Truth Wanted 08.43 with Kelley Laughlin and Flabbergasted

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You know, a lot of different people believe in a
lot of different things, and that's why we're here every Friday.
If you believe in alternative facts, or a conspiracy, or
what others might call pseudoscience, or even a religion, we
want to talk to you about why you believe it
and examine the evidence that you provide us. So give
us a call because the show is starting right now. Hello,

(00:26):
Welcome to another episode of Truth Wanted. I am your host,
Kelly Laughlin, and this is a live calling show that
happens every single week on Friday at seven pm Central,
where we talk to people about what they believe and
why they believe it. And if you'd like, you can
call us at one five one two nine nine one
nine two four to two or through your computer at

(00:49):
tiny through your computer at tiny dot cc slash call
tw Truth Wanted is a product of the Atheist Community
of Austin of five oh one c three nonprofit organization
dedicated to the promotion of atheism, critical thinking, secular humanism,
and the separation of religion and government. And every week

(01:10):
we have a special guest on the show and today
is no different and I want to introduce my special
guest flabbergast and how you doing, buddy.

Speaker 2 (01:17):
I'm doing great. I'm excited to be here.

Speaker 1 (01:19):
I'm excited to have you here. I really am. I've
been looking forward to this all week, so I really
have Well.

Speaker 2 (01:25):
I'm glad. I'm glad we're both feeling better to do
it too, because I know both of us were a
little sick earlier in the week. So this is right, Yeah,
a great way to end the week that hasn't been
super hot for us.

Speaker 1 (01:35):
Before we get started, we always like to do last
week's We Want the Truth question, and we usually bring
up our back up post, and today's going to be
no different than any other week. So I'd like to
bring up Damien real quick and he can take us
through our questions of the week.

Speaker 3 (01:51):
Hello, gentlemen, and well of suddenly suddenly in between both
of you, so you go to see you Jeremy, and
good to see you Killy.

Speaker 1 (01:59):
Yeah, that's good. I'm happy to have you here. This
is awesome. We could actually do an episode of non
Profits right now, couldn't we?

Speaker 2 (02:05):
We could, We could, we can do Yes, haven't we
done that before? I feel I feel it.

Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah, I feel like we have.

Speaker 3 (02:10):
Last week we asked you what is the best sci
fi religion and why? And here are our favorite answers.
Number three from per Milson two three nine four says
the techno religion from the table top game Warhammer forty
k there. Number two comes from Chuck Gaidos. The best
sci fi religion is the Way of the Prophets on

(02:33):
Behor in a star Trek deep space nine. Just like
the Christian God, their gods exist outside of time, even
better than the Christian God. Their gods are real. And
number one, drum roll please. Number one from Peanut Hamper.
The best sci fi religion is probably the Church of

(02:54):
All Worlds. From Stranger in a Strange Land. You get
to learn the Martian language and philosophy and how to
grock correctly. Bonus is clothing optional.

Speaker 1 (03:04):
Yeah, I could crack that.

Speaker 2 (03:06):
I'd give a shot better than the most religions that
we have in our world. At least you had me
at Grock.

Speaker 1 (03:11):
Yeah. I remember ate a bus many years ago and
I asked if you had ever read Strange and Strange Land,
and you went no, I couldn't crack it. That true story.
So what is our problem for next week?

Speaker 3 (03:23):
Damien propt for next week is let me just quickly
pop down the pope. Was it?

Speaker 4 (03:28):
Where was it?

Speaker 3 (03:28):
Where was it? Oh Jesu, I've I have lost. The
prompt next week is if you were invisible in a
church service, what would you do?

Speaker 1 (03:37):
I might pee in the holy water.

Speaker 2 (03:39):
I think I would gently go around and blow on
the Bibles so they're turning pages to different things.

Speaker 3 (03:46):
I would lift the pasta up and like listened to
in the air and like carrying him around as if,
like you know, he was being carried off to the
crucifixion and maybe even crucifying. I've had like a big,
big camera from nails right there. It's like, hey, it's you.

Speaker 1 (04:02):
Know, if that was a Catholic church, that Ga might
become a saint for doing for you doing this.

Speaker 2 (04:08):
Pick wisely? Who your.

Speaker 4 (04:10):
OK?

Speaker 3 (04:11):
Fine, I'll research my priests the bosses before.

Speaker 1 (04:14):
Yeah, all right, thanks a lot. Hey you got it,
flabber gass, you have any you did give an answer?
Oh my, both my brain cells have been getting stuck
together all week. All right, Damien, we're going to have
you back at least at the end of the show.
So thanks for coming up and doing the questions with us,
and we'll see in a little bit. Hey, and now
here is the point of the show where we usually

(04:34):
talk to our guests and learn a little bit about them.
So flabbergasted, What can we learn about you that's interesting?

Speaker 2 (04:40):
Well, I am a historian. I used to be a
history teacher, and like that's my bread and butter. I
used to teach debate, and I taught whole classes on
on fallacies and argumentation and how to defend an argument,
how to pick apart argument. So that's that's uh stuff
that I really really love to sink my teeth in.

Speaker 4 (05:00):
Too.

Speaker 1 (05:00):
Awesome, I love that. Yeah, well, your ship fit in
really well right here then, And if people wanted to
see more of you somewhere, where would they go?

Speaker 2 (05:09):
You can find me on TikTok. I'm flabbergasted at zero
zero one is where I do most of my stuff,
though I've been a bit lazy the past month.

Speaker 1 (05:16):
It happens, it happens. And also, as I mentioned earlier,
we could also find you on the nonprofits here in
the ACA as well.

Speaker 2 (05:23):
It's correct. Yeah, I've just recorded a couple of days ago,
so you'll see a couple more with me and some
of my wonderful friends coming out this upcoming week awesome.

Speaker 1 (05:30):
I was supposed to be on those but I ducked
out because I was really sick, and I feel really
bad about it.

Speaker 2 (05:34):
But I know I was afraid I was going to
miss you out on you today, I was like, Oh,
what happens if he doesn't get better by Friday?

Speaker 1 (05:39):
No, yeah, I was. I was starting to feel I'm
feeling a little bit better yesterday. Today I'm still a
little bit off my stomach, but I'm not doing too bad.
So I took some anti nausea drugs before the show started,
so I feel pretty good. I feel hopefully.

Speaker 2 (05:51):
Hopefully no one comes in with anything that makes us
nauseous on their merits, right.

Speaker 1 (05:55):
That's yeah. So you mentioned you were you have a
history boff. You love history and todd history. What's your
favorite point of part of history or points in history?
Is what I guess I should say.

Speaker 2 (06:06):
So I when I was in when I was still
in university, I wrote my thesis on the rise of
Japanese ulter nationalism prior to World War Two, So I
really love that kind of conversation, like how did a
society fall into alternationalism and all of the problems of
alternationalism that come along with it, and like that tied

(06:28):
in a lot to my fascination interest with Japanese history
in Japan, which is like what I focused in in
most of my degrees, and so yeah, that's that's probably
one of my favorite things. It's a really good case
study to look at because they didn't have a lot
of history in the same way that like Western societies
did when we come into the early nineteen hundreds, so

(06:49):
you see a lot of change really fast. You get
to see how new ideas really kind of start shifting
in the population.

Speaker 1 (06:55):
And this is kind of started with the Meiji Restoration, right, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (06:58):
The Meiji Restoration came in, and then that was basically
at first a rejection of the empire, uh the empirical system,
and then that kind of flopped back around where they
then re embraced it and then opened up to the West,
and and a lot of flip flopping around as you
tendency in history. They they started with the movement, realized

(07:18):
it wasn't going to go the way they wanted it to,
started swapping on positions to kind of solidify power, took
the emperor, put him on a pedestal as as as
a figurehead who had no real power, which is why
after World War Two not a lot of people held
the emperor to a lot of credibility because he didn't
have any actual real authority in that position. He was
a figurehead the whole time. And yeah, so like like then,

(07:42):
how that leads into a rising international and they built
alternationals and they built up a new version of Japanese
nationalism that they started spreading through the population that really
kind of got this very fervent, uh like like hyper
fixation on how they are right, and that led to

(08:03):
what they started doing in World War two. They then
went out into well even prior to World War Two,
they went out to Korea and the East Asian Islands
and all that stuff and started kind of colonizing and
doing all that stuff. And that is all a product
of the rising internationalism which comes as a result of
their war with Russia actually and discontentment within the population

(08:24):
of the fact that they won the war with Russia
but they got nothing for it, and so that's the
whole thing.

Speaker 1 (08:29):
Yeah, yeah, that's awesome. That's awesome. I actually would love
to sit and talk to you about that for like
an hour, but I didn't do it always. Yeah, I
don't think our viewers would go for it, because that
sounds awesome to me.

Speaker 2 (08:40):
Trying to like consolate, consolidate the information and not just
go off on for hours just rambling about the things
about this because.

Speaker 1 (08:47):
I was always I was always amazed at how fast
they industrialized their society to catch up with the West.
You know, that was just so amazing to me that
they were able to do so much so quickly. That's
why I said, I consider to talk about this for
a while.

Speaker 2 (09:00):
Yeah, absolutely all day. That is that is it's what
I love. But I really love to hear since history
is like my field, it's what I love, it's what
I do. I want to hear from people who think
that history and what they understand about history is something
they can use to support their supernatural or religious or
like like pseudo scientific claims, because like like that's not

(09:23):
how history usually works, right, Yeah, that's what that's that's
what I'm excited about. Right now.

Speaker 1 (09:30):
We got some people in the chat saying that they
would listen to you and I talk and with the
history wanted, let's do it.

Speaker 4 (09:37):
Well.

Speaker 1 (09:38):
I would love to we are Colleger.

Speaker 2 (09:40):
We've got a new show on the line. Already, there
we go, there we go, just rack it up.

Speaker 1 (09:44):
Well, we need his crew. You guys want to all
voluntarily got a crew going, we'll have the show, so
uh we probably we we do have a call. You
want to go ahead and take the call? Might it
might be a little interesting, it might be a little
uh well, well we'll get there.

Speaker 2 (09:58):
I'm sure we'll have a great time.

Speaker 1 (09:59):
We got This is somebody who calls in a lot.
It's John from Canada. Hi, John, how you doing?

Speaker 2 (10:04):
We lose them already?

Speaker 1 (10:05):
Can we hear you?

Speaker 5 (10:06):
John?

Speaker 1 (10:06):
We were having some problems with the Colin studio audio
before the show. That's why we had a late start,
so we might still be having that problem. I'm going
to return John to the queue and let the crew
work that one out and maybe we'll end up talking
more about the industry. The pre world ward to.

Speaker 2 (10:24):
Japan Japanese modernization. Yeah, like like just kind of to
dump jump back into Japanese modernization. Something that I found
really fascinating about that whole era and the rise of
ulternationalism is how Japan started building a narrative about what
it means to be Japanese and I'm sure a lot
of people are familiar with the concept of bushido, Yeah, right,

(10:46):
the Japanese code of honor that is very kin in
a lot of ways to chivalry, and it's mostly made up,
especially the version of it that we understand today. It
was it was fabricated effectively on this overly romanticized version
of Japanese history and used to kind of pitch this
idea of this is what it means to be Japanese.
That same ideology is also one of the reasons why

(11:08):
Japan was so popular in across the world. Like prior
to World War Two, Japan was looked upon very favorably
by Western powers, particularly England and the US, and like
very friendly with them, and they viewed Japan as like
this enlightened version of an Asian society, which because they
were racist, of course, yeah, and so it was they

(11:31):
crafted this narrative not only for their own internal usage,
but also to create a narrative about how the rest
of the world sees them. And it's a really interesting
thing about building a false historical narrative to give yourself
credibility that otherwise you might not have.

Speaker 1 (11:46):
Japan fought to wars against Russia no, so they fought.

Speaker 2 (11:50):
The Russo Japanese War, which is often known as World
War zero yep, also known as World War zero, the
precursor to World War One, and set the stage for
a lot of kind of that tension. And then technically
they were against Russia during World War two, but they
didn't actually fight Russia. The war was Russia them.

Speaker 1 (12:06):
I was thinking of the battles in Mongolia before, just
before World War two, Galkin Goal. No, it doesn't.

Speaker 2 (12:12):
Ring uh not off the top of my head.

Speaker 1 (12:14):
I think it was in nineteen thirty seven or thirty eight,
the Russians and the Japanese, the Kwantong Army from Manchurio
fought the Russians.

Speaker 6 (12:22):
History.

Speaker 2 (12:23):
Oh yeah, yeah, I told you I was a history.
But oh yeah, yeah, okay, okay, yeah. There were border
border skirmishes, so that wasn't like yes, yeah, okay, you
said wars.

Speaker 1 (12:33):
I was like, I was like, oh yeah, it was.
There was some There was a really big tank battle,
galkn Gole. It was actually the biggest tank battle in
history up into the time that had happened, and it really,
uh it actually showed the superiority of Russian tanks that
were totally inferior just a few years later.

Speaker 2 (12:50):
So well, they had to build up after. I mean,
they were very much embarrassed after losing to Japan in
the Russo Japanese War, because they should have won. They
had all of the advantages. The only advantage that Japan
had was like like proximity, well and training. They actually
they did pretty good in that regard as well, and

(13:12):
so and luck, of course, as with every war, luck
plays a huge part. And so then after that kind
of international embarrassment, there was a lot of motivation for
Russia to demonstrate their their military capacity afterwards.

Speaker 1 (13:27):
But I just checked with the crew they're still working
at in Collins studio.

Speaker 4 (13:30):
Problem.

Speaker 1 (13:30):
That was what really launched Japan into becoming a major
world power was the Rust Japanese War.

Speaker 2 (13:36):
No, it was in a lot of ways, yeah, because
it was the first time that any non Western country
stood on the international scale toe to toe with a
Western power. And that was when everybody's like, oh dang,
like Russia lost to them. Yeah, and that was a
huge That was a huge thing for a lot of people. Yeah,
So yeah, it was. It was a world changing event,

(13:59):
even though technically speaking, you could say it was much
more a draw, which is why, like after the war,
the terms of victory were not favorable to the Japanese
and a lot of people were very upset about that.
And that was also utilized to promote national fervor in
Japan and outrage and kind of ramp up that frustration

(14:19):
within society, leading to you know, the extremely militaristic and
extremely authoritative, ultra nationalistic and there's a word, a colonialist
mentality that they built.

Speaker 1 (14:35):
I would recently found out that Teddy Roosevelt encouraged the
Japanese to invade Colin Island to get the Russians to
come to the negotiation table to end the war. Thought, wow,
that was actually kind of a sharp idea to you know,
because the Russians had nothing to lose, and so that's
why they wouldn't come and negotiate. And it wasn't until
the Japanese actually invaded their territory that it forced them

(14:57):
to come to the table.

Speaker 2 (14:58):
Yeah. And it's also the fact that like in when
we talk about like the the influence that like bringing
Japanese table for the end of the WARLD. Are we
talking World War two.

Speaker 4 (15:10):
Japanese? One?

Speaker 1 (15:11):
Yeah, got to know about peace Prize for it.

Speaker 2 (15:14):
Rand in the War, I did not get into that
aspect of it, so that is I thought you were
talking about something else. Yeah, that's new to me too.
It goes to show you no matter how much do
you study of something, there will always be things you don't.
It's insane.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
That's why I love history. I really that's why I
love geology too. It both things just really really perked
me up.

Speaker 4 (15:31):
I really do.

Speaker 2 (15:32):
There's always going to be something new to learn. And
like just this little niche thing over here that happened
that influenced the things that you just it just wasn't
part of what you looked at.

Speaker 1 (15:40):
That's awesome. I was not expecting this conversation, but I'm
totally enjoying it. I don't know if we're boring our
audiour viewers with it. I'm getting off on it, so.

Speaker 2 (15:52):
I don't know if the viewers want to know what
you're getting off on, Kelly.

Speaker 1 (15:56):
I think most of the viewers know what I get
off the rocks and history.

Speaker 2 (16:02):
That's how we do it.

Speaker 1 (16:03):
I got a reputation to being a party king too.

Speaker 6 (16:05):
So.

Speaker 2 (16:07):
Well, I'm here for it. I'm here for I.

Speaker 1 (16:08):
Haven't slowed down just because I got old.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
What's your favorite, Like, like when we talk about history
and we talk about all of these kind of paranormal
claims or these supernatural claims or the religious claims that
we talk about on shows like this, what is your
favorite kind of of historical point that you like to
go to or bring up as like a counterpoint or something.

Speaker 1 (16:27):
One of the things that I like to really look
at is like the Church's reaction to science as it
became more well known, right, like the Catholic Church's reaction
to Copernicus and Galileo and how eventually they lost that battle.
And then when we had then when the science of
geology came along and we were studying fossils and stuff,
and the Catholic Church didn't come out against any of

(16:49):
that because they had already learned their lesson. But the Protestants, whoa,
you know, there was no way that that the strictigraphy
could be correct, that there could be different ages of
the earth, the earth could be possibly as old as
the geologists thought it was, So I like finding that out.
One of the things I found really interesting in that
regard was that it took over one hundred years for

(17:09):
all the churches in Europees to put Europe to put
up lightning rods because they thought lightning was God's punishment
to a bad village that was a village in sin
or maybe the priest of the church was a bad guy.
But yeah, it took one hundred years to put lightning
rods in all the churches.

Speaker 2 (17:26):
Well, really, what a suck to be one of the
bigger churches because you would have been the first one head.
The bigger you get, the more is I guess a
lot of that. The bigger, the bigger you get, the
more God's going to be pissed at you.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
Kind of a closely related fact, it was really dangerous
to be a bell ringer in medieval times because there
were no lightning rods, and there was a belief that
thunderstorms were caused by demons in the sky. So the
bell ringer would run to the church and start ringing
the bells, the church bells to chase away the demons,
and what he was doing was basically just wiring him

(17:57):
up or wiring himself up to be a luxury from lightning.
So because the church Stepo was always the tallest building
in town.

Speaker 2 (18:04):
So it's really kind of interesting to me, how like
we look at these things and it's just like it's
just evidence of the ever shrinking versions of God in
every generation. Every generation, something about the God that the
previous generation believed in is lost because we understand just
a little bit more about reality than we did in
the past. And like watching it in real time and

(18:27):
you're exactly correct, Like, like looking at these things in
history is what makes it fascinating that you can look
and see how much smaller God has had to get
at every stage. And this all powerful, all knowing God
is just shrinking every single year until you have to
suddenly push him outside of reality as a whole to
be able to justify his existence.

Speaker 1 (18:47):
His hiding place is getting smaller and smaller, right Exactly.

Speaker 2 (18:52):
My favorite thing when we talk about history and we
talk about how history is useful in these conversations, is
I one thing one argument to hear a lot is like,
how if you look at Jesus, for example, right, well,
we can look at the historical people will say, you
can look at historical record and you see people that
say Jesus did this, and Jesus did that, and and

(19:12):
this is evidence of the things that we know about Jesus. Right,
we know Jesus was resurrected because we have the witnesses,
and we have people writing about it, we have historians
writing about it, but we don't even in history take
that confident of a statement on things that aren't supernatural claims.
And my favorite example about this, going back into my
knowledge of Japanese history, the other thing I really got

(19:32):
I stuck in on was Miamotu Musashi. Are you familiar
with Miamota Musashi. No, Miamotu Musashi.

Speaker 1 (19:37):
I know that there was a battleship named after him.

Speaker 2 (19:40):
Yeah, yeah, the Musashi. Absolutely, Miamotu Musashi was effectively a samurai,
a samurai in practice more so than in class. That's debated,
but basically everything we know about Miamote Musashi is well,
he has two periods of his life. His first half
where he was a warrior. The second half he was
a philosopher. The second half is like, we have a

(20:00):
lot of corroborating information. We have multiple people talking about him.
Everything about the first half of his life is all
first hand accounts from him. So he is telling us
everything he did, and that is not very reliable. And
so all these things we can verify some of these things, right,
we can verify that he fought this person and the
outcome was this, But all the things that he says

(20:22):
about that fight, we don't necessarily take as truth, right.
We take it as a possibility, as his version of
that particular story, his interpretation of how things played out.
But even when we have first hand accounts, even when
we have, you know, a guy writing his own bibliography, right,
we have he has he founds an entire philosophical school
of thought in Japan, and he has followers to this day.

(20:45):
There's an entire we can trace back his his philosophical
teachings through generations all the way back to his death
of people who actually spoke with him, and we still
don't take any of those things as absolute fact.

Speaker 1 (20:57):
That's probably enough trying to fix the audio issues at
the Collin studio. So that was kind of funny, though.
That was awesome.

Speaker 2 (21:05):
It's God, that's what that is. It's God using my
voice for some weird reason. Yeah, so like that's my
favorite one. People like to be like, oh, well we
know all these things, like, well, but we don't know.
We we accept that some of these things are our
likely outcomes, and and the things that we accept are
likely are still things that we know are actual, real possibilities.

(21:27):
None of these are supernatural claims. None of these are
outside of the extraors. Some of them are like like impressive,
but none of them are outside of expectations, outside of
what we expect in reality. Everything that that that he
claims he did at that time is something that theoretically
we could do today. And we still don't believe that
he did all those things.

Speaker 1 (21:45):
And I was thinking before the show, I was talking
about being down in South America during the revolutions, what
so reminding of Peru, And you know, believe it or not,
I met Bernardo O'Higgins and there you go. It's a fact.
And that's basically what you're talking about is doing right.
I just made up of history and early history for myself.
So I still had my Irish accent back.

Speaker 2 (22:04):
Then, too, uh, ask someone with a very Midwestern American accent.
I really wish sometimes i'd have a better accent, but
I don't. I got that boring I got that boring
Midwest accent. Sorry everyone, the oh goodness, Yeah, it looks
like we're still We're still working on it. We're still
trying to.

Speaker 1 (22:23):
Uh get that collin studio working figure.

Speaker 2 (22:25):
What's going on so we can get that that gentleman
in here to tell us all about whatever it is
he he has in the docket. Do we have any
notes on it? Like? What are we what are we
waiting on him for?

Speaker 1 (22:34):
I think it was the same problem we were having
before the show. They're just it's just not working in
between the uh okay, the host and the collar.

Speaker 2 (22:41):
Yeah. So I see I see Crispin in the in
the in the chat here saying he has an undefeated
record talking about Musashi record and it's sixty two duels
or as a swordsman, or so it is claimed, and
that's so it is claimed? Is so important? Yes, yes,
of course, of course he thinks he won all of them.

Speaker 4 (22:59):
You can.

Speaker 2 (23:00):
The best you could say is he definitely survived all
of the duels he was in, which is still better
than most.

Speaker 1 (23:04):
So yeah, not everybody that did that, right, No, yeah.

Speaker 2 (23:09):
Yeah, duels were to survive a duel means you at
least didn't get your butt kick or you were such
an embarrassment they didn't feel like it was worth killing you,
which is the worst one.

Speaker 1 (23:19):
But I was going to grab my sword, but out
of I have a I.

Speaker 2 (23:23):
Have a senai here. I have a buken on the
floor over here. All right, since where show me? I'll
show you mine if you show me yours. Oh fencing rapier.

Speaker 1 (23:32):
Yes, yeah, I was. I fenced when I was in college.
I was on the tool fencing team.

Speaker 2 (23:37):
Yeah, I got I got a I got a shanai here,
and I got a boken here. I haven't used him
in a while. To be honest, I I have some
physical difficulties that I didn't used to have.

Speaker 6 (23:48):
But makes uh this kind of.

Speaker 2 (23:49):
Fun a little more challenging than it used to be.

Speaker 1 (23:52):
But yeah, cool, cool, cool. So we've talked about hello, Hello,
we got there.

Speaker 4 (23:58):
This is the voice of God.

Speaker 2 (23:59):
Oh oh, can you prove it?

Speaker 3 (24:03):
Well?

Speaker 7 (24:04):
I've been keeping your phone calls from coming into you,
but I've shown I'm going to show pity on you
and let you talk to some callers because I know
one of them will convince you that I'm real.

Speaker 1 (24:14):
Awesome.

Speaker 2 (24:15):
I appreciate your pity. It means so much to me.

Speaker 1 (24:18):
Awesome, God, bless you.

Speaker 4 (24:20):
Somebody will be praying for you.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
Thank you, guy.

Speaker 2 (24:23):
You know they can do something more useful than praying
for me.

Speaker 1 (24:25):
I'm convinced.

Speaker 2 (24:26):
Now I'm not. I'm pretty sure that was just an
AI chat bot.

Speaker 1 (24:32):
We love We lost John, though, hopefully you will call
it John. Call us back. Yeah, call us back, John.
We got everything fixed up. Thanks you, thank you for
being patient, and yeah, please call back. He had a
couple of I know, he called a couple of times
because his question changed and uh, yeah, I was probably
would have been a really interesting conversation. So, uh, while
we're waiting for him to call him back.

Speaker 2 (24:54):
I'm curious if anyone else out there has an interesting
thing they'd like to bring to us, Like what what
suit for natural claims? What religious claims? What pseudo scientific claims?
Do you think we should accept? What do you got? Yeah,
make me learn something new today. I love learning new things.

Speaker 1 (25:11):
There's all kinds of weird supernatural things out there, the whole,
like the whole spiritualist movement that started in like the
eighteen sixties or so. That was a weird thing to
me too.

Speaker 2 (25:20):
So my personal pet peeve is astrology. Like, come, come
tell me why I should care if you're you're a Sagittarius, Like, like,
I I love being wrong. I genuinely mean that I
love being wrong. Come prove me wrong, Come make me
learn something new, because the only way to ever be
right about everything is by being willing to accept when
you're when you're wrong about them.

Speaker 1 (25:40):
I used to totally believe in that stuff too, totally.
I read tarot courage it did, though, I was to
totally caught up in new and crap. It was horrible.

Speaker 2 (25:48):
I was gonna I'm not surprised with all the crystals
behind you. I kind of assumed there was a point
in time also into tarot.

Speaker 1 (25:55):
It was kind of what got me into into the
whole crystal thing. And as I as I started learning
about I started out thinking you had powers, right, And
then as I actually started learning about the science behind him,
I realized that I had been wrong and the science
was actually way more interesting, you know, to me.

Speaker 2 (26:12):
So, so you're telling me you don't keep particular crystals
there to have certain energies for you.

Speaker 1 (26:18):
Hey, I have one, and it guards me from superstition.

Speaker 2 (26:22):
It guards you from superstition. Is that the courts?

Speaker 1 (26:29):
It's my d rock.

Speaker 2 (26:31):
When I was dating I was dating someone who was
very much into that, into like like crystal energy and
all that stuff, and it was really hard to be
overly critical because they were so cute. But they try
and give me like rocks and be like this has
this energy, and.

Speaker 1 (26:47):
It'd be like yeah.

Speaker 2 (26:49):
But on a positive note, it seems like John.

Speaker 1 (26:52):
That's ready. All right, let's bring him on in. Hey, John,
can you hear us this time? Yeah? So much yay
for the crew. So it says John here, John here.
It says to me, was Kelly wants a Christian? And
if so, what changed his mind? I was raised Lutheran.
I had a pretty rough childhood. John. I had a

(27:14):
physically abusive stepfather. I'm not talking about spankings. I was
really physically abused, and he was the one that made
us go to church. And then when he was out
of our life, when I was about thirteen fourteen years old,
I stopped going to church. I never really liked going.
I didn't feel like when I was a kid, it
was fun, you know. I was going to Sunday School
and it was good, cool to meet all these cool

(27:34):
other friends and play games and stuff. But as I
was starting to get older, I started thinking, this doesn't
make any sense to me. I wasn't completely out of
it yet, but by the time I was fifteen, I
had pretty much given it up as a belief. I
kind of had a little bit of a relapse when
I went into the service in nineteen seventy seven, but
by the time I got back out of it, I

(27:55):
was over it. So does that answering your question, John, I.

Speaker 8 (27:58):
See as it does the quota famous apologists, which I
will not say his name, but the quota famous apologists.
You might say that in your situation with your stepfare
don't throw the baby out with the bath war.

Speaker 2 (28:12):
Yeah, if I if I could say, I have such
a huge problem with the phrase of don't throw the
baby out with the bathwater, because what you're doing is
you're you're telling me there's a baby in the bathwater,
and there's not right what you what that phrase is
saying that there's something good in this that's worth holding
onto when it comes to religion, and there is nothing
in that bathtub, in that bathwater that is being thrown

(28:35):
out with it. And you're making people afraid of getting
rid of these shackles of this thing that is drowning
them because you're telling him there's something in there worth keeping.
And I still have yet defined it. So I'm curious
what in your mind here, John, is the baby?

Speaker 8 (28:50):
You have a certain that there's no baby.

Speaker 2 (28:52):
What I'm saying is I certainly have no evidence, no
reason to believe there is a baby. Everything that people
tell me is a good thing about religion that's worth
holding onto is not a religious thing. It's it's nothing
that I need to have religion for. And so no
one is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Everything
that I have lost since I got rid of religion myself,
because I also grew up very religious, was all of

(29:14):
the dogma, all of the harmful beliefs, all of the
the authoritarian way of thinking, the top down view on morality.
And then everything I've gained has been all of the
positive things that religious might religions might have given me
a little bit of, but I've found them so much
better and in so much healthier ways outside. So that's

(29:35):
why I'm asking, like, when you say the baby of
the bathwater, what in your mind is the baby? What
is the thing about religion that's worth holding onto you?

Speaker 8 (29:41):
Well, I speak to lots of questions. They say that
brock clarity to the lives of purpose. It also morality.
It also got them out of the situation like friends,
So it made them say that do drinking right.

Speaker 1 (29:57):
Everything that you said there you can get without religion,
no right, pretty much everything, and I got, John. I
I I mentioned just earlier about having a physically abusive stepfather.
I have CPTSD really bad, and I struggled throughout the
first half of my adult life. I was drug addicted,
I was an alcoholic, I was homeless half the time.

(30:19):
I had a really bad problem. And one day I
realized that I was never going to get better unless
I made myself better. So I was able to get
out of that without God, without any religion at all.
So I don't know why anybody would need religion to
be able to get out of that same situation. What
it takes is enough fortitude and personal responsibility to get

(30:40):
you out of that type of situation. You want to want,
You need to want to make yourself better. You need
to realize that there is good in the world, that
there's things that you know the good that you can
do for the world, and that creates that purpose you
were talking about that religion gives you.

Speaker 4 (30:56):
I have that.

Speaker 1 (30:56):
I have purpose too. Does that make any sense to you, John?

Speaker 8 (30:59):
Yeah? Whoever I told you about the last whatever I
told you last year about that situation, I had the
person who helped me, and I've never forgotten that.

Speaker 1 (31:09):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I do remember that. And I had
people help me too. You know, I didn't do it.
I can't say I did it all on my own.
People did help me, especially like giving me a place
to get my shit together, right, I mean, they gave
me a shelter, they gave me food when I didn't
have any of either one of those things. They got
me back on track, got me working again. And yeah,

(31:30):
I mean there was a lot of people that really
really helped me out in the early part of my life,
that really helped me get to where I am today.
And I can honestly say I still have CPTSD, but
I've learned to control it better so that I can
deal with it much much better.

Speaker 8 (31:44):
Well, I'm sorry that what you I'm sorry about what
you went through with your stepfather, and I'm happy that
you got better. I really am.

Speaker 1 (31:51):
Thanks John. You know, I have people say that to me,
and other than the ct other than the CPTSD, I
don't really mind the things that happened to me because
to me, like your failures, the bad things that happened
to you. The negatives in my in my life have
made me more of who I am today than my
successes did. I learned more, I gained more personality from

(32:15):
those things. So I look back on all the bad
things that happened to me as just part of my life.
You know, it was just part of me progressing to
be who I am. And I always say, it doesn't
matter whether you were bad or good. It's always about
being better every single day. And that's what I'm trying
to do, just be better every single day.

Speaker 8 (32:35):
I could agree more.

Speaker 2 (32:37):
I would also throw in, if you don't mind me
jumping in here a little bit, Jeas is that all
of these things that you say people can get out
of religion. I don't disagree. You can find a purpose
in religion, but you don't need religion for it. And
the purpose you get out of religion is I would argue,
a healthier purpose, a purpose that is actually going to

(32:57):
be based in what is good for you and not
based on what I would consider effectively a fairy tale
that we have no reason to believe is actually true.
And if we start building our lives on falsehoods, then
there is going to be a consequence for that at
some point in time, and you can avoid that by
building it on things that you can actually demonstrate, right,

(33:18):
building your purpose on family, on friends, on community, those
are all really good foundations of purpose. When we talk about,
you know, you know, using religion to get out of addiction, right,
religious approaches to addiction are demonstrably less effective than non
religious approaches. Approaches that don't teach you an authoritarian approach

(33:40):
to avoiding a problem are going to be better long
term approaches to it. That's why there's organizations out there
that are centered around the idea that you need to
have a God. I'm not going to name the organization,
but there's an organization that's that is centered around the
need of a higher power for addiction, and that organization
has a ridiculously low success rate. And secular versions of
those systems that don't take that same hard line, authoritarian

(34:03):
approach to getting rid of addiction are notably more successful.
They're also less popular because religion hasn't been endorsing them
for so long. But these are the things that we
run into morality. Morality from religion is this idea that
whatever God tells you is good, is good and if
that thing is not good, then you have to find
a way to make it good. And we have so

(34:25):
many examples of this in various religion. Right, we have
slavery as an example, we have misogyny, we have anti
LGBTQIA approaches like treating people in society as less. Then
these are all moralities that are taught to us from religion.
When you get out of religion to look at the
moral systems, we can actually start justifying our morality without

(34:47):
having to say because so and so told.

Speaker 8 (34:49):
Me so the top down for the.

Speaker 2 (34:53):
Moodel absolutely right. An authoritarian approach to anything is never
the best approach.

Speaker 1 (35:00):
And not only isn't an authoritarian approach, it comes it
comes from somewhere that we can't even prove is real.
You know, it's it's it's from what I can tell,
it's a man made authoritarian approach.

Speaker 8 (35:11):
Oh, I see, Okay, So that's what that sounds like.
Let's say let's say let's say we're living in the
times a cave man, it would be like the caves says,
God's in the cave. I'm gonna go ask him what
we should do. He walks into the cave, walks out,
he gives the instructions.

Speaker 2 (35:26):
Yep, that's exactly what it is. You even see that
in the Bible, right the guy walks up on the
mountain to get God's laws and comes down with a tablet,
and only that person supposedly spoke to God. And everyone's
just listening to this other guy who said that he
spoke to.

Speaker 1 (35:37):
God, or or I'm the shaman and I get to
eat the magic mushrooms and talk to God and come
back and tell you what he told me after I
ate the magic mushrooms, because that's you know, was part
that was big tribal thing too. So not not just
magic mushrooms, but other psychoactive drugs. Was very common for
shamans to take and come back and tell the tribe
about their experiences and what God had taught them or

(35:58):
the spirits had taught them. Well, they were gone from
this world and then the other spiritual world.

Speaker 2 (36:03):
So yeah, John, it sounds like you got it. Man
like like questions and I want to say real quick
just to comment to something going on in the side chat. Sorry, John,
just give me one moment, Narcissa, give us a call.
What do we got going on there? You're talking about
we can find God in quantum physics. You're saying Kelly
doesn't like you, so you don't want to call in. Well,
i've never met you.

Speaker 3 (36:24):
Talk to me.

Speaker 2 (36:25):
Tell me why I should believe that.

Speaker 1 (36:26):
If you have proof, I want to see it. Seriously,
if you really have proof, I want to see what
you have proof of.

Speaker 2 (36:32):
And and if you feel like, if you feel like
Kelly's not going to give you a fair shake because
or whatever, come talk to me.

Speaker 4 (36:37):
Let's shut up.

Speaker 2 (36:38):
Bring it to me.

Speaker 3 (36:39):
What do we got?

Speaker 2 (36:39):
Tell me how to find God in quantum physics, because
if I can find godom quantum physics, I want to
so sorry about that, John, I just that was going
on in the side chat for a few minutes. And
like if they, if they, if they're so confident, they
should call in.

Speaker 1 (36:50):
Right Fostina was talking about calling in too. Both of
you should call on in.

Speaker 2 (36:54):
Yeah, I didn't see the other one. Who was the
other one, Fasina?

Speaker 4 (36:57):
No?

Speaker 1 (36:57):
Yeah, John? So we lost John. I think I don't
know if he hung up or we just lost the connection.
But he's gone. We have another caller in the queuey
Georgie from Bulgaria. He him and he wants to talk
about new age ideas.

Speaker 2 (37:12):
So let's do it. Georgie, welcome to.

Speaker 1 (37:15):
Get him up here. My Collin studio is working a
little slow, but I pressed the button to bring him
up here. Here we go, Hi, Georgie, Sorry about that.

Speaker 6 (37:22):
That was my bed.

Speaker 1 (37:23):
I think I think I did something wrong.

Speaker 2 (37:25):
Hey, Georgie, welcome.

Speaker 1 (37:26):
Can you hear us? Georgie?

Speaker 2 (37:27):
Oh no, are we having problems?

Speaker 5 (37:28):
Oh no?

Speaker 1 (37:28):
I was like, oh no, I know we had this fixed.
All right, I'm Georgie. I'm gonna for right now. I'm
going to return you to the queue. I'm going to
let the crew work it out. It only took him
a couple of minutes late last time, so please be patient.
We'd love to talk to you. We really really would.
So since everybody's been listening to you and I talk,
what do you think about bringing Damien back up and
bringing him in on our conversation.

Speaker 2 (37:49):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (37:50):
I thought that would be kind of a good idea,
so we can. There you go, It's hi, dam long time.

Speaker 3 (37:55):
They say, whoa I just imagined, and then Greg was
saying I'm the voice of God. I really wanted to
jump in and go no, sorry, Greg, I'm the voice
of God, but leave me off camera just so it
really really compels the effect.

Speaker 2 (38:12):
I do think for the voice of God, yours, yours
definitely has a little bit more base to it. I
was gonna say, I was I was trying to say
something for the accent, but I don't know.

Speaker 3 (38:22):
Maybe maybe God is yeah, maybe because God is Australia
after all. But no, I really wanted to jump in
on that call from John because, yeah, I do find
that religious people tend to hang on to religious beliefs
because of the utility of the religious belief And I
do like what you were saying, Jeremy about well, yeah,

(38:43):
is there really a baby? And can we get the
benefits of religion without being in the religion? And yeah,
so I find that the most compelling reason to be
in the religion is not necessarily the truth behind it,
but because of the utility.

Speaker 2 (38:58):
Yeah, I think that's I think that's it's a really important,
you know, thing for us to kind of keep in mind.
Is like just because something just because someone can find
a use for something doesn't mean that that thing is good.
And like we find things that are useful all the
time that are only useful in the short term, and
in the long term, they cause so much more harm,

(39:19):
and at the end of the day, it feels like
that's the that's the right answer to do because you
don't know what those other options are. And so I
don't blame people, like I understand completely why people end
up doing that. I understand completely why people are like, Hey,
this is the only way I know how to do
this right now. But at the end of the day,
like like, there are better ways, and maybe I don't
know all of them, and maybe my way is still

(39:39):
not the best, but we're not going to find those
better ways if we keep getting stuck in Well, this
one worked for me, even though it hasn't worked for
everyone else.

Speaker 3 (39:49):
I think also is having that culture that allows us
to openly and freely question without moral injunctions or moral
all I can say, trading people who question as anathema
as opposed to people who are genuinely curious and genuine
genuinely curious about something.

Speaker 1 (40:10):
I'm good. Word that we got Georgie ready, and also
word that we wanted that they want to keep Damian
up on the screen, too, So Damien, so yay, this
will be sorrybers, so we'll bring Georgie back up, Hi, Georgie,

(40:31):
how you doing? Can you hear me?

Speaker 5 (40:33):
Now?

Speaker 6 (40:34):
Awesome?

Speaker 1 (40:36):
I'm glad that. I'm glad the crew worked it out.
So it says here you have new age ideas. You
claim we are eternal beings? Is that correct?

Speaker 4 (40:43):
Yes? Okay?

Speaker 1 (40:44):
What what?

Speaker 4 (40:45):
Why do you?

Speaker 1 (40:45):
Why do you get the idea that we are eternal beings.

Speaker 9 (40:48):
Because we want meaningful, enjoyful experiences and I extrapolate that
from spirit from heaven that we want to expand we
want to have new experiences, new desires.

Speaker 2 (41:02):
So question on that, Damien, right, we I agree, we
want to have new experiences, we want to have new desires,
we want all of these things. I am in full
agreement with you on that. But does us wanting something
make that thing true? Like, like, how does that equate
to we want to be this? Therefore we are this?
How do you how do you make that jump?

Speaker 9 (41:22):
Well, these kind of thought processes are called metaphysics. So
if you imagine we're eternal beings, non physical eternal being,
and for there to be eternity, there must be expansions
because it won't be alternative, there's no expansion that.

Speaker 2 (41:39):
What you basically just said was if we imagine that
this is true, then it's true. And I actually care
about not imagining that it's true, but having a reason
to think it's true. We can imagine all kinds of
things as true that are not true, right, Georgie?

Speaker 3 (41:53):
If I could just quickly ask what do you mean
by expansion? I'd like to get results on that.

Speaker 1 (41:59):
What you actually curious about that as well?

Speaker 4 (42:01):
Sorry?

Speaker 2 (42:01):
Sorry, Kelly, No, no, you're good.

Speaker 1 (42:03):
No, yeah, one of us had to ask you, right,
So yeah, what what do you mean by can you
define that expansion for us?

Speaker 9 (42:09):
Meaningful experience, experiences, new desires, the opportunity to be ourselves,
our true selves.

Speaker 1 (42:17):
But if we're eternal, why is it that we don't
remember all these things that happened to us through eternity.
We only remember this life.

Speaker 9 (42:25):
Do you think that's a very good point? And I
would say in my responses that we are getting out
of our own way so we can have new desires,
or at least have the experience of new desires.

Speaker 3 (42:37):
Georgie, could I ask, do you believe in reincarnation?

Speaker 4 (42:40):
I don't believe in time, so believe in time?

Speaker 1 (42:44):
I can't really answer the question. Now, do you believe
in recent George?

Speaker 4 (42:48):
Twenty seven?

Speaker 2 (42:49):
Do you believe?

Speaker 1 (42:51):
But do you believe you're twenty seven?

Speaker 4 (42:53):
I don't feel like it, but yeah.

Speaker 1 (42:55):
So then you do believe in time at least in
a regard.

Speaker 9 (42:58):
Right in my point of view, every moment is eternal
and we're creating it as we go.

Speaker 2 (43:04):
So Damie or George Georgie, though, the one thing I
want to really ask here, right, like, you're telling us
what you believe. Right, You're telling us you believe that
we experience all moments for eternity, that that their time
isn't is an illusion at best? Right, you're telling us
that that we are eternal beings. How do we know
this to be true? How do you know this to
be true?

Speaker 9 (43:24):
Well, A good exercise, mental exercise that you can do
is ask yourself, what would you be doing if you
had infinite awareness and are an eternal being?

Speaker 4 (43:34):
Okay?

Speaker 2 (43:35):
So if I ask myself that question, then I will
come to the conclusion that we are.

Speaker 4 (43:39):
Most possibly okay.

Speaker 2 (43:40):
And so if I if I ask myself that question
and I come to the conclusion that we aren't, then
how do we tell the difference between my conclusion and
your conclusion?

Speaker 9 (43:47):
Where you see spirit is not what we are looking
for we're looking for new things.

Speaker 2 (43:53):
Yes, I believe we're looking for new things, but new
things are doesn't mean eternity. Right, You're you're you're jumping
a lot of a lot of gaps here, right, you're
going from I can imagine this thing. I can ask
myself this question. I can see this as as maybe
a possibility, therefore it's true, and that that's what it
sounds to me, like what you're saying. I am am

(44:14):
I misunderstanding here, Georgia. Can you repeat, Yeah, Yeah, no problem.
What I'm hearing from you is you can imagine this thing, right.
You can ask yourself these questions as if it's true,
and therefore it is true. That's what it sounds to me,
like what you're saying, and that doesn't logically follow to
me in any way, shape or form. I can ask
myself all kinds of questions about things that aren't true.

(44:36):
I can I can imagine all kinds of things that
aren't true. How do we know it's true? If we
can ask ourselves a question and have that answer be
both a real answer or not a real answer, how
do we know if the answer is actually base in reality?

Speaker 9 (44:48):
Well, the phrase we're alling this together.

Speaker 2 (44:51):
Yeah, but.

Speaker 9 (44:54):
The greater part of us, the more expended part, is
ninety nine percent in spirit, and the one percent is
also in spirit.

Speaker 4 (45:02):
We are in a kind of dream.

Speaker 9 (45:04):
So it's all about having more enjoyable experiences.

Speaker 2 (45:09):
I agree, like the pursue, agree with Yeah, the pursuit
of more enjoyable experiences is so valid. I'm here for that.
I'm I'm all here for looking for more enjoyable experiences. Right,
But that does not mean that we are there for
eternal That does not follow, right. You cannot say we
seek out new experiences, therefore we seek out new experiences

(45:32):
for eternity.

Speaker 1 (45:33):
Yeah, it doesn't. It doesn't logically follow. I don't know.

Speaker 2 (45:36):
Yeah, but that wasn't That wasn't least agreeing with you.

Speaker 1 (45:38):
Right, that That was us trying to figure out what
you say. And well, now now the idea is, how
does what you think right that we want more experiences
plus what equals eternity? Because just wanting to do things
doesn't equal eternity in and of itself. There's got to
be something else as part of that equation. So show
us your work, as any good math teacher would ask.

(45:58):
I learned that from skyt Ticky show us the work,
you know, wanting experiences plus what equals eternity?

Speaker 9 (46:08):
Well, so excuse me a moment. Existence is not subject
to time. Time is a concept within existence, and time
does not exist. We're creating it, so.

Speaker 4 (46:20):
Existence cannot become non.

Speaker 9 (46:22):
Existence by definition by their quality.

Speaker 2 (46:27):
You said that we create time, but you also said
you don't believe in time. So which one? Which one?

Speaker 6 (46:31):
Is it?

Speaker 2 (46:32):
Like like it feels? It feels to me like you
are just coming up with answers to to questions that
that are are interesting to you and coming to conclusions
that these things are the actual reality. Like like it
it's it's well as as I've heard before, it sounds
like bong rip theology. It's like you sit in a room,
you think really hard about stuff, you come up with answers,

(46:52):
and you be like, I like that answer. I'm gonna
think that's true. And that's not how we come to
conclusions about reality in any way, shape or form.

Speaker 9 (46:58):
I have mentioned in previous that I guess some sources
on the internet on YouTube, for example, of people channeling
beings from beyond dirt.

Speaker 2 (47:09):
Okay, but what does that have to do with us
being eternal, right, Like, that's a different claim. That's a
completely different claim.

Speaker 1 (47:14):
Yeah, right, channeling is something completely different, right, and that's
going to need its own set of proofs, right.

Speaker 2 (47:19):
Can I ask you a quick question, Georgie, about the
impacts of this kind of belief question for you, Georgie.
My question, Georgie is do you think if we have
an infinite amount of experiences and we get to experience,
as a result of infinity everything that we could ever
want to experience, what at that point in time is
the value of each of our experiences?

Speaker 4 (47:43):
The value?

Speaker 2 (47:44):
Yeah, if we have an infinite amount of experiences and
as a result, we will get to experience everything we
ever want to experience, or even things we don't want
to experience, what is the value of those experiences? Do
you think that these experiences have value if we get
as many of them as well?

Speaker 9 (48:00):
One where you see existence is something like a trinity.
There's positive energy in negative.

Speaker 1 (48:06):
Energy, Georgia.

Speaker 2 (48:07):
I apologize, I apologize, Georgie. That's not an answer to
the question I asked, right, that is completely tangential to
what I asked you. I asked you, if we have
an infinite amount of experiences, do you think that those
experiences have value.

Speaker 9 (48:21):
What I'm thinking is that everything is neutral when we
imbue meaning in it.

Speaker 2 (48:25):
Okay, so then that if everything is neutral, you're saying
that that there is not value in them, no inherent value.

Speaker 9 (48:31):
This is where the part about the meaningful experiences comes in.

Speaker 4 (48:36):
We're creating it as we go. So it's like, you.

Speaker 9 (48:40):
Know, we want to have fun with we want to
experience our infinite, eternal nature from a new point of view,
and the physical reality provides that.

Speaker 3 (48:49):
But if we are spirit, then what is physical reality?

Speaker 2 (48:52):
Where?

Speaker 3 (48:52):
Where? Where does the delineation occur between the physical material
and spirit. Actually this leads to the next question. I
wanted to ask, what do you mean by spirit?

Speaker 9 (49:03):
The greater part of us is in spirit, but we
as physical beings, are also in spirit.

Speaker 1 (49:09):
Wait wait wait wait wait wait, please wait please. The
greater part of us does not in any way explain
or be an answer to that question. That that just
that just was an answer. That what very nebulous answer
that could have meant anything the greater part of us.
That's not.

Speaker 3 (49:27):
That's yeah, that's I get that you fervently believe what
you believe, Georgie, But yeah, as Kelly said, it's a
very I'm trying to imagine what you mean by the
greater part of us. And there's something you said before
that like, if we imagine like ourselves as infinite beings

(49:48):
and able to know and understand every concept, how do I,
as a person who lives in a country in one
country and speaks a couple of languages on one planet,
how am I supposed to understand everything? Given I'm so finite.

Speaker 9 (50:09):
Well, that is the point of physical reality, so you
can walk the journey. The journey is like the destination itself.

Speaker 2 (50:17):
That's that's such a meaningless tautology. Yeah, like you just
said a bunch of words that have no real meaning.
And I mean it might sound a little harsh, but
to be honest, that feels like everything you've said today,
everything you've said, is is I think this thing, I
feel this thing. It seems to me. And when we
ask you for evidence, all you do is go back
to I think this, it seems this, it feels to me.

(50:38):
And then when we point out why we don't see
that as making sense, you say, well, I think this,
I feel this, and it seems to me. There's nothing
substantive in anything that you're presenting us here, and it's like,
how are we supposed to find any of this convincing
or or honestly even interesting if you can't substantiate.

Speaker 3 (50:56):
Anything, Actually, do you find it kind of interesting? I think?
I think the question is how do you prove it
to a rational skeptic? How do you prove it?

Speaker 4 (51:07):
I think?

Speaker 1 (51:08):
If well, go ahead, go ahead, please, okay, I can
cite it some sources before when I've code in, but
there regardless, because yes, I was going to say, like
a lot of the things you're saying were things that
I would have said twenty years ago, twenty thirty years ago,
And I don't know. Are you familiar with the Zen

(51:30):
Buddhist Path to enlightenment?

Speaker 4 (51:32):
Do you know?

Speaker 1 (51:32):
You know, first there is a mountain. Are you familiar
with that?

Speaker 4 (51:35):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (51:36):
Yes, Sam, okay, But it sounds to me like you're
in that middle part where the mountain is no longer
a mountain and the river is no longer a river.
That's what it sounds like to me when you talk
to or you're talking, it seems to me that you
haven't quite gotten there. You're only halfway on your path.
Does that make any sense to you? Because to you.
The way you're talking, it seems like you no longer
think the mountain is really a mountain.

Speaker 9 (51:56):
Well, I want to tell you a different story.

Speaker 4 (52:01):
A teacher that said to the Yeah, no.

Speaker 1 (52:04):
No, I didn't tell a story. I was just I
was just like, I'm trying to make a comment on
your narrative, right, and and then just bringing up another
spiritual story isn't going to do it for us because
we don't believe in that spiritual nonsense, see what I mean.
So I'm trying to get I'm trying to get you
to maybe think about what you're telling us from a

(52:24):
different point of view, because where you're at, like I said,
where you're at, the things you are saying are things
I would have said twenty thirty years ago.

Speaker 2 (52:32):
And I think these are things that could be interesting.
They were if they were substantiated, right, if you gave
us any reason actually hold onto these thoughts for any reason,
actually ponder them. But Kelly just came out and said, Hey,
here's the problem that I'm having with you with what
you're presenting here. And what you responded to was what,
let me tell you a different story.

Speaker 1 (52:49):
Yeah, It's like like what I it was like what
I said when right over your head you didn't listen
to it at all, and I was trying to put
it in the language you would better understand than some
of the you know, the language we had been using.

Speaker 9 (53:02):
But the fact that we're eternal and each moment is
a parallel no.

Speaker 1 (53:07):
No, no, stop stop stop, that we are eternal has
not been an established fact. You can't say the fact
that we are eternal because that is not an established fact.

Speaker 3 (53:17):
Chat that's kind of assuming the thing that you want
to prove.

Speaker 1 (53:20):
Yeah, you're yeah, right, exactly.

Speaker 9 (53:22):
I'm talking about Geno's paradox, where the role goes and
has infinite amount of distances to cross.

Speaker 1 (53:29):
Yeah, I'm familiar with Zeno's paradox, and I'm also I
also know that mathematically we've solved Zeno's paradox as well,
so I don't Yeah, so I don't use Zeno. I
used to use Zeno's paradox, but since I learned more
about mathematics, I don't use it anymore because it's a
really really bad example to use because we have actually
solved that paradox. It's no longer a paradox. And if

(53:51):
you don't know about that, you should go look it up.

Speaker 9 (53:53):
Well, gentlemen, I think my strongest point is that we
are getting out of our own way by incarnating in
physical reality.

Speaker 2 (54:03):
I don't think that's a strong point at all, because
you haven't given us any reason to consider it or
given any credibility to it as a strong point. It's
just a thing that you said. Cool. I'm glad you
think that. I'm glad that that does something for you.

Speaker 1 (54:16):
But I believe that you believe that.

Speaker 9 (54:19):
Yes, and I think I cannot change my beliefs, not
that they have them.

Speaker 1 (54:24):
Sure you can't I change mine? Yeah, it depends on.

Speaker 2 (54:27):
If you actually want to investigate it well enough to
actually like substantiat or if you want to actually investigate
your beliefs well enough to and actually evaluate them meaningfully,
then then you can change your beliefs. You could either
better justify your beliefs or come to an understanding of
why the beliefs you hold aren't valid. If you don't
want to change your beliefs, if you don't care about

(54:48):
if what you believe is true, and if you don't
care about you know, actually being able to support the
things that you say, then yeah, then you can't change
your beliefs, and then no one's going to be able
to do anything about that. But that's going to that's
gonna be the choice. The choice that isn't going to
be about if you can change your place. It's going
to be if you want to actually do the work
to substantiate the things.

Speaker 4 (55:07):
That you say.

Speaker 9 (55:07):
Well, thinks in physical reality seems so familiar to me,
Like alcohol and these kind of things, it's like you
before you tried them, After you try them, it's like, oh, yes,
now I remember.

Speaker 3 (55:22):
Usually people drink alcohol to forget Yeah.

Speaker 2 (55:25):
Yeah, I might need to have a drink after this
forget this call.

Speaker 9 (55:28):
I'm not trying to convert your on anything, guys. I'm
just I just want to give a good conversation. And
my strong my strongest point was uh, not so good.

Speaker 2 (55:38):
Well, Georgie, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us.
You know, I encourage you think think more about it,
like like look into look into the solution of Zeno's
paradoxic Kelly pointed out, and and call back again when
you think you can actually like give us reasons to
to consider this in a meaningful way, and then we'd
be happy to to give it more thought.

Speaker 4 (55:57):
Okay, sounds great cool.

Speaker 1 (55:59):
I really love you to go check out Zeno's paradox though,
and how we have solved it. I don't remember right
off the bat with how we did it, but we
really it was a new field of mathematics that just
been done within the last few decades, and we have
actually salve Zino so than you. I used to use
Zeno's paradox all the time because it's such a fun thing,
you know, and then it's yeah, but unfortunately it does

(56:20):
it's nov it's not have valid anymore. I got, you know,
we got to do a couple of things here that
I didn't do. I was going to do it before,
and I and I didn't. We have a couple of
super chats, so and we were going to do super
Truth tonight. So let's do the superchats real quick. I
forgot we did a separate tab for those of ten
dollars from space. Barbarian says, praise Dog. They liked that.

(56:43):
Praise Dog. Sorry, they liked that. And uh, you know
for a trivia for super Truth, I got a good
one to go with with praise Dog. During World War two,
a great day named Juliana who was awarded the Blue
Cross Medal for extinguished being an incendiary bomb by peeing
on it. So there you go. And our second super

(57:06):
chat was from Crispin Split. Thanks Crispin, and it's one pound.
I think a pound is funny money. I'm not sure,
but there's no message. Thanks Crispin for that flower. Yeah,
I was gonna ask you.

Speaker 2 (57:18):
Yeah, I got, I got, I got a super uh
super fact for that.

Speaker 4 (57:21):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (57:21):
The first ever novel written in Japanese history was written
by a woman that's Japanese Golden Era.

Speaker 1 (57:28):
That's cool. And and one other thing I forgot to do.
We we normally do it d you know, pretty close
to the beginning of the show. And that's to a
shout out to the patron of the week. And I
want to do that right now, and I'm gonna shout
out to I'm gonna get to here where we got
lauren Z. Shout out to laurn Z for being our

(57:48):
patroot of the week. Thank you so much, Lauren, and
thank you to everybody else that helps it, donates to
the show. It helps keep this going. We don't make
any money from this. We're all volunteers and it just
keeps making the show about and keep you coming to you.
So thank you very very much, Lawrence. You're awesome and
so are all the rest of you people. And you
can donate by going to tiny dot c c pete

(58:10):
slash Patreon tw So, thank you all very very much.
I almost told we got so we got so wrapped
up and talking about Japan, and I don't sorry bad
Patriot though, No, that was my bad. I'm I'm supposed
to be the main host here, so that was my bad.

Speaker 2 (58:26):
You're supposed to be the responsible and I get away
with everything.

Speaker 3 (58:28):
If if I just quickly pause. I listened to Georgie
just then, basically his argument of if you can I
think his arguments essentially, if you can imagine it, therefore
it's therefore it's real. And that does sound a lot
like the presuppositional Christian apologists argument you have to have
a you have to have a concept of God to

(58:49):
reject therefore God is real. It's like, well, just because
I can imagine it doesn't mean I can imagine a
race of seven foot tall biped or aliens that come
to to hunt every twenty something ease that that doesn't
mean they're real.

Speaker 2 (59:05):
Yeah, I'm pretty sure they have a movie about that.

Speaker 3 (59:06):
Actually so it might be well really, well, I'll be
to check it out.

Speaker 1 (59:11):
We have one more caller. I'm a little husbittant to
take it because of personal things, but we'll go ahead
and take them. I might just sit back and let Yeah,
I just like you guys sit back and handle it.
It's Sarah. He him from Indonesia says God is real
and has argument for God's existence. So Hi, Sarah, what argument.

Speaker 2 (59:30):
Do you Sarah?

Speaker 5 (59:32):
Yeah, So yeah, I was the person on the chat
saying that I have forgot and you guys called me
out on it and said I should call it in.

Speaker 6 (59:39):
So I did.

Speaker 1 (59:40):
Oh, yeah, thanks thanks for calling.

Speaker 5 (59:42):
Yeah, well, I know there does not the apist experience
XP but if I remember correctly, the premise is still
the same. But just what I believe as the caller
and why, and well I believe in God now. I
mean I'm still kind of on the fence about it,
but compared to the last year, per se, I think
I'm closer with the worth believing in gut now than

(01:00:03):
I was back then. And you know, I was actually
born and raised as a I was I was not
born s a feast. I was raised as a feast
because the reels. But you know, as a kid and
growing up in school, and I've always been taught this
concept of God that he's kind of like this, uh,
like what a painter is to be painting. Like when

(01:00:25):
you have those two you know that they cannot be
the same thing at once. You know, the painter can
produce a nice painting and all that, the painter can
never be that painting, right. So okay, so in a moment,
you'll see where I'm going with us. And that kind
of what brought me to, you know.

Speaker 6 (01:00:42):
Constructing in the first place. I thought it was silly.

Speaker 5 (01:00:45):
And since we have no uh empirical evidence of this
God particle or God uh end of the existing anywhere,
we have not tested it. We have not its presence
anywhere in time?

Speaker 4 (01:00:57):
So I who did we?

Speaker 1 (01:01:01):
Did we lose Sarah there? Hello? Yeah, hello, Yeah, we
got you. You just lost you for a second, but
we got you back.

Speaker 6 (01:01:08):
Oh yeah, I'm sorry about that.

Speaker 5 (01:01:10):
Yeah. A friend of mine actually told me about this
Hindu concept of God. I believe it was the Vedanta
school of thought. I'm not sure how to pronounce it,
but basically, you know, this conception of God is more
of a it weighs out what God actually is as
opposed to be what he says, the oversimplification that is

(01:01:33):
the Western Monothy is the God that we've all been thought.
You know, that guy who painted a nice painting. In
a way, so in this school of thought, God is
more akin to what air is to sound. So when
you have a sound, when you have music, you know,
you know that that sound or that music is one
and the same with that air. So they're not separate

(01:01:56):
things like the painter is three painting. They're the same thing.
Air is what makes music, and well.

Speaker 1 (01:02:03):
It's it's it's it's the vibrations moving through the air
that make the music. Correct, it's not. They are two
different things. Music and air are not the same thing.
They are two completely different things. Music music is air's
reaction to a physical thing.

Speaker 5 (01:02:18):
Yeah, but what I'm saying is that you know, you
can you can still say that sound is made out
of music. I'm sorry. Music is made out of air
and sound.

Speaker 4 (01:02:28):
Oh I know.

Speaker 1 (01:02:28):
I just explained to you that it's not. It's made
from vibration. It's made from the air being moved. It's
not it's made from something outside the air that's causing
the air to respond.

Speaker 5 (01:02:39):
But yeah, it needs the air for that to make exist,
right if the air.

Speaker 1 (01:02:42):
Was no, it just needs the air to carry it.
It doesn't. It just needs the air to carry it.
That's all it. That's the only thing that needs the
air for.

Speaker 2 (01:02:50):
So it's a difference between being made out of and
being reliant on right, Yes, So so without molecules for
the vibrations to move through, then we wouldn't hear sound.
That's why there's no sound in space, right, Well, I
mean not much so anyways, Right, you get the less air,
the less sound. But that's different than being made out
of air, which is the claim that you were making,

(01:03:12):
at least the comparison you were making, to be fair,
the comparison you were making.

Speaker 5 (01:03:15):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, maybe that was not such a good comparison,
But I guess the point I was trying to make
here is that you know, using that comparison is that
you know this perceivable world, as as I had on
the chat, the existence of God can be attested through
the existence of this perceivable reality. And the reason why

(01:03:36):
I think that way is because the material reality, the
physical world as we know it, it's relying on this
God's existence because God. You know, according to the in
the Eastern concept that seenor concept I mentioned is it's
basically much less this guy's made something, but more like
the ground of all reality. So I think it helps

(01:03:59):
to clear up some conception that an atheist might have
when they tried to debunk out and when they try
to find.

Speaker 6 (01:04:05):
God, uh through for God, why they're.

Speaker 5 (01:04:08):
Not finding it until now? It's because we're looking in
the wrong place. You know, God is not out there.
It's not a particle of floating in the sky or
in space, but rather God is within everything about exist because.

Speaker 1 (01:04:20):
Yeah, but but I'm but but but, Sarah, I am
experiencing everything that exists around me, right I'm doing that
right now, right right now, even as we speak, I
am experiencing everything around me, and I don't see God
or I don't see any reason for God to be
a part of what I am experiencing here. So I'm
trying to figure out and I'm going to go back
to what I did with our previous caller. Let's put

(01:04:43):
this into a math equation, Right, my experience plus what
equals God? What's the what? What's the what there?

Speaker 6 (01:04:51):
Well, Well, here's the thing in my thinking.

Speaker 3 (01:04:59):
Here the thing right.

Speaker 5 (01:05:00):
Well, then the most the thing that actually put me
in the rabbital of quat.

Speaker 6 (01:05:07):
Of physics groups God was that I saw.

Speaker 5 (01:05:11):
How you know, up until now scientists in quantum fields,
they have not figured out the mechanisms as through why
such atomic particles take on the shape orentization, to spin,
the speed, the momentum that they do. It's just it's
just kind of something that happens randomly, so that you
know when you see that physical reality is basically the

(01:05:32):
big things, right, and big things were made out of
smaller things. And in the smallest level you have the
sub atomic particles, which you can say to be the
building blocks of physical worlds, of the physical world. It
doesn't go any smaller than that. And on the smallest scale,
you know, they behave almost any non deterministic pattern, like
they just take on whatever they want. I mean, there

(01:05:55):
is no equation that explains why they took the shape
or them to be the position that they do. It's
just that you know that the equation that they use
is actually more of a possibility rather than.

Speaker 3 (01:06:07):
It's certainly Sarah, can I can I as charitably as
I can can I so im pure argument as we
don't understand it. Therefore God is that Essentially your argument
is that because there are certain things we don't understand
about the physical world, therefore there has to be a God.

Speaker 2 (01:06:28):
Is that?

Speaker 3 (01:06:29):
Is that the crux of your argument?

Speaker 5 (01:06:31):
Well, no, not really. I think it's actually the opposite
of that. It's because we do understand that on the
quantum level, things behave almost in the possibilities whigs other
than a definite other than they're being a definite mechanism
for it.

Speaker 6 (01:06:48):
And it just tells me that, you know, that's where
God is.

Speaker 5 (01:06:52):
God is this If you look at the Eastern conception
of God, God is basical dis infinite possibilities.

Speaker 6 (01:06:57):
So materialize it.

Speaker 5 (01:07:00):
Into the physical world by limiting itself. And that's kind
of like you know what happens on the quantum level.
You have possibilities to the wave function and it then.

Speaker 6 (01:07:09):
It collapses into.

Speaker 3 (01:07:11):
Okay, So, Sarah, can I quickly ask have you run
this past any quantum physicists. Have you sat down with
the quantum physicists. I've gotten to a chat with the
quantum physicists. Have you run this and if so, what who?
If you can tell us who was it and what
did they say in response to your hypothesis.

Speaker 5 (01:07:30):
I don't think I need to, because well, for me,
really honest, if I do, if I have sat down
with a quantum physinesses, they're just going to give me
their interpretation of it.

Speaker 6 (01:07:39):
And as far as I'm.

Speaker 5 (01:07:40):
Concerned, there is more than one quant one and more
than one quantum physics interpretation out there, and I guess
the most famous one the Covin.

Speaker 3 (01:07:51):
But Sarah, if you're basing your life and your identity
on this, wouldn't you want the best possible interpretation. Wouldn't
you want your beliefs to be I suppose challenged, And
wouldn't you want to know that you're believing the right
thing about this very complex topic? Because it just seems
it just seems funny that you know, quantum physics is

(01:08:13):
a very very very specialized field, and yeah, here we are.
You know this this person, and I'm assuming that you
don't have a irrelevant qualification in the field. Here's this
person without irrelevant qualification in the field, somehow able to say,
you know, not only do I have an understanding understanding

(01:08:34):
of quantum physics, but I'm telling you that it's God
that to me, just on the face of it seems
very extraordinary.

Speaker 2 (01:08:42):
And if I can jump in here as well, I
want to add something to this. Right like, you said
that we understand quantum physics well enough for you to
come to that conclusion, but then you followed up by
saying that we don't have a singular or even a
small number of interpretations of quantum physics. That means that
we don't have a good enough understanding of quantum physics
to come to those kind of conclusions by any stretch

(01:09:04):
of the imagination. We don't have a variety of interpretations
of the way gravity operates. We don't have a variety
of interpretations about how math works as a language. We
have some fringe levels of some of the more complex
stuff that we still haven't quite figured out when it
comes to gravity and physics and math, but the core
ideas of these things are not up for debate. That

(01:09:26):
is not true with quantum physics in the same way.
There are some things that we think we understand and
we're learning regularly if we're wrong or not about them.
To the sense that, like so much of quantum physics
is up in the air. That's why you have such
vast understandings such so many diverse different interpretations of what
quantum physics is telling us. And if you can say that, oh,

(01:09:47):
there's so many different interpretations of quantum physics that I
don't even need to ask an expert what their interpretation
is because it's just another interpretation. But we also understand
it so well that it proves the thing that I'm
talking about. You are not following, right, those two things
are mutually exclusive claims.

Speaker 1 (01:10:02):
Okay, yeah, But what it seemed to me, and maybe
I'm wrong, but the way, but the way you were
explaining it when I asked about the you know, the
what is the what there, it seemed to me that
you were saying, well, there's all these different possibilities, but
this one happens, so therefore God. And to me it's
sounded like, hey, you know the concept of Schrodinger's cat,
that's God. So I'm totally confused.

Speaker 5 (01:10:24):
Oh, but I would like I would say that one
of the one of those quantum interpretations that exists is
happens to be the most popular. It's just, uh, the
one thing that the majority of quant physicists uses and
uh actually believes in. And that's not me saying it.
That's something that you can look up in Google. It's

(01:10:45):
the Copenhagen interpretation, which is.

Speaker 6 (01:10:47):
They don't even niels plain, they don't.

Speaker 5 (01:10:50):
Even attempt to explain why the quantum world behaves that way.
It's just that here's the match, here's the equation, the
likelihood exquit the the way function equation which works based
on possibilities and the possibilities distribution rather than as solid costs,
and the type of matanigence like you would see in
biology or you know, classical physics. And so I take

(01:11:12):
that as a as kind of like a not to
you know, do the average guide through things that maybe
that's just how it behaves. You know, we don't really
have any uh, any way of making sense of it
because that's just the way it behaves.

Speaker 6 (01:11:26):
And and that's to me so very.

Speaker 2 (01:11:29):
Similar if I could God about God? Sorry, sorry, sorry,
sorry interrupt Sorry. Like I like, I feel like if
we let you go, if we let you keep going,
we're just going to be here for an hour. And
and I appreciate you have a lot to say, and
I'm not trying to be rude, but I do want
to jump in on this right because what you're talking about, right,
is that this is the most common interpretation, and this

(01:11:50):
most common interpretation is not by the experts defending the
thing that you were defending, So you are adding an
interpretation onto the most popular interpretation. So even still, you
could still go talk to a physicist that takes that
most common interpretation if you think that's the best interpretation
that supports your thing the most, and then you don't
have to worry about it if it goes in this
other interpretation, that's just another interpretation that you don't want

(01:12:13):
to give credibility to. But I think a really important thing,
going back to kind of the core of what you
were talking about, you started this conversation by saying that
God is effectively necessary for this. And I might not
be using the same words you use here, but you
were effectively saying that quantum physics can only operate the
way what it does because of God. You made that

(01:12:33):
kind of statement, and the thing is what you're doing
there is you're simply saying we don't know why it
works this way. Therefore God and it very much is
what Damien was pointing out earlier, this we don't have
an answer for why it operates this way, and therefore
we need God to be the explanation for it. And
I know you rejected that as your position, But the
more you talk about it and the more you express
these things, that is what your position effectively boils down to.

(01:12:56):
And you said you're going to come in here and
you have proof. None of this is proof. None of
this is evidence. All of this is your interpretation of
a common interpretation of something that doesn't agree with you.

Speaker 1 (01:13:08):
Yeah, it's not proof, it's conjecture, sorry, Sarah.

Speaker 3 (01:13:12):
Is your God a philosophical concept or a material or
being with a personality that makes decisions?

Speaker 5 (01:13:21):
Yeah, my dad is a philosophical That's kind of what
I was getting at. My dad is kind of this
abstract conception of infinite possibility. So it's more like a
it's more like minds. It's more like maths, you know,
the idea of maths, the idea of logic, and that's
kind of what's.

Speaker 3 (01:13:37):
So why not just call it maths and logic and nature?
Why not just call that? Why do we have to
add this baggage onto it?

Speaker 5 (01:13:44):
Yeah, but if you think about it, logic and maths
and you know, things like that.

Speaker 3 (01:13:48):
They the logic and meths are things that we created
to help us understand the world where we can trace
the history of logic and mathematical thinking for hundreds of years.

Speaker 2 (01:14:00):
Logic and math are effectively just languages that we're using
as a tool to describe the objective reality we share.
And what you're doing here is you're just redefining something
into something different so you can call it the thing
you want to call it. You're not even providing the
same function as logic and maths, right, You're not providing
a language or a method to describe something else. You're

(01:14:22):
just saying, there's this thing here, and I'm going to
call it God. So what okay?

Speaker 5 (01:14:26):
Well okay, well you said that logic and mathematics there
are simply tools or it's kind of similar to how
language and they we use it as a.

Speaker 1 (01:14:35):
Pool yes, yes, lives and whatnot to understand.

Speaker 5 (01:14:40):
I bet the different because the philosophical take on all
of this, if you're bread on Plato and a lot
of the ancient brick lits, which where they say that
you know, logic, maths, geometry, things like that, they're not
something that we make uh, that we made up to
understand this book, but.

Speaker 1 (01:14:57):
Rather why why should we take their word at that.

Speaker 2 (01:15:00):
And the Roman vulcan was volcanos, and and philosophy has
come so far in the past three thousand years, right like,
why why are we pointing back to ancient Greek ancient
Greece philosophers as the philosophers of note in this particular conversation,
right like, like, that doesn't bring us value. Someone thought
this thing once, therefore it's true. Isn't a answer, it's

(01:15:23):
not evidence, and that's not a reason to believe.

Speaker 5 (01:15:25):
Okay, Well, if you again, if I circle back through
what I said about band of physics and how in
the smallest scale things behave more like a you know,
a possibility is going into existence, materializing itself spontaneously taking uh,
you know, a finance piopracies for itself spontaneously out of
just pure cands. Now you would see how that kind

(01:15:47):
of that's.

Speaker 1 (01:15:49):
What you're just going to write in new circle about
what I said. You were saying before that Schrodinger's the
concept of Schrodinger's cat equals God, and that just doesn't work.

Speaker 3 (01:15:57):
Man, Well, I don't know this is this thing is
really complex.

Speaker 2 (01:16:01):
Therefore God at the end of the day, you're pointing
to something that we don't know you want to call
it God because and the thing is, I don't even
understand why you want to do that. What value does
calling this thing god bring us? Unless you're gonna say
it has some sort of like quality to it that
we usually think of when we talk about God, like
does your God? Does your God interact with us? Does

(01:16:22):
your God care about who we have sex with? Like,
like why should we care about you putting this label
on it?

Speaker 5 (01:16:28):
Okay, well, using the label God kind of bring a
baggage through it. But like I said, I'm not really subscribed,
not really just like availed it with any of the
traditional Western monotheistic gods anymore that the God with human
like attributes. I don't believe in things like that. My
God is more philosophical. Okay, I just call it God
because yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:16:49):
So what purpose does it serve?

Speaker 5 (01:16:51):
Then?

Speaker 1 (01:16:52):
If it's if your God is philosophical, what purpose does
it actually serve?

Speaker 5 (01:16:57):
Well?

Speaker 1 (01:16:57):
Because except to thill the gaps of your now.

Speaker 5 (01:17:00):
Or give you mean us No, well you can go
to that word or I don't know yet, but there
are you know, hinger school of thought.

Speaker 6 (01:17:08):
Through this school of.

Speaker 5 (01:17:09):
Thought, we're basically uh you know, knowing this fact knowing
this fact that everything comes from gotten material, reality, emanates
from God, aminates from pure possibilities. It gives you a
way to liberate your soul.

Speaker 6 (01:17:24):
And I'm sure that.

Speaker 1 (01:17:25):
You've heard of how do how does that liberate your soul?
And and explain to me first what a soul is?

Speaker 5 (01:17:31):
Okay, So your soul is basically your awareness, right, your awareness?
I mean if you look at a rock and you see, well,
it's a rock, or or you look at a uh
you know.

Speaker 1 (01:17:42):
So I wait, wait, wait, wait wait. If if my
soul is just awareness, why don't I say much? Why
don't you say your awareness and study your soul? Why
are you using a different word?

Speaker 5 (01:17:53):
Because because awareness makes it? Uh?

Speaker 1 (01:17:57):
Because I'm aware of things, and I don't think I
don't have a soul. I'm just a you know, a
physical thing. I don't understand what you mean by a soul,
and I'm still aware of everything around me as I
told you before.

Speaker 2 (01:18:08):
And it feels like you're just trying to add like
like these more complicated, more philosophical terms for a lack
of a better word here to make these normal things
sound and feel special right Like at the end of
the day, right are you really are just either redefining
things into terms that you prefer, which, if that's the case, fine,

(01:18:31):
that has no value in any way, shape or form
to anything we're talking about, or to anything about how
we should live our lives or why we should live
our lives a certain way. And when you're not doing that,
you're simply saying, we don't know. Therefore, let's label it
this thing and give this credibility somewhere that we can't
justify at the end of the day. Right, if this
is just a concept, this is not a real entity

(01:18:51):
that has any real impact, and you just want to
give it this label. Sure, cool, hold that, go all
day with it, like, but recognize, I think it's important
reconize that you're not bringing anything of value or of
substance or new to the table that has a meaning
for anything here, not.

Speaker 1 (01:19:06):
For me anyway. I mean, everything you've said is just
stuff I've heard other people say before, and I didn't
believe it then either, because there's no essential proof of
anything you're saying. You're just giving us a cut what
you conceptually feel is correct, And I just I can't
sign on to something like that. I have to have me.
I have to have some kind of empirical and ambiguous
proof that I can hold on to you before I

(01:19:27):
believe anything. And I'm pretty sure that you feel the
same way about everything else in your life except this.

Speaker 2 (01:19:35):
And I kind of wish it's similar to the conversation
we were having earlier with the previous caller. Is that like
at the end of the day, like it sounds like
it could be interesting maybe if we're actually given a reason,
a good reason to think about it, Like I don't
need to have the absolute solid proof put in front
of me before I tangle with the idea. But you
aren't even giving me a good enough reason to tangle

(01:19:56):
with the idea. And that's the problem. You are just
saying things things, You're just redefining things, and you're not
giving anything substantive, useful, or valuable to hold on to
and move forward with. And I don't know how you
get past that. And I don't know if we're gonna
have enough time for us to hash that out anymore today.

Speaker 1 (01:20:14):
But we are, actually we are actually over time already, Sarah.
I would love it if you'd call back and talk again.
We'd love to have continue this conversation. I'm sure Dan
would love to have this conversation with you as well,
so feel free to call us back. As much as
I want to keep this going, we are over time
and I'm just gonna have to call it short. So
thank you very much Sarah for calling in. I appreciate it,

(01:20:37):
and I'm sorry I dropped Sarah already. That was that
was my bed.

Speaker 2 (01:20:42):
Sorry Sarah, But Sarah, I also want to point out,
like you were afraid that we weren't we're gonna be
hostile to you, or like we don't agree with you,
don't we don't share your beliefs, and we're critiquing them
and criticizing them. But I do think we had a
civil and good conversation. So I hope you don't feel
discouraged to call back in the future, like you seemed
a little concerned about calling in the first place. So
I hope at the very least we've alleviated that for you.

Speaker 4 (01:21:03):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:21:03):
Well, if if Sarah does want to call back, I
suppose that the only thing I would Sarah to do
is differentiate between Yeah, like, why call maths and logic
and our inability to under same quantum physics? God Like,
why add that label on top why not just say
this is something we don't understand, what value does it bring? Indeed,
that's a question in just way putting up.

Speaker 1 (01:21:24):
As Oku Banshi mentioned in the chat, got it, the
quantum quantum physics has just taken the place of God
of the gap.

Speaker 3 (01:21:30):
So I was really afraid though that when Sarah said
about paintings and painters, I thought they were going to
go the right comfort route and go every painting as
a painter.

Speaker 2 (01:21:42):
I had I actually have notes when when when Sarah
started talking and I was like concept God equal painter
to a painting, dash, watchmaker, argument, question mark, I was
waiting for it.

Speaker 1 (01:21:54):
So we are going to wrap up the show. Guys.
You were great man. I had a great time tonight.
It was so fun hanging out with both of you guys.
I'm so glad we brought Damien up too. That was
it was awesome. I want to reiterate, where can we
find you? Flabbergasted?

Speaker 2 (01:22:09):
If you find me, you find me on TikTok at.
I'm flabbergast at zero zero one and didn't recognize me.
You'll see my beautiful face.

Speaker 1 (01:22:15):
Cool and Damian, if we were looking for you, where
will we find you?

Speaker 3 (01:22:18):
At you would find me on the toll Friendly Atheist said,
podcast episodes released sporadically.

Speaker 1 (01:22:24):
Cool, cool, cool, awesome, and we can buy both to
you and myself often on the nonprofits. So tune into that. WHOA,
there we go. And I want I want to thank
all the callers that called in, and I want to
think especially the viewers that stuck with us through it all,
and reiterate, Oh, we should reiterate what the prompt for

(01:22:44):
this week is? You want to do that daily inner?

Speaker 3 (01:22:46):
Should I if you were invisible in the church service,
what would you do?

Speaker 4 (01:22:51):
That's a good one.

Speaker 1 (01:22:52):
I can't wait for the answers to that one. I
really really can't.

Speaker 2 (01:22:56):
And there are no requirements to keep it Pg. Thirteen,
I don't think.

Speaker 3 (01:23:01):
And just to make it political because we are five
one c three organizations.

Speaker 1 (01:23:04):
The one thing Dan likes to wrap up the show
with is words of wisdom from our guests. So flabbergast,
did you want to go first?

Speaker 2 (01:23:11):
Words of wisdom? If you are going to say that
something is an important thing to believe, you should be
able to justify it.

Speaker 4 (01:23:18):
Good, Damien.

Speaker 3 (01:23:21):
I learned today that spirit is the greater part of us.
And I'm about to have lunch. I'm about to have lunch,
so maybe that's my stomach will be the greater part of.

Speaker 2 (01:23:30):
Me, and our soul is our awareness. I'm sold in
you right now, Fleby guested And.

Speaker 1 (01:23:38):
With that, I want to encourage every ready come back
and join us again next Friday. It'll be Next Friday
will be Halloween, so that'll be fun. And in the meantime,
everyone keep wanting the truth.

Speaker 2 (01:24:00):
Watch the non profits, and join the hosts in the
live chart.

Speaker 4 (01:24:04):
Visit tiny dot c cy slash y t n p

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Truth Wanted 08.43 with Kelley Laughlin and Flabbergasted

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

All Episodes

Truth Wanted 08.43 with Kelley Laughlin and Flabbergasted

Stuff You Should Know