
Community of Austin which is a five oh one C
three nonprofit organization dedicated to the promotion of atheism, critical thinking,
secular humanism, and the separation of religion and the government TOLKI.
Then it is a live calling show and we have
open lines, so get your calls in at five one
two nine nine one nine two four to two or
from your computer at tiny dot c c slash call

(02:36):
th And before we get into calls, we have our
usual question of the week section talk heathen to me,
So we're going to bring in our wonderful backup host
JMI to deliver the goods. Hell Lord Jamie, how are
you mate?

Speaker 3 (02:52):
Hello?

Speaker 4 (02:52):
Calling in colling in wording. It's rather hot here, It's
perfectly fine. I have fee anyway, talk even to me.
We did ask you some questions, and we actually have
a cormedy hat trick coming up because all three of
our answers, and they are very funny, all came from
the same contributor. So our question was last week we

(03:13):
asked name a bad time to give God control? And
so in at number three x million, A bad time
to give God control is when conceiving himself. Mummy issues
number two again from x million, A bad time to
give God control is when creating a universe. Evidently, as
ours is nearly one hundred percent deadly to life forms.

(03:34):
Take it from someone who lives here. The fact that
the sun will absolutely kill you if you let it
while giving you life is so weird. Thanks God. And
number one x million one more time bad time to
give God control is right before climax. Jesus, take the wheel,
make the wheel, let him come into you. Oh dear,

(03:55):
I hope we will past two minutes to that point,
but thank you very much. But anyway, I just accidentally
the monetization.

Speaker 1 (04:04):
I'm pretty sure I called everybody a cunt last week, but.

Speaker 4 (04:10):
They're here with me. Vern's just off camera holding a baseball.
But anyway, So the prompt for next week, and again
answers in the comments, not in the chat. The prompt
for next week is Jesus last words ron answers only,
do either of you have a funny impromptu answer to

(04:32):
that prompt?

Speaker 1 (04:33):
Am, I'll let you go first?

Speaker 2 (04:35):
Oh sure, I have a stupid one.

Speaker 5 (04:37):
Sure.

Speaker 2 (04:37):
He looked ponscious pilot dead in the eye and said,
you've crossed me for the last time.

Speaker 1 (04:43):
I wish I'd never asked why do I do it
for myself. I'm pretty sure that's the second time in
the last half an hour I've letting myself in something
like that. Yeah, I think I would answer Jesus last words.
I wish and I wish I hadn't been so damn

(05:03):
good at carpentry.

Speaker 4 (05:06):
The would be nailed it. Have an excellent chap and
chapping next week.

Speaker 1 (05:19):
I'm just going to work with Americans. That's it. How
dare you, Jamie fantastic? If you want to give your
answers to that question, you can do so in the
text box under the video. I don't know what that means.

(05:40):
In the responses, the replies, the YouTube chat section, I
don't know what it's called. The comment section, that's the one.
The comment section is what I was going for all along,
answering the comments section, and you will be picked out.
Hopefully we'll pick more than one person out next week.
Get a little bit more dive us from diversity in

(06:04):
these answers. But of course it's not just me and
Emma and Jamie, although if we could, with us being British,
we could pull the whole thing off on our own
all the time, just very easily. But we do have
a crew across the pond helping us out a little
bit and just a little bit, so if you want
to bring the crew came up and let's have a

(06:24):
look at their wonderful faces. Let's have a look at
that crew who makes all the magic. Look at them.
They're lovely bunch of people, all merrily facial hair, all
of them, even the girls vircial ahead. We love the crew.
We seriously we couldn't do this without them. And they
let it get his away with a bit too much sometimes,

(06:47):
but it's a lot of fun. But in the meantime,
let's get on to what we're here for and what
the crew facilitate, and that is the cause. And we
have some We have Samuel from Illinois who wants to
make a philosophical and scientific argument for God. Samuel, are
you there? Hello? How are you?

Speaker 3 (07:07):
I do?

Speaker 6 (07:08):
I do?

Speaker 3 (07:08):
I'm sorry?

Speaker 1 (07:09):
Good? You want to make a philosophical and scientific and
scientific argument for God?

Speaker 3 (07:14):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (07:15):
I do.

Speaker 3 (07:15):
Actually, I'm much of my training in school for undergrad physics.
I had like a lot of interesting cosmology and so
I do also dabble in philosophy as well.

Speaker 1 (07:27):
Okay, that's cool. Let's let's let's do it. This should
be interesting.

Speaker 3 (07:31):
Yes, I would like to start with the philosophy. You've
heard of a Plato school of the realm of forms
or yes, Platanism.

Speaker 1 (07:39):
Yes, would you like to explain it to the audience
just in case they haven't, or would you like me
to explain it to the audience. It might be better
coming from your own words.

Speaker 3 (07:49):
Yeah, just I want to say I'm a professional on it,
but I would say the gist is that essentially much
of our concept of ideas, in our concept literally the
of things inhabit a realm or dimensions separate from the
physical reality, and that us thinking about it is how
we tap into things like mathematics, geometry, and language, that

(08:13):
these things are independent from the physical world, and that
Plato back then was trying to describe I think, what
he called the realm of a power oma, which is
where we essentially draw from these ideas.

Speaker 6 (08:24):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (08:25):
So just to kind of clarify that for people who
want the kind of gist of it, the main gist
of it there is Plato said there was a realm
of perfect forms. So every time we, for example, think
of a circle, it is an imperfect representation of a circle.
The only true perfect circle exists in this realm of

(08:48):
perfect forms. I've got that about right of understanding, absolutely, Okay,
so yeah, let's let's discuss it. Go ahead.

Speaker 3 (08:56):
And so from that starting point, I thinkometry is my
base foundation. The fact that we can come up with geometry,
and that despite there no concept of a triangle existing,
and yet most of our ideas around photography, basic engineering
architecture is built on ideas that don't actually physically exist.

(09:19):
Is what really started to open me up to the
idea of God. Because to me, whether it be a
concept like love or compassion, there might not be a
physical explanation as to why those things exist. But at
the same time, I would consider those to be emergent
properties that we are drawing from in that essential plate
in this point of view that despite their not being

(09:41):
a physical explanation for love, love exists in a different
realm that we interact with. And I think that aspect
is one of the characteristics of a God.

Speaker 1 (09:51):
Why do you think that? Why do you think that's
the case? And we have because you've let me just
clarify why I'm asking that you because you've asked to
Essentially for me, you've hasd two different. You've put two
different points forward there. The first one is that things
like love have no explanation. You know, they're not physical
things and they have no explanation. Therefore God, and you

(10:13):
also said geometry. And this falls into different categories for me,
because the way I would explain it is, first of all,
love does have an explanation. In fact, loves, the many
different forms of love that we know of have explanations.
We know they come from the brain, we know their

(10:33):
emotional things. Friend of the show, Dr Richard Firth good
be Here, who wrote a Human History of Emotion, a
very good friend of mine. I've known him for twenty
years plus. He's written a book all about the history
of emotion where he talks about these different kinds of love.
Neuroscientist Dr Dean Bennett wrote a book called Emotionally Ignorance

(10:56):
where he specifically talks about love and how it comes
from the physiology, the brain, the nervous system, and the
different kinds of love. So on that point, you've completely
lost me saying that it's not a physical thing. On
the geometry part of it, you know where I think

(11:17):
you're going back to this realm of perfect forms from Plato.
I think there are arguments against that, and I think,
you know, I think one of the stronger ones was
put forward by Bertrand Russell. I think it was, and
you know, and we can go into that shortly. But
I'm really interested in why you think they are evidences

(11:41):
or proves for God in themselves when one seems to
have an explanation anyway from the experts in the field
who talk about that certainly believe it has a physical explanation,
and the other one has is certainly philosophical considerations which
we need to take into account. So why do you
think that the realm of forms proves God? Things like

(12:04):
geometry come from the realm of forms, and the arguments specifically,
the arguments against those aren't strong.

Speaker 3 (12:12):
Yeah, And I should apologize for the love because I'm
a huge advocate for natural selection. So I could say
that there are multiple physical explanations as to why organisms
would have compassion or want to experience social relationship with
each other. I only offered that big one because at
times I would say, in a zero or sum universe,
there might be sures as to why we would pursue

(12:35):
love as a broad concept as opposed to just self interest.
But even that, Richard Dawkins does talk about why you
could be compassionate. I would say the geometry angle is
compelling to me because I would say it's an example
of an emergent property that has no physical reality, and
yet the truth of it, it's so powerful that it
does in fact influence the physical reality, if that makes sense.

(12:57):
Like like I said, there is no true.

Speaker 2 (13:00):
Tiny bit Samuel. Sorry, just because I think the way
that I'm not an expert in mathematics, so forgive me.
I read a lot and then I forget half of
what I read. So I reread a lot, but I
reread a lot on mathematics and the mathematics of the universe.
And I've watched a lot of interesting documentaries on people
who think that maths is related to mathliness is next

(13:21):
to godliness, or however you might describe it. But my
understanding of mathematics is descriptive of the universe. It's not
as some separate, some separate property that doesn't have a
physical manifestation, but rather it's a language that describes the
physical world around us. So I feel like we're disconnected
on that, and that's.

Speaker 3 (13:42):
A score philosophy, is it a discovery or is it
something that we invent? And my point of view is
that I think it's a false distinction that ultimately it's
both something that we discover and something that is innate,
because it's something that we shoulbute. Because I think that
ties into the land of forms, is that I think

(14:03):
people are essentially a window into that essentially, which is
why art is like so powerful to us. When people
make a beautiful artwork, I think they're tapping into something
greater than themselves. But they also why do go to that?

Speaker 2 (14:17):
Why is it? Samuel, It's a nice thing to think.
I just don't understand why.

Speaker 3 (14:21):
Well, I think that because essentially, when they're doing something
like a sense of awe or appealing to something more
and I don't want to use the word design, but
something greater than themselves, I think that is. I think
it is emotionally appealing, but I think it's also like
a sign of something deeper in the like consciousness itself.

(14:43):
Because I essentially I don't know why people are oriented
towards more radical concepts like both beauty and disorder, but
I think that would help explain why, because I think
in their forms and separate from the physical laws and everything,
things like ordering chaos, a breach of you know, absolute

(15:06):
and that we can choose between the two. But they
have like in a physical like there could be a
physical explanation as to why we like music, and in
the future that could be given, but as of right now.

Speaker 2 (15:17):
There are there we know reason lots of reasons why
we like music, to do with the brain and the
natural rhythm of the human body and things like that.
There are lots of reasons. I feel like if if
this isn't because I think you've got a really interesting
approach and you're very nice about it. I think Samuel,
this might be a bit of a God of the gaps,
just put in an interesting philosophical way.

Speaker 3 (15:37):
No, and absolutely, but my appeal would be that it's
not necessarily God of the gaps. I think that God
and science are one of the same. That the physical
consens and such though, are manifestations of something intertwining with us,
if that makes sense.

Speaker 2 (15:56):
I mean, this is something that I think, Yeah, sure,
I just say that this is something that I a
conversation that I have with a lot of people, and
something that I preface whenever I talk about religion. Well,
most of the time when I talk about religion, because
it comes up a lot. The concept of like whether
via mathematics or cosmology or something of like, the something
greater being explained as God is really just a personal descriptor.

(16:20):
It's just a distinction that I personally prefer. And I'm
fine with you to feel that way. I'm fine with
you to call that unknown God. For me, it's just
a scientific unknown. What's the purpose of this idea? What
does this do for us?

Speaker 3 (16:35):
Well, and here's the thing, and here's the contradiction. Well,
I wouldn't say it's a contradiction, but I would say
that God wants us to be in a situation where
we don't necessarily have to depend on Him, but that
we do appeal to hire truth as a way for
self orient ourselves, or would be like compassion for others
through empathy, because when other religions say that you have

(16:57):
to believe, it's almost used as a is it is it?

Speaker 1 (17:04):
I mean, I don't mean to interrupt you, Samuel, but
my degree is in religious studies. I've studies lots of religions.
I've been very fortunate, I consider myself so I've been
a guest at Buddhist temples and mosques and lots of
different churches, and I've never heard anybody really kind of
outright threaten people that you've kind of got to follow

(17:26):
them in a threatening manner. There's the kind of background
like underhanded, well you might burn in hell forever if
you don't kind of threat. But surely that's in Christianity
as well. I've heard I'm sure I remember as well
as well, many many Christians make that remark, well you'll go,
you'll burn for help, you'll burning ever for well, that

(17:48):
kind of threatening, and that's from Christians. I don't really
hear anything. I hear that in some other religions, but
I don't hear anything beyond that in other religions. I've
certainly never been at a mosque, and you know, I've
never gone in pretending to be a Muslim, And I've
never been in a mosque and somebody walk up to
me with a gun and say you will convert or else.
It's never happened. It's never happened. So I think maybe.

Speaker 3 (18:13):
Watching too much TV historically, don't you think that's a
bit disingenuous though that there has been instances of Muslim
the clerics and preachers of the past using Yeah.

Speaker 1 (18:23):
I think probably every religion has done it in the past,
but from my personal experience interacting with these people, it's
not something that happens every day. Do you not think
it's happened in Christianity in the past where people have
been threatened that if you don't turn into christian any religion.

Speaker 3 (18:40):
I'm saying oftentimes the reason why religion is so compelling
is both the institution and the implicit threat of denying
anyone religion, Like if you deny Christianity, you will go
to Hell. If you deny it, if you deny the
power of Mo Harbord, you will be put to the stake.
I'm saying that oftentimes religion does use implicit a way

(19:01):
to galvanize, like the loyalty to their religion.

Speaker 1 (19:07):
Samuel, Samuel, that sort of just like to point out
that's a fair enough take, But you did say that
Christianity doesn't do this, and other religions do, and that
was the point I was making that you know, not
all other religions do it. That is just not a
given in other religions that it happens, and when we
look back historically, it's Christians also do it as well.

(19:30):
So it's not particularly a good argument when you're trying
to say, well, Christianity doesn't do this, other people do,
because that is a bit a bit nonsensical, really, isn't it.

Speaker 3 (19:39):
But I'm not going in Christianity is better for that
reason at all.

Speaker 1 (19:43):
Okay, let's move on.

Speaker 2 (19:48):
Yeah, sorry, I think we're just I think Samuel and Richard,
you guys are just getting a bit crosswise on that.
I really would like to hear the scientific aspect of
your of your offerings.

Speaker 3 (20:01):
Yes, so essentially has to do with cosmology and the
nature of time because a lot of my well I
did say a lot some of my studies in school
was related to cosmology and Big Bang theory and essentially,
you know you've heard of like the concept that you know,
time is an emergent property. Yes, well it's a part

(20:24):
well relativity, but essentially that mass and energy when combined
or what allow for time to exist. Because it's the
aspect of space time itself. It's kind of relating from
Richard Pinrose's idea of I think it's his idea of
a cyclical universe in that and it's a relationship, it
has its relationship with shapes in that and maybe I'm

(20:47):
buchering this a lot, is that over a given enough time,
especially as matter and energy dissipate over trillions on trillions
of years, that they will since to be a time
where because there's no reference point for how time should function,
essentially there is no end point to time, and so
infinity becomes you know, literally physically manifest. And that in

(21:09):
relation to things like quantum fluctuations, so you can get
something like a big bang. Again, that's very reductive for
what to be a much more in depth explanation. But
how I relate to that is that I believe that
have you heard of the concept of a Boltzman brain?

Speaker 1 (21:25):
Yes? You like? Again, would you like to explain it
for the for the audience and for people who haven't.

Speaker 3 (21:31):
Yes, very tough. Yes. A top down explanation is that
essentially quantum fluctuations or just things like yeah, quantum fluctuations
could recreate what could be considered a human brain, whether
it be physical or just still electrical wiring of a
physical brain, and that, however unlikely. It is because time

(21:54):
is infinite, supposedly, which has yet to be proven. Given
of time, you could a century weekly the perfect complication
of a human brain even without a body.

Speaker 1 (22:06):
Essentially, forgive me, Samuel, but when you're talking about the
scientific proof for God here and and as much as
you know Boltzmann's brains, and we can get onto the
philosophy in the second. But Emma asked you specifically about
the science, and when you jump into the speculative, then
we're not really talking about the science anymore. Yeah, or

(22:27):
indeed evidence. You started talking about infinity and and cyclical universes,
and that confused me a little bit because the prevailing
theory and cosmology is the heat death of the universe.
That you know, things are going to stretch out so
much that the heat will essentially it's what it's called
the heat death. The universe started being infinitely hot the

(22:50):
from the that word that can't remember, that little dot
point thing. Singularity is the one that not a lot today.
I don't know the singularity from which Unif a verse
game was infinitely hot and dense, it's cold down and
it will cool down to such a rate that all
the heat will be dissipated. The universe will stretch out

(23:12):
that far, and that's why it's called the heat death.
That's the prevailing theory in cosmology. So it's interesting to
me that you're talking about scientific evidence. You're trying to
prevent this of scientific evidence, but you're talking about a
hypothesis which isn't the kind of mainstream accepted one by
the majority of physicists. So what is it about the

(23:35):
cyclical universe? Soorry carry on? Please?

Speaker 3 (23:38):
Well, yeah, I would say this is an argument the
same way you know, prosecution and making argument. I can't
tell you a certainly start into what I'm saying is
the truth was. I was raised on a Christian household,
but I was very, you know, very skeptical of any
type of name for God. It's only into recently that
would say that I'm warmed up for more altho philosophical.

(24:00):
They have scientientific explanation for God. But I can't say
with any certainty that God is real. I'm just saying
that this is a compelling arguments for me as to
why I think it could be plausible that he exists.

Speaker 1 (24:11):
That's okay, Samuel, I just want to in you again
just to clarify. Can we agree then, because I just
want us to be on the same page. Can we
agree that regarding the point you made about love that
isn't evidence for God because you've agreed with us, it's
it does come from the physical and this idea that

(24:33):
the cyclical universe in Boltzmann's brains. These aren't actually because
I'm a specifically asked you for the scientific evidence, these
aren't in fact scientific evidence. These are things that you
are convinced of that the scientific evidence doesn't actually state
that these things are true. It doesn't give it doesn't evidence.
Then can we agree on those things and then let's

(24:54):
let's move on and to the things that we can
that talk about that may be compelling to us.

Speaker 3 (25:00):
I don't know, they're definitely hypotheses, but I would say,
for one, if you can get into it, I mean,
the reason why I find those soul compelling is the
fact that it's not just the God the gas, is
that the money to the interpretations relying on those things
fit into like actual cosmology. The fact that because for them,

(25:20):
for the Big Bang, there is no starting. Each point
of the universe has experienced the Big Bang. It's the
fact that there is no which I put it, there's
no there's no time before the Big Bang. Essentially that
all times, all clocks start there, and for me, I
feel like that is proof that in the idea of simultanetis.

(25:43):
You know, that is both it's proven and that's inherent
to relativity. And for me, that's proof that time as
a concept isn't as strict as as what many lay
people might assume to be about, you know, the universe.

Speaker 2 (26:00):
That's just much sure, Samuel, if I understand how your
thoughts on the nature of time and cosmology relate to God.
I mean, if we were going to have a proper,
properly link that these ideas that you're talking about with God,
we'd have to ask you to define what you're talking
about when you say God anyway. Are you talking about
a creative being, something that originated the universe? Are you

(26:20):
talking about something that is somehow responsible for interacting with
the nature of base time or so I just wonder
if there's a way you can distinctly sort of explain
for us so that we can have this conversation what
is the link between these cos cosmological and philosophical discussions
and you thinking that that is related to God or

(26:42):
some kind of argument for God. Because I'm I'm a
bit lost, to be honest, Okay, then let.

Speaker 3 (26:47):
Me give a brad and I just like so much
of it as hypoaster, so you can feel free to
say that the scientists incident and I would agree. So
my view is that because time is infinite, quantum for
oserations will eventually produce something like a bolt mean brain,
and in my opinion that I would I would call
that something like a god, if not God, and that

(27:08):
I think the brain you would.

Speaker 6 (27:10):
Call God, or the.

Speaker 2 (27:13):
You would call that brain, that brain like creation god,
or you would call the events that facilitated that God.
What is it you're calling God?

Speaker 3 (27:21):
Well, I think God is the totality of the system,
but I would think the brain is in that in
that situation, would be the entire system because in that environment,
especially once the heat that approaches the heat that I
think can never be completed, because there's no way for
all heat, all energy to ever dissipate space. Time itself
has inherent energy energy, which is why quantum flucturations, which

(27:45):
is scientific, has been proven without a shadow of a
doubt that over time something, if it's possible for something
to arise, like a bolt brain, it will inevitably arise.
And because of that, I think our universe is something
of a of a previous Bolts mean brain, which I
would call that.

Speaker 1 (28:04):
That's, first of all, it's a bit of a tautology
to say that it's possible for something to arise, therefore
it will arise, you know, that's given. The thing I
think I'm having trouble with is connecting the dots. In fact,
a couple of things on this point. First of all,
connecting the dots it is possible to begin with. I
don't think you've demonstrated that. And secondly, you jumping from

(28:27):
this idea of a Boltzmann brain, which in the original
formulation was it was the idea that a brain was
created including memories, and this is how minds can form.
It doesn't necessarily even if a Boltzmann brain formed, it
doesn't necessarily lend itself that it is a god, never

(28:49):
mind a specific god. So it seems like there's a
lot of dots you need to connect which you're not
currently connecting. I'm certainly having trouble with that. I think
Emma's having a bit of trouble with that as well.
All we're asking you to do is connect the dots
for us, walk us through the process of this is
I think a Boltzmann brain might be possible. I think

(29:12):
it's possible because step A, B and C. And I
think the Boltzman brain is God, walk us through the
steps A, B and C. And that God is a
specific God, walk us through the steps A, B and C.
Because all you're doing at the moment is saying, well,
I think a Boltzman brain can be created, and then
I think that's God and that created the universe. And

(29:32):
you're not really showing us any of them working out.
You're just telling us what you believe. And that's fine,
you know, that's what we're here for to listen. But
we want to know why you believe it. We want
to work through that with you rather than just having
you tell us, because that's a bit boring. If I'm
honest from my point of view, I want to to
know why people are talking about it.

Speaker 3 (29:53):
Yes, I mean so, I would say from the beginning
then for quantum fluctuations as there essentially, I don't want
to give too much of a layview, but the fact
that literally at the fundamental reality, things pomping it out
of existence? Would you agree that's not that happens?

Speaker 1 (30:11):
Yeah, I think happens. Yeah, I think that's what the
physics shows. I don't know. I don't know how much
I think.

Speaker 2 (30:17):
I think the most accurate way that I've read my
favorite physicist describe it is that that's what appears to
be the case from what we can see. I don't
think it's totally accurate to that is what happens. That's
certainly an approximation from our view. But yes, but I'm
happy to go with that.

Speaker 1 (30:34):
Yeah, fair point, fair clarification.

Speaker 3 (30:36):
Yes, And that would you say that random fluctuation if
in an environment like the one subscribed by the Big Thing,
that a random flunctuation could have caused the Big Being.

Speaker 1 (30:50):
This is where I'm getting confused, because you're saying in
an environment like the Big Bang and could have caused
the Big Bang. So you seem to be kind of
like jumping backwards and forward time wise. Here, what we
know about the Big Bang, this precedes the Big Bang.
The Big Bang is the process where we have this

(31:11):
change of state. This is the name we give to it.
I know you know this, Samuel, I'm explaining this to
the audience. So the Big Bang is this change of
state we have from where we have this infinitely hot
and dense point, which is a singularity Richard, which is
the name I couldn't remember earlier. And this hot and

(31:31):
dense point, for some reason we don't know why, began
to start cooling and expanding. In that cooling process, it
began to expand, and that's how all the particles and
everything formed. And it is this expansion process, this point
where it calls and expands. It is we kind of

(31:52):
put a demarcation line there and we say this is
called the Big Bang. This is time zero. This is
where everything began. But before that, we don't actually know
how the singularity came to be. And there are, as
you say correctly, lots of theories about it. Some people
connect these theories of things jumping up, appearing out of

(32:17):
and I'm going to be very careful here when I
say this nothing is not actually a nothing. It's it's
it's a physical is a it's a state of where
particles jump out of like a kind of weird particle
gravy which doesn't exist but does exist at the same time.
Physics is great, isn't it. And we have this and

(32:39):
these particles jump out of this. That's one and one
of the ideas about how the singularity started, was that
it was one of these particles that popped out of
this weird gravy stew and suddenly formed our universe. And
they might be you know, there are hYP whats of
hypothesis that say there might be many, many, many of

(32:59):
these that happen all the time, that they might even
happen within our own universe all the time and form
new universes. And it's all lots of fun, but it
is a hypothesis. We don't know that that's how the
universe started. Certain physicists, I think Lauren Krause ascribes to

(33:20):
this idea that you know, that's how the universe came about.
And I think it's interesting, and these hypotheses are interesting,
but it's even more interesting to me when you're ascribing, Look,
I believe in a god, and I believe in a
god because of this when it is a hypothesis and
we don't actually know the answer. And this is why
it's so important to me for me to ask you

(33:43):
how are you doing the work? Because you're describing one
of many, many hypotheses. But yet again, if you forgive me, Samuel,
you're not actually showing us you're working out you're not
saying this is my preferred hypothesis because and here is
my re You're saying to us, this is my preferred hypothesis.

(34:03):
And if you follow it down this line of lots
of preferred HYPOTHESI I have, then you get to God.
But you're not showing as She's still not showing us
the working and that's the really, really important part for us,
and that's what we're just missing out from your Samuel.
So if I can really try and get you to
zone in on the giving as they're working out, rather
than just saying that you know, this hypothesis makes sense

(34:26):
to me, this hypothesis is attractive to me. Can you
kind of tell us why you think that hypothesis is
the case. Why is your preferred hypothesis over the many
many others that are out there.

Speaker 3 (34:40):
Yes, because I think over the span of what I
think is incity, because I do think infinity as a
concept exists. I think mathematics the ult with infinity all
the time, whether or not you think mathematics is real,
or to describe something, I do think things like calculous
and even geometry. I'm humble to say, well, the night

(35:02):
a cruised but it does, the fact that it often
needs infinities and equations tells me that the concept different
infinity does exist. And if that and what's that in mind,
it's that applies to something like time, whether or not
I can say with certainty that it will eventually create
something that I would spin would call a god that

(35:22):
over time, something like the Baltzman Braid would arouse, and
because of that that would become I'm.

Speaker 1 (35:30):
Sorry, Okay, it was too easy. It's all get to
let go and chalous. Please continue, Samuel, sorry, just ignore me.

Speaker 3 (35:41):
I think you want to experience love, so yeah, I
think arouses valid.

Speaker 6 (35:45):
But.

Speaker 3 (35:50):
Introspects with the philosophy that I think once that entity
has created the Boltzman Braid, it wants to simulate. Uh,
it's the self existence essentially and be able to feel
what it's like to be a conscious agent and in
the environment like that. I think something like an answer

(36:12):
to simulation would help explain why something like the universe
would come about. Essentially, it would create its own universe
be able to experience itself.

Speaker 1 (36:21):
I'm going to pass you to Emma shortly to respond
to you, Samuel. I'm just going to say before I
do that, thank you. For acknowledging that infinity is a thing.
It's very nice to hear a theists say that, because
so many pretend that it's not. And if you would
like to debate William Lane Craig and correct is silly
foolish ass on this notion, please feel free to arrange

(36:44):
one and I will be watching it and in your
corner all the way. But with that, I'm going to
pass you over to Emma so she can respond to
what you've said so far, and then we'll let you continue.

Speaker 2 (36:54):
I'm happy with everything that you've said so far, Samuel.
I just I'm still as Richard. I'm still hung up
on the on the why you've said you you think
that this is a good ex I just I just
need to know why you think that, why you think
that uh a Boltzman brain is it. I'm not familiar
with the concept, so if I'm misunderstanding it completely, you

(37:15):
have to talk to me like I'm five. I'm sorry.
Why you think that that you know relates to a
creator and sense that it would want to create? You know,
how you know what this theoretical simulated brain would want
and how that's still how that relates to their being
a God, because I I feel like I could be
on board with all these hypotheses and maybe I would
read a lot and these would be my favorite, and

(37:35):
I still wouldn't have any faith in a god. So
I I'm just still getting a bit lost on kind
of the basics. I think that might be me just
not understanding fully.

Speaker 3 (37:43):
No, no. And also for William Craig, this is anything
that goal Bayo would have to practice a lot not
to be a dancing.

Speaker 1 (37:52):
You would, I think you'd be all right, made to
be honest, because it's a bit shit. It's not as
good as everybody makes out.

Speaker 3 (38:00):
But I would say I'm very much butchering. I think
the philosophy of a short story. Have you heard of
the Egg?

Speaker 1 (38:06):
I mean that's a little bit vague.

Speaker 3 (38:11):
Well for anyone for the listeners of hearing this, I
would very much recommend reading. I think it's a very
beautiful short story about how why God would make reality,
and it's essentially the idea that he wants to replicate himself,
create another entity similar to him, which is why I
think something like The Guard of the is alleg oracle.

(38:35):
I don't know if I'm breaking with you know, major
Christian doctrine. But I think the idea that there was
a mistake for us to eat the tree is apologies
for my language other bull crap. I think he wants
us to experience the very nature of being alive, which
includes both love and pain, and the idea that things
like us learning to become more compassionate with more another

(38:57):
despite our animalistic tendencies is the entire point our ability
to overcome ourship is why we have to be in
the universe filled with death and pain. I don't know
why people make so much less about sin. I think
sin it's what we need to hear at the time
of the message, because a lot of people, I think,
are really much oriented towards an authoritative figure telling them

(39:20):
what they have to do, rather than having given them
a good explanation as to why they should do it innately.
But to me, the reason why the Baltzman brain is
appealing is that the fact that within the short story,
essentially it's about In wanting to come closer to his
creation by making us go through a very active existence
which includes all of all of the human emotions, all

(39:44):
of our struggles, all of our pain, so that we
can come closer to him. Eventually kind of.

Speaker 2 (39:51):
I feel like Samuel, I know you said that you've
you sort of did a lot of reading and philosophizing
that brought you to more of a theistic perspective. But
I do wonder if you have to start here with
a pre supposition that God exists and that you have
an idea of what he wants. And I just because

(40:11):
for me, as a person who has no relationship with
the God concept, there's nothing to link this nice story
or what sounds like shot that if I was going
to be a Christian, I'd probably be on board with
your philosophy. I like the sound of it, But because
I like the sound of it doesn't mean that I
think it's true. So I'm just losing where this is
just because we sort of were drawn in because there

(40:34):
was an idea of like evidence, you know, and just
an idea of like this is this is why I'm
compelled to believe in God. But it feels like you
have to believe in God at the start for your
ideas to make sense. Did that make any sense?

Speaker 7 (40:47):
No?

Speaker 3 (40:48):
Absolutely, And for full clarity, I would say I did
have I would say a supernatural visitation. But my thing
is I don't believe anyone should believe my anecdote. I
think anecdotes are terrible evidence. So if I would say
that I had something like that, I don't expect either
of you to believe that. I would say this is

(41:09):
somewhat a post talk rationalization as to why that experience
was as powerful as it was. But to me, I
think a big view or my idea of God is
that fact that it's not coercive, essentially, that you don't
have to necessarily believe God is there because my thing
is I think it's like an experiment almost the laboratory

(41:32):
doesn't want to tamper with the results too much. Otherwise,
you know, what's the point of running the experiment for me,
Like I don't want to paint my results otherwise the
entire point is fogless. So I think for me, my
idea of God is something that is passive in the
way he interacts with the world. I think he wants I'm.

Speaker 2 (41:55):
Sorry, you can finish your point, Simili, go ahead, yes.

Speaker 3 (41:58):
Like the passivity of him essentially giving out edicts is
something that human religions fault with, because I think all
human religions are summer true. It's just the fact that
because people value tribal instincts over a lot of things,
they hyper focus on certain bitsiness truths, and then they
put human you know, faults within them, like for example,

(42:22):
I think a lot of the Ten Commandments are true,
but some of them I don't think are true. I
think some of them are just what humans at the
time put in order to make sure that they can
maintain power. I think that might different.

Speaker 2 (42:34):
I am going to I am going to cut in
because I feel like we're going to go off on
big old tangents and I think we've kind of got
to the crux of it, which I did a video
a little while ago, and if anybody watching saw it,
but it was ten reasons I'm not a Christian in
response to the question why aren't you a Christian? And
one of my given reasons is that most of the time,
when I talk to somebody who has has evidence and

(42:57):
compelling reasoning, it turns out after a long win discussion,
no offense. Samuel. I do think it's been very interesting,
and you've been very nice with interesting ideas, but it
tends to boil down to I had a religious experience,
or I was brought up Christian, or you know something
that is anecdotal and like you said, accurately and we
can all agree, isn't evidence. It's not going to change
my mind or Richard's mind. And I don't think. I

(43:18):
don't think there's anywhere really else we can move with this.
You've got some interesting ideas to you. They say God
is real to me, they have nothing to do with God.
And the conversation I think just is going to be
cyclical after this point because I don't think we can
relate to each other.

Speaker 3 (43:33):
Yeah, and I'm sorry if I wasted time. I just
wanted to give.

Speaker 1 (43:38):
Not at all. You've not wasted our time at all.
And Samuel, you've been greatly respectful and I've thoroughly enjoyed
having the conversation with you. I do want you to
call back, and I believe it or not, I actually
want to discuss the religious experience. There's this kind of
experience you had, because I want you to walk through,
walk through the actual experience and what is compelling about

(43:59):
it for you and see if we can work together
to try and untangle that web and see white it's
not compelling for us, why it's compelling for you? See
if we can reach some kind of ground where we
can agree on it. In the meantime, I'm going to
do a secular rarity and give you some homework. I
don't usually do this for people, but I have thoroughly

(44:21):
enjoyed my conversation with you, and we didn't quite get
to everything I would have liked to have got to
in the time we've had. I want you to kind
of if you haven't, I want you to if you
haven't already, I want you to go away and read
up on Bertrand Russell's kind of objections to the perferfeut
Platonic realm, because it has some really really good objections

(44:45):
to it. And if you haven't read them already, I
you know, please go go and read them him and
other philosophers. There are some quite major flaws with it,
so it'd be good for you. I keep glancing up
because I keep forgetting his name, and I've got his
History of Western Philosophy sat on my bookshelf just up
to my left, so keep up, just to remind me

(45:05):
of what is called. But yeah, if you read up
on some of Bertrand Russell and other people's objections to
the perfect Platonic realm, because some of them are quite compelling,
and yeah, if you can give us a call next time,
please do. I'm gonna let you go. But if you
can give us a call next time, let's please discuss
your experience and like walk through it.

Speaker 3 (45:25):
Yes, I will thank you so much, not a problem.

Speaker 1 (45:28):
And thank you so much for calling. That was I
really enjoyed, Sam.

Speaker 2 (45:32):
That was a really good one. That was a great
That was a great first call.

Speaker 1 (45:35):
Yeah, it really really was. I am going to get
I have seen and I hope this is who I
think it is. There's someone in the screening room. They're
not quite ready to be taken yet, and it says
I was asked by Richard to call and discuss my
faith in God. I think this might be someone I've
been having an interaction with on TikTok and it's really

(45:56):
really it's been really, really interesting and I am so
pleased if it is this guy who was called. But
we do have a couple of announcements before we get
to that next call. So it is that time off
you again. So it's always that time of year, isn't it.
We are so excited, So I said that in the
most unexcited voice. Let me try that again. It's so excited.

(46:18):
We are so excited to announce the back Cruise. Tickets
are up for sale Forrest j, Mike, Dodor, Men, Objectively,
Dan and other hosts. I guess that means that they've
not been confirmed yet. That's why the names aren't there.
You will be there. I'm not going to be there,
so your favorite host won't be there. Join us in
August sixteenth, twenty twenty five, and get your tickets and

(46:42):
all in for at tiny dot cc slash. Back Cruise
tickets sell out fast, so get your tickets now. And
as confirmed on last week's show, Sydney Davis Junior Junior
will be making an appearance as an actual bat because
everybody knows Sydney is a vampire. A great way to

(47:04):
support us, other than going to the back Cruise is
by sending super chats and get them in and we
will read as many as we can. And I'm going
to read the one we've had. You tight host people,
come on, get your money and you get your under
your pockets. I'm going to read the one super chat
we've had. After have finished his announcements, join our weekly
watch parties at the Freethought Library on Sundays for live

(47:27):
viewings of Tolkithen and the Etheists experience every Sunday, doors
open at noon and it is a great place for
building community. And that is exactly where Jamie the Blind
Libry is backing up from live today. So if you
are at the watch party at the Atheist Community of
Austin at the at the FREEFOT Library, please go up

(47:47):
to the window and go like that to Jamie from me.
Just put him off as much as possible. And finally
you can follow Tolkeithen on TikTok. We do a pre
show live every Sunday where we go when we say we,
it's me goes live and talks to people and eventually

(48:08):
just tries to coax you to call. And let's not
dress it up. That's what it is. And I always
have a great deal of fun on there and those
who join me in there, We've got some regulars. We
always like little twenty minute segment. We have a lot
of fun over there, so get yourself over there as well.
And we do have a super chat as I mentioned

(48:28):
Morgan Underscore Fleeman who send CHF two. I don't know
what c HF currency is, do you know what that
is immergus, I have no idea chaffs two chaffs to
chuffs too, chuffs and says I thought it's called love,
not love with us and then there's some kind of

(48:49):
silly face doing that much love. Thank you very much
for that superchat. You too can send super chats and
we will read them out if they are not disgusting
or naughty or dirty. In well they can be dirty
and naughty. We'll read them out as long as as
long as the YouTube friendly will read them out. Let's wish.
Let's be right about it. So if you want to

(49:11):
comment on anything myself or Emma has said, but you
don't you're not brave enough to call in, send us
a super chat and do it. And with that I
am going to take I'm very excited about this. Joe
from the UK, Hello from the UK, who wants to
talk have a discussion on faith in God now? And

(49:31):
I talked to a lot of people and are you
the person I've had the major interactions with all the
dms and stuff or someone else that brilliant? That is brilliant.
Thank you very very much for calling in. I do
appreciate it, you know, I know we've had a bit
of a back and forth. So we've got the wonderful

(49:51):
Emma Throne here, who's going to be joining me on
taking your call, So take it away. You know, this
is a platform where we invite you to tell us
what you believe and we walk through that, so you know,
take it as well. Tell us what convinced you that
God exists.

Speaker 5 (50:06):
Yeah, all right, I'm not going to ramble on too
much because I have had a pretty wacky experience with
God in my life. So sorry, I do apologize. I've
never actually done obviously this talk show before.

Speaker 1 (50:22):
But it's fine, it's fine, and I know if we
might have got a little bit heated at points on
on TikTok, we are really friendly. We are you know,
we're friendly and we're welcoming. There's nothing to be nervous about. Please,
you know, just take it in your own time and
we'll respond.

Speaker 5 (50:39):
And likewise, I apologize for my frustration on the TikTok.
So I'm, you know, just figuring it all out as
I go along. But so yeah, never never believed in
God at all, you know, I weren't even interested, never
went to church until I was about nineteen. I started
heavily abusing drugs, and obviously that period of my life
is a little bit of a blur because the damage

(51:00):
that I'd done to my brain. But I had the
topic of God came into conversation with me and a
couple of my friends in for a couple of weeks
leading up until this night, and this is not so yeah,
I'll just I hope I can say this on I'm
not going to specify which drug because I don't know
if you can say that on the show. But I
had a bad drug addiction and that's causing me problems

(51:23):
with my health, abusing it every single day. And I
had a very very sort of weird spiritual experience where
I thought I overdosed and I took a separate drug
which is sort of considered a psychedelic, a strong, strong amount,
and I sort of lay down and died. Basically, I died.

(51:46):
And what I thought God was what I experienced God
to be, which I don't think that it's a man
in the clouds or whatever. It was. The energy of
love came and surrounded me, my Nan, my late Nan,
who who she she I felt she was there and
I thought, this is so peaceful. And then I thought,

(52:09):
holy crap, I'm dying and God is here right now.
And then since then, I broke out of that trip
and I went to rehab, got clean, and I connect
with this thing as much as possible, whatever I know
God to be, and I'm still figuring it out. You know,
I'm only young. I'm still sort of figuring it out
as I go along. And this thing, whatever I know,

(52:31):
this is a show that is apheist run if I'm
if I'm not wrong, Sorry if I'm wrong. But this thing,
in my experience, I connect with it, and it does
wonders in my life. It really does want it. It
puts things into play for me which I never could
have believe has happened, and my life has transformed tenfold
and I never could have done.

Speaker 1 (52:52):
It on my own.

Speaker 5 (52:53):
Sorry for a bit of a rabble.

Speaker 1 (52:56):
It's fine. I just wanted to let you get your
story out, Emma, have you got anything? In response to
what Jill.

Speaker 2 (53:04):
Said, First of all, congratulations on getting clean, Joe. It's
a very very difficult thing to do and remarkable, and
I think as much as I'm very happy for you
to have this beautiful faith in this God that you've experienced,
you need to make sure you give yourself a healthy
dose of patting yourself on the back because you've done
the hard work. It's a fairly common story in the

(53:26):
conversion world of it's a fairly common story in the
psychedelic drug world as well. Have experienced something, you know,
a spiritual kind of awakening. In my opinion, from my perspective,
it's the human brain, the wonders of the human brain.

Speaker 1 (53:44):
Essentially.

Speaker 2 (53:45):
I think this is a beautiful story of you digging
yourself out of your own problems. And I love that
you describe the experience as wacky, because I love a
wacky story. And I would say that this is a
great example of the wacky experiences can occur when your
brain chemistry goes crazy with psychedelics. For me, I mean,

(54:06):
it's one of those things, isn't it, where your personal
experiences with God and spirituality and never going to translate
to another human being because we've not been inside your brain.
For me, you had a chemical experience. For you, you had
a religious experience. The important thing is that it made
your life better. And I don't really have any other thought.

Speaker 1 (54:26):
Yeah, if you don't mind you, I think one thing
that you've said really stood out to me more than
anything else, and that was when you said you died. Now,
I think there's some confusion around near death experiences, which
is what I'm assuming you meant that you had an end,

(54:47):
because a lot of people think that they died and
came back from death, but in actual fact, we have
no confirmed medical cases of anybody ever in history been
legally dead and coming back. What happens is that we
have people coming back from brain death. And that's that

(55:09):
not being legally dead, that is essentially not being dead,
because dying it isn't just a light switch where you
turn it on and off. It's a process where your
body and the whole system begins to shut down. And
in every case that has been you know, recorded and
studied properly, what we found is that when people have

(55:32):
been resuscitated, they haven't been resuscitated from legal death. They've
been resuscitated from brain death. And what's been happening is
this process of dying has been taking place, so there
is there is still, as has been recorded, kind of
glimpses of consciousness as there there is still people still

(55:56):
experience things during this process, and then and the resuscitated
they think they've been brought back from death, but it's
actually not death as we would kind of call death.
It's actually the process of dying, which has been stopped
and reversed. So I think that's I'm not diminishing your experience.

(56:17):
I fully believe that you've had the experience, but I'm
just I think it's very, very important that we understand
the difference that you know, when someone says, like in
your case, I was brought back from the dead, we're
not talking about legal death because that's never happened as
far as we're not still here.

Speaker 5 (56:35):
Yeah, so I can't decide, But does it I'm wondering,
have you ever has anyone ever come onto the show
and talked about the experience of because the obviously the
chemical or very similar chemical to dimethyl trip to mean
is released in the brain when you die. Has anyone

(56:55):
ever come onto the show and talked about the experiences
of like, oh, because I've never done it, but people
having that experience with you know, the toad's venom and
having that doing metal trip to mean experience where they
feel like they do have that brain death and say
the same sort of thing. Is that sort of similar?

Speaker 1 (57:15):
It's funny you should say that because I have a
paper in front of me which is called Classic Illucinogens
and Mystical Experiences Phenomenology and Neurocorrelates from twenty eighteen by
the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Neurosciences at
John Hopkins University. And the person who sent me this study,

(57:37):
I'm going to call them out is called Jimmy. And
he claims to hail from Texas. When he has called
every single call in show going, every single host on
every single call in show going apart from more, he
refuses to call and talk to me. And the reason
I believe he refuses and calls to talk to me

(57:58):
is because he offered me the paper as evidence that
there is a God that people can experience when they
take huge quantities of d MT, and I ripped this
paper apart, and he has refused to call in and
talk to me. For five years. I have been trying

(58:19):
to get him to call to call in and talk
to me. The lady who does the our after shows,
who facilitates our after shows over on Discord, she has
been present when I have been inviting him in to call,
and he has point blank refused to call in. He
just won't talk to me. He won't do it. This

(58:39):
is very interesting.

Speaker 5 (58:40):
The reason I feel like I called in is because
I feel like, you know, you know, after we've gone
back and forth on the old TikTok and stuff, I
feel like my views can get and yours as well
could get you know, some misconceptions over text messages. So
I thought, like, I do have respect to just phone
you and put up the confusion, because at the end
of the day, it's one of them things. It's life

(59:01):
in it. Like sometimes you just you believe something and
someone else will believe another thing, and your past will
just never cross in that sense that you'll never you'll never.
And I respect the fact that you call me out
on my tiktoks, and I know I've I've apologize again.
I've got a bit frustrated in the in the past.

Speaker 1 (59:19):
It happens, don't worry about here. It happens.

Speaker 5 (59:21):
I got to say, though, I swear, I swear on
everything right. I did not filter your comments on.

Speaker 1 (59:28):
If anyone goes on to my Tea toog page, they
will see a little picture of me doing something like that.
And the private message that Joe said was saying. I
promised me. I didn't delete your things. I didn't delete
your comments. Don't worry about it. Look, it's the bridge,
and I appreciate you calling my.

Speaker 5 (59:45):
Class is offensive for some reason, I don't.

Speaker 6 (59:49):
No, I'll tell you what it was.

Speaker 5 (59:49):
I'll tell you what it was because I got so
frustrated at you that I blocked you. But then I
thought it was so interesting that I unblocked you. So
you must have got in my head that much.

Speaker 6 (59:59):
I and that.

Speaker 1 (01:00:03):
Listen, mate, don't worry about it. I genuinely appreciate you calling.
I don't want to get back to this mystical experience
state because I have done a lot, a lot of
study in this. You know, my degree is in philosophy,
partly in philosophies and other stuff as well religious studies
and ethics, because it's a weird degree which just encompasses
lots of things. But one of the kind of the

(01:00:26):
things I'm most interested in in philosophy, like a personal
passion of mine, is consciousness studies. So I've done a
lot of stuff. I've been meditating for twenty plus years,
so a lot of this stuff in this paper that
was sent to me about these mystical experiences I've actually experienced.

(01:00:47):
There's something which are called the kind of six dimensions
of mysterious experience mystical experience, which were put forward by
a guy called Walter Stace, and they are sacredness and
poetic quality, deeply felt, positive mood, and joy, ineffability, paradoxicality

(01:01:08):
under the transcendence of time and space. And I'm sure
that sounds very, very familiative familiar to you considering your
own experience. I've experienced those in meditation. I have a
friend who is a Buddhist monk who was also addicted
to drugs when he was younger, and he started practicing Buddhism,

(01:01:28):
and he credits Buddhism as being the kind of power
that pulled him through that and having those experiences. And
he connects the meditative Buddhist meditative experience with these experiences
it had on drugs when he was on drugs, and
I think there is certainly something going on. There's certainly

(01:01:50):
something happening. The disconnect I have is when it's used
to say this is evidence or proved to me that
God exists. And that's where the disconnect comes from me,
because I've had these experiences. Myself, I do not believe
that God exists. And on top of that, I know Muslims,

(01:02:11):
I know Buddhists, I know Christians, I know Hindus who've
also had these experiences and cite these experiences as evidence
that their religion is true and that their God exists. Now,
I'm sure you can see a problem here, and this
is you know, when we were talking about in the

(01:02:32):
early conversations we had on TikTok, when I was talking
about why epistemology is so important, there is a major,
major problem here, and that is, although these experiences may
seem compelling, not all of those religions can be true
because they contradict each other. So there has to be
something that gives. There has to be something that gives.

(01:02:54):
And what I think what we can say at best
is that and this has been hugely generous I think,
is that one of the religions is true and the
others are false. But that experience is not a good
enough experience. It's not a good enough methodology to say
which of those religions is true. And I think that's

(01:03:17):
for me where the problem arises. Because I can accept that,
you carry on, please carry.

Speaker 5 (01:03:24):
On are you saying like in that sense, let's say hypothetically,
are you saying that like that if one of the
religions was true. Are you saying that they are like
wholeheartedly true, like every part of the religion is true.
Or is it possible that some elements to each religion
that is true and then some that have been fabricated

(01:03:47):
over time and lost in translation.

Speaker 1 (01:03:49):
That's a great question. That is actually a really really
good question. And this relates back to that paper I
referenced earlier. So, first of all, I don't think any
of them are true. I'm the only an abrot over
the one of them maybe true. Is that I'm kind
of giving a kind of benefit of the doubt argument here,
just to present a point. I don't believe any of

(01:04:10):
them true. But at best, being the most generous we
can be, we could say that even if one of
them was true, whether in whole or in part, having
one of these experiences is not a good enough methodology
to say this can be used as evidence or proof
that this is true, because other people of alternative theories

(01:04:35):
also claim this evidence as their religion. Now that's one
part of it. The other part of it, which raised
was about this picking things up. There is a thing
called perennial philosophy, and this is what this paper is
actually about, and it talks about that very thing you've
just mentioned, that there are common factors when people have
these experiences, and we can take we can take kind

(01:05:00):
of little bits of we can take these common factors
and say this describes in an ultimate reality in which
God is present, and there are other bits of the
religion which we can kind of throw aside and ignore.
And they actually talk about this in this paper. The
problem with doing that is it seems, having reread this

(01:05:22):
and other papers and spoken to people on this at
length who believe this to be true, it seems that
those common factors, those commonalities, are the things that they
want them to be to make their particular version of
this perennial philosophy true, and the kind of dismiss lots

(01:05:43):
of really really important factors, like some cultural experiences, some
personal experiences that don't fit in to this picture they
have of this perennial philosophy. Now, that's all well and good,
but it's not particularly a good methodology because we know

(01:06:03):
from speaking anthropologically, if that's how you say the word
from an anthropologist point of view, that where things like
the way religions come about and the history and the
lineage and the culture are all very very important to
informing these kind of experiences to begin with. So I

(01:06:26):
think it's very I think it's very difficult to say
that on one hand, yeah, we're going to accept these
mystical experiences that people have that are informed by the
culture and the things, but at the same time, simultaneously
this missed that stuff. And we have a very good
we have a very good record, you know, We've got

(01:06:48):
anthropologists and historians who've studied, like the Nealythic period was
the period where organized religion and organized society and warfare
all came to be a thing. It all happened in
the Neolithic period, and this this commonality happened throughout the

(01:07:12):
world that slightly different times, it happened throughout the world,
and those cultural influencers are influencing these experiences that people have.
And I just don't think you can so easily separate
the fact that on one hand it's cultural, but on
the other hand, dismissing just the cultural aspects and accepting

(01:07:33):
these bits which inform this mystical belief I've spoken for
a long long time, Joe, i'd, you know, please respond
to what I've said. Then I'm going to let Emma
jump in and respond to you.

Speaker 6 (01:07:42):
No, I.

Speaker 5 (01:07:44):
Somewhat agree with that. I do actually agree with that,
and you know, apologies for I just want to say, like,
apology for my lack of knowledge on the subject, because,
like I said, like I'm twenty one now, I've only
had what I believe is this connection with God for
two years of my life. Sorry, and you know, i'd

(01:08:05):
like to say as well, sorry, I don't have too
much longer. I don't want to waste your time or nothing.
But I just wanted to say, like, I'm not actually religious.
I'm not religious. I don't with religion. I'd like say
the Christian religion, Like do I believe that, Okay, if
there was a God, would that God bring me onto

(01:08:26):
this earth for there being a possibility of ternal eternal damnation?
While that is just crazy? What what even is that about? Like, well,
how is that even fair? And if I don't believe
that Jesus Christ is Lord, then I'm going to help.
That's that's crazy, that's craziness. Like to me, that is insanity.
What I do believe is that there is a source

(01:08:50):
from what from my personal experience source, call it whatever
you want. I'm currently studying the Master Key System by
Charles F.

Speaker 3 (01:08:58):
Harnell.

Speaker 5 (01:08:59):
He calls it the universal Mind or Creator or whatever
you want to call it.

Speaker 6 (01:09:04):
That is all.

Speaker 5 (01:09:06):
That is the only bit of where I'm at with
my connection with I call it God because it's easier
to call it that way, and that's how people know it.
But really and truly, like again, I do apologize if
I've gone off topic of what you've said and I've
not responded entirely of what you said, because I haven't,
I apologize, but I haven't looked into the religions quote

(01:09:28):
unquote religions as such, quite frankly, because at this stake
in my life, I'm not really that interested in researching them.
I'm more interested in this connection that I have with
this higher being, higher self, whatever you want to call it.
For me, personally, I feel that it's there. My life
is tenfold better. You know. The Master Quee system says

(01:09:52):
that we are all it experiencing itself, which is a
bit of a crazy one. I don't know what it is,
but for me, I know that it's there, and I
know I keep was going on and say this again.
I do apologize that I've called up the show with
such lack of knowledge on the object.

Speaker 1 (01:10:09):
I am so glad you've called you. I really, really am.
There's a there's an old Buddhist joke that goes something
like a guy walks up to a hot dog stand
and the tender says, what do you want? And it
says one with everything? Ha ha ha. So yeah, look,
it's great. I'm gonna if Emma doesn't die laughing, I'm
gonna let Emma respond here and then we are going

(01:10:30):
to move on. So we've got a couple of more
calls to take. I just want to say thank you
so much for calling. Keep making your TikTok videos, keep
going on your journey, and if you do want to
call back and discuss any of your experiences, you are
more than welcome to do. So please do.

Speaker 5 (01:10:46):
Thank you, Richard. It's good to talk to you, mate.

Speaker 1 (01:10:48):
Emma.

Speaker 2 (01:10:48):
Yeah, no, I think I basically said everything that I
thought earlier. I'm just very happy for you on this journey.
I mentioned fairly often. Again, I just I really you
read the same books over and over again. Because I'm
not a science brain, and I have to I forget everything.
But I like reading about quantum physics and quantum mathematics,

(01:11:10):
and I really like Carla Ravelli and he talks about
this kind of preferred theory of quantum mechanics. I think
it's called relational quantum mechanics. But the idea is that
at its base level, everything only exists in relationship with
each other. And I always feel the most I guess
you would call it spiritually connected with everything and the

(01:11:32):
fact that technically, scientifically it seems possible that everything is
simply just one system that only exists in the way
that we relate to each other. And for me, that
doesn't inspire a kind of deity you like idea, but
it gives me a sense of peace in a way.
And I think that a similar kind of experience, and
it's just one of those things. It's a beautiful personal experience.

(01:11:54):
We're never going to be able to fully appreciate each
other's experiences because we're not in each other's brain. I'm
just glad that you I'm glad that you're well and
that you agree that you know, certain ideas are a
little bit cooky. I think we think we have a
lot of ideas in common, so you keep on keeping on.

Speaker 1 (01:12:10):
Yeah, thanks very much. I'm going to let you go, mate.
Thanks for calling in and out speak to you soon. Yeah,
that was a good I'm so glad he called in.
I genuinely didn't expect him to call, but I am
so so glad it has. I just want to touch
before we move on on. What you said then, about
that kind of spiritual experienced I've been writing about kind

(01:12:33):
of trying to describe in as few words as possible
reality in this book I'm writing at the minute, and
it is. It's a tough task. And I've been reading.
I mean, I'm interested in cosmology and physics and stuff
anyway as a laperson strictly as a layperson, but I've
been getting like knee deep into you know, reading lots

(01:12:57):
of papers off from Einstein and stuff. In the past week.
I've literally thrown myself into doing this kind of looking
into the physics side of this to kind of get
this description across two people. And I have to say
that is when I feel most wow. Man. You know,
I've meditated for a long time. I have what you

(01:13:18):
might call I hate this word don't crucify the audience
as spiritual experience. I hate that word. I hate it
when Sam uses it. I don't know why I'm using
it myself. Just this sense of awe and wonder. I
could have just said that to begin with with that,
that stupid word. This sense of awe and wonder, it
is amazing. And when you're thinking about the universe, and

(01:13:41):
I've been, I've been writing out some thought experiments in
this book to try and get people to think and
connect personally with just the vastness of the universe, and
it really really is or inspiring. A long, long time ago,
there was a band called Hawkwind and they had a
song called Space is Deep and I just love that

(01:14:04):
title because it's got that double double the kind of
meaning of it being big and deep.

Speaker 3 (01:14:11):
Man.

Speaker 1 (01:14:11):
Wow, man, I just I just love that title. I
think it really captures it. So anyway, let's let's move on.
We have patrons, So I'm going to ask Emma, if
you have access to the document, which I believe you do,
to read down our top five patrons if you will.

Speaker 6 (01:14:31):
Yeah, okay.

Speaker 2 (01:14:32):
Our top five patrons are oops all Singularity, which is
so fitting for today. We have Diane Kiran's I'm pronouncing
that right, Dingleberry Jackson. We have kalievil Helvetti. I don't
know why, I'm like, I like adjusting my glasses, like
that's going to change our place. My monitor is to

(01:14:52):
my face my partners laughing, I mean looking at my
laptop by leaning in. We have Hey Carlton and honorable
Mention Hell's Bells. Thank you very much, buddy, Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:15:06):
Thank you very much for that. Of course, we appreciate
all our patrons, and if you would like to have
your name read on air, then please consider supporting us
at tiny dot c seat slash, Patreon th and we
have started recording the talk. He then discord after shows,
and that's for all levels of paid Patreon. So if
you want more content from us, and you really do

(01:15:27):
get lots of insight into the kind of a bit
more about the hosts and a bit more in depth
about their backgrounds and things, it really really is worth
listening to. We have a couple of more super chats.
We have Herbie Shine, who has sent ten pounds, he said.
Jimmy was recently using a Facebook page to spread his

(01:15:48):
dese equal God experience. He changed his name several times
over the months until Promise banned him. He would he
wouldn't have a genuine chat. I've talked about him, you know,
for you know, it's not here to defend himself. I
wish he was, which he would actually call in and
defend himself because I've been asking for a long long time.

(01:16:08):
But yeah, it is what it is. Morgan underscore. Fleeman
sends another CHF five I still don't wise and says,
allow me to confuse you with some more HF brilliant,
Thank you. I absolutely love that. And Miranda Rensberg, who's

(01:16:29):
been a member for one year, sends ten dollars and says,
when you use a chemical nun to alter your mental perceptions,
why on earth would you then insist that you're chemically
altered perceptions are evidence for a day to say you
already know what caused it? Fair point. I can't really
argue with that. We have got Tom from Mississippe, and

(01:16:51):
he has got two very short stories in response to
the poll. Hi, Tom, welcome to the show, and please
take it away.

Speaker 6 (01:16:57):
Okay, this first story taught me a lesson the second
story I'm still puzzled by. So the first story is
I was talking to a homeless guy in a parking
lot one day and a couple of cop cars showed up.
He was a little nervous, so I invited him to
my car and we sat there talking about life and living,

(01:17:18):
and at one point he asked me what church do
you go to and I said I don't go to
any church.

Speaker 3 (01:17:23):
I'm an atheist.

Speaker 6 (01:17:24):
And he said, don't kid yourself, brother, we're having church
right now, and I realized he was absolutely right. I mean,
he believed in God. I didn't. But we were there
in community and charity, talking about being human. So that's
the lesson I've kept. Church isn't about God. Second story
is the one I don't understand at a There's a

(01:17:45):
local coffee shop I offered go to and is often
frequented by I think he's an Episcopalian priest. And we
see each other often enough, so you know, Hi, how's
it going. And one day I noticed he was reading
a CS Lewis book, one which I hadn't read, so
I thought it might be a chance to strike up
a conversation.

Speaker 3 (01:18:04):
So I said C. S.

Speaker 6 (01:18:05):
Lewis interesting writer, but personally I don't find that persuasive
and bang, the shutters came right down, the frigidaire started
growing off with them, and that was it. And I
can't figure out. I didn't say you're an idiot if
you think C. S. Lewis is good, I said, I
don't think he's precise. But that was enough to just
completely freeze me right out the door. And I don't

(01:18:27):
understand why.

Speaker 1 (01:18:28):
Yeah, it happens. Funnily enough, just before the show in
the green room, we were we were talking about how C. S.
Lewis is not all compelling.

Speaker 2 (01:18:39):
Complaining about.

Speaker 1 (01:18:41):
So very very apt. I think, Emma, any response to
that experience? Have you ever had anything like that where
people have just shut down straight away, not responding to you?

Speaker 2 (01:18:52):
Sure, oh sure, there's a I mean there's a million examples.
There's a guy who another English guy who bait on
Twitch and he talks more about politics than religion and things.
But you get super cuts every now and then of
people that shut down just immediately being asked some kind
of you know, some kind of challenge to their own

(01:19:14):
perspective results in name calling and hanging out the phone.

Speaker 5 (01:19:17):
You know.

Speaker 2 (01:19:17):
It just some people just aren't prepared to confront anything,
and that's just life.

Speaker 1 (01:19:22):
I'm afraid. Yeah, I tend to agree. Is it's weird
because I had a I mean, I've had the experience
with religious people. But I'll tell them. Going to tell
you a little story now, if you're all sitting comfortably.
I was once drafted in. I have the opportunity sometimes
to play the bass guitar, and I was drafted in

(01:19:42):
by someone and I only kind of half knew these guys,
but they needed a bass player for a concert they
were doing in Oxford, so they drafted me and I
went and practiced with them. We went down and we
did it was for super Toffs. Really was like super Toss,
like in this barn on this land in the middle
of the So we went in, we played the concert.
We did a bunch of just like average due songs,

(01:20:05):
and I was talking to a guy afterwards and we
got on really really well. And we were talking for
about an hour and it was like gains at like
one o'clock, two o'clock in the morning. It was getting
on a couple of vodkas and we're having this conversation
and getting on really really well. And this was going
back a long long time. This was before i'd been
to university or anything. And he said to me, just

(01:20:28):
like out of the blue during the conversation, I forgot
to ask you which university did you go to? And oh,
I didn't go to any university. No, I don't need
that university life and all that. Then Oh, and it
literally about tailed and walked away from me. It happens
in all walks of lives for all sorts of reasons.

(01:20:52):
It's one of those things, unfortunately, and it is something
you come across quite a lot with religious people. Some
people have prepared for these conversations, some people aren't. Some
people want these conversations, some people don't. You know, the
previous caller, we we we've been going back and forth
on tikbok TikTok, TikTok TikTok for quite a while when

(01:21:15):
I've been trying to persuade him to call, and you know,
I'm glad he's kind of taken the steps to do it,
but it was really resistant to start with. He really
didn't want to, you know, he literally said, I don't
want to talk to you about this stuff.

Speaker 6 (01:21:29):
And some people leading to that kind of relating to
that conversation a bit you just mentioned based guitar, which
is a point we early time and so for me
the long long ago. But also I think you mentioned
studying in disciplines which allowed you to have transidental experience.
I studied for quite a while and was able to

(01:21:51):
have transcendental experiences almost well, but interestingly enough for me
that moved it need a lot of way from theology
and away from spiritualism towards atheism.

Speaker 1 (01:22:02):
I was an atheist.

Speaker 6 (01:22:03):
That was going on in Yeah, what was going on
in my brain? And when you look at what goes
out in your brain, I think, yeah, yeah, you kind
of kind of get away from spiritual I was.

Speaker 1 (01:22:13):
An atheist when I started meditating. I got into it
through martial arts. It was I didn't even mean to
get into it. And yeah, I had a traditional I
had like a proper traditional relationship for the first year
of meditating with a Chinese chan priest who was strict

(01:22:38):
and from from a from the aspect of practicing meditation,
it was good for me. It probably wasn't entirely legal,
but it was good for me and from that perspective,
and I you know, I had many, many of these
experiences that you might call mystical experiences, which I preferred
just to call or inspiring, to get all of the

(01:23:00):
wo out of it, because I've never felt anything supernatural
connected to it, never at all. And that's been the
one thing that I've really kind of you know, I've
been studying the texts of Buddhism for probably something like
fifteen years. I've been meditating for just over twenty years.

(01:23:21):
I've been studying the text of Buddhism from an academic
level for just over about fifteen years something along those lines.
And you know, I've got really like deep into them,
looked at the different perspectives of them, different schools of Buddhism.
I've been, like I say, I've been up to temples
and stayed, I've been on retreats, and I have never

(01:23:41):
no matter how intense a meditation was, no matter what
the conversations have been. And these are just to clarify
people who believe in the supernatural aspects of Buddhism. I
know not everybody does, but you know, the kind of
monasteries I've stayed at do believe they were tie based monasteries,
and believe indeavas that cause storms and all sorts of nonsense.

(01:24:05):
And I've never been compelled by any of the stories
I've heard, any of the anecdotes I've heard. I've got
a bookshelf full of books by Buddhist mystics and people
who have witnessed them doing things, and it just doesn't
It's not compelling to me at all.

Speaker 7 (01:24:24):
And I think, here, here, you and I hear you,
and I differ in that in my studies it was
never spiritually or mystically oriented, but I and also there
were never any drugs involved at all.

Speaker 6 (01:24:40):
But I will possibly another point of contact. When I
first interviewed the sense, he told me, if you've worked very,
very hard, it can be in a black belt three years,
but if you work very hard, it will probably take
you five or six.

Speaker 1 (01:24:52):
Yeah, I love nonsense like that. What is the sound
of one hand class?

Speaker 5 (01:24:57):
It was.

Speaker 6 (01:24:59):
Actually about it a while. You've got to make money.
He's got to make money, which give people black belt.
But if you want to be a real student, then
he's going to really teach you and don't expect immediate rewards.

Speaker 1 (01:25:13):
Yeah, I just I don't find stuff like that compelling.
I know, I get what you're saying. There is not
a mystical thing in that regard, but things like that
are used to kind of display this kind of mysticism.
You know, these these there's lots of Coan's and riddles
and things, and you know, it's.

Speaker 6 (01:25:36):
Just I think the closest I got to anything really
mystic was I studied with a student of Gerchief for
about three years. That was an interesting experience.

Speaker 1 (01:25:44):
Yeah, I think a lot of them. I think a
lot of these these They can be interesting. But as
I say, you know, bodied armor can be as mystical
as he likes, but it's gonna it's not very skeptical
about stuff, and that I think is the kind of
crooks for me. Tom, we appreciate your call me. We

(01:26:05):
are going to have to let you go because we
are over time. So thank you for calling in if
I've've had a really good show today, And I said,
and that didn't mean that's sound quite as surprising as
I was. Last week there were a lot of comments
in the chart on YouTube complaining about the kind of

(01:26:28):
calls we'd had. But you know, we're going to take calls.
You know, I think I adequately defended those callers to
those people concerned. Look, we get all sorts, and we
take all sorts, and you know, that's the nature of things.
Sometimes you're going to like the calls, and sometimes you know,
we're not going to not take calls because you find
a certain person or a certain subject untoward. I was

(01:26:51):
on the show yesterday talking about animal consciousness and veganism,
and we've had vegan calls on this show in the past,
and people have complained about them, you know, saying why
you're or get taken vegan calls. You should be talking
about God. You know, as far as I'm concerned, ethics
is part of the largest fear of what we talk about.
And those calls are welcome, and you know, sometimes you

(01:27:11):
get calls that you don't like. You I'm afraid. I'm sorry,
and I appreciate you all supporting the show, but you're
just gonna have to bear with it because the good
ones will come up when you do that. So on
that note, we are going to remind you of the
prompts for this week Jesus's Last Words, wrong answers only
replying the comments and tune in at the beginning of

(01:27:32):
next week's episode to hear the top three answers. I
do want to thank Jamie for backing up today and
helping out there, he is, Jamie, your thoughts, because I
am sure you have got many.

Speaker 4 (01:27:45):
So a lot of little bollocks. Anyway, Well, I haven't
my head, my pie. I had to tell you what
might now, very briefly, Boltzman brain, I'm cribbing from the chat.
Would it not be an emergent thing in our universe
therefore constrained by natural law? I mean, I don't think
anything that would be constrained by natural law would be

(01:28:08):
called a god? Would you just throwing the word god around? Secondly, Joe,
even if I give you all all the toys, let's
say there is some universal's transcendental thing that you can
tap into, and all these different religions are tapping into
it differently and just interpreting it differently.

Speaker 1 (01:28:25):
I give you all that.

Speaker 4 (01:28:26):
Two people come up to me, one of whom took
a bunch of DMPT and talked to God, and the
other one just trip balls and thinks he talked to God.
How do I tell the difference? What methodology can we
use to differentiate truth from fiction on that one? Because
testimony don't really work for my chief, sorry, And that's.

Speaker 1 (01:28:47):
Pretty much it.

Speaker 4 (01:28:48):
Other than I think you'll fansa that your continual melaparapisms
and fairly to probably yours the English language, queen's language,
not the king's back him really was the side down by.

Speaker 1 (01:29:04):
I have no fucking idea what you just said. We
had We had someone in the comment in the chat
and I didn't address it at the time because we
were on the call with Joe and I didn't want
to kind of get distracted from that who said was
complaining that the British British episode of Talkiden and it's

(01:29:24):
all represented by English people. Can I just pull it
out that little flag there is not I know you're
going to be angry, says Scotland on it. Thank you
very much and good night. So for the rest of you,
I'm on the joking it says, you know, fair comment,

(01:29:46):
you can be forgiven. We have got another super chat
and that is from Morgan Fleeman who says, no worries Richard.
I'll come in the after show and explain what HF
it's really on. Getting way way too overcomplicated for a
simple currency. Donish. Anybody wants to come into the ACD

(01:30:09):
have to show you are more than welcome. We will
all be there. You can hang out with us for
a little while. The address is tiny dot c c
slash ACD discord. And if you don't believe, this is
your community and we appreciate you being here, being here,
and if you do believe in I hope this has
been demonstrated today with you know, Joe calling. We're not

(01:30:32):
going We're not going to jump on everybody. We're not
going to just attack you just because you really just
have these experiences. We're going to talk to you and
try and walk through whether these are justification for believing
what you believe, and that's what we do. We're not
here to shout, we're not here to ball, we're not
here to really like raise hell with you just because

(01:30:52):
you believe something different to us. That's not what we're
about all on this show. So if you're nervous for
calling in, if you are a really just believe it,
and you're nervous about calling in because you think I've
seen these shows before, all it is is a horse
ganging up on us and shouting at me, and it's
going to make me feel uncomfortable. You're not going to
get that with us. We will match your energy. If

(01:31:14):
you come in like Joe did, like the first caller
did and just explain your experience. We're going to have
a conversation. We might challenge you on it, but we're
going to be nice about it. We're going to have
a friendly conversation with you. If you come in balls tripping,
saying you're wrong, you know that you're wrong, You're way
toss are always wrong, Your talk shit all the time,

(01:31:36):
rah rah. Trust me, I will match your energy, but
I'm not going to meet you like that to begin with.
That's not what we're about here. So if you don't believe,
we don't hate you, we're just not convinced. We'll see
you next time.

Speaker 7 (01:32:08):
We want the truth.

Speaker 1 (01:32:09):
So watch Truth Wanted Live Fridays at seven pm Central.

Speaker 6 (01:32:13):
Call five one two nine nine one nine two four
two or visit tiny dot cc forward slash call tw