The Atheist Experience

• The Atheist Experience 29.25 with Jmike and Seth Andrews @TheThinkingAtheist (With Special Guest Godless Engineer)

  Welcome to The Atheist Experience 29.25 with Jmike and Seth Andrews @TheThinkingAtheist and Special Guest, Godless Engineer! This week, your hosts dive into some thought-provoking discussions about morality, belief, and the challenges of open dialogue.This episode kicks off with a powerful monologue about the very nature of good and evil, challenging the idea that everything, even atrocities, could be justified as part of a "greater good" or a consequence of free will. The segment questions the coherence of concepts like sin and atonement if all events are ultimately part of a divine plan. Guest host Seth Andrews then shares insights into his background and experience, including a look back at his past as a Christian radio broadcaster. He also reflects on the importance of extending grace to those with differing beliefs, advocating against demeaning or superior attitudes towards religious individuals.Drew from California calls in to discuss the challenges of managing temper and emotions when engaging with people who hold opposing views. The conversation explores a specific incident where a friend, despite knowing Drew's skeptical stance, sent him astrology content, leading to a breakdown in communication and a feeling of disrespect. The hosts and caller delve into the dynamics of setting and respecting personal boundaries in conversations about deeply held beliefs.Jim from Missouri raises questions about the resurrection story, presenting arguments that it is a complete fabrication. He challenges the traditional biblical narrative of Jesus's burial, positing that crucified individuals were typically left unburied or thrown into mass graves, rather than being placed in tombs. The discussion extends to the broader lack of contemporary historical evidence for Jesus's existence and the reliability of biblical accounts when proving biblical claims.A theist caller, Shabbaz, asks where atheists get their morals and why they often seem disrespectful or condescending. Seth answers the first part by explaining evolved ethics and pro-social behaviors as a basis for morality. The conversation then delves into Shabbaz's reasons for believing in Allah, including a "falsification test" from the Quran and supposed "scientific miracles" related to bees and honey. The hosts challenge these claims, questioning the criteria for such tests and highlighting historical knowledge that predates the Quran regarding honey and bee behavior. The discussion also unpacks why some atheists might express frustration or disrespect in such conversations, often stemming from repeated, vague arguments.Finally, John from New Hampshire calls in to discuss the historical existence of Jesus, prompting a nuanced conversation about what kind of evidence is sought for such claims. The hosts and caller explore the idea of a "minimal historical Jesus" and the challenges of relying on common names or biblical accounts for historical proof. The call culminates with the hosts sharing their own "pause moments" – instances where their beliefs were genuinely challenged, leading to deeper inquiry and a strengthening of their skeptical positions, including Jmike's pivotal experience with Flat Earth theory.Thank you for watching and listening to The Atheist Experience!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

  --------  

  1:55:46
• The Atheist Experience 29.24 with Secular Rarity and Godless Engineer

  --------  

  2:01:54
• The Atheist Experience 29.23 with Forrest Valkai and ObjectivelyDan RX7

  In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Objectively Dan, sort through calls of AI, logical fallacies, and apocalyptic dream interpretations. No circular arguments made today! Chidumebi in PA asks how to combat religious students that insist on AI reliance to justify the Bible. It is important to teach children how to search and explain why there is bias behind some of the input. These models are designed for good output, not accuracy. Be sure they understand what material they will need to know as a requirement, regardless of their personal beliefs or use of AI language models. What is the student supposed to do if they end up in a career they do not know how to do as a result of their reliance on AI? Mike in SC, thinks that AI can replace atheists but not theists because it can do anything atheists can do by using less resources. What is your understanding of the massive centers needed to support AI? If the soul is a factor, how do you explain an AI video that turns people to Christ? It is odd that you believe the actions of human beings that are atheists can be reduced down to a chat box. If dogs don’t have souls, is it cool that we just replace all dogs with AI? Our lives are more than just a sum of our labor and we find this conclusion dehumanizing. Herman in Canada has massive observations of “things begotting things” so therefore there must be a creator. It is important to point out that energy has not been created. What created the actual creator of the universe? How do you know that the reality of physics was exactly the same just before the big bang? If everything is contingent on something, what would a world that was not created look like? Luc, a Catholic in Canada, explains his different perception in the prime mover argument and that is that rules need rulemakers. Why are the rules of nature excluded from this argument? We do not need to provide evidence for not believing in something. What evidence do you have that everything needs a rule maker? Of these two things, which is the more reliable pathway to truth; evidence or faith? Why is it good enough for you when the Catholic Church says something? We are not expected to just believe a thing because a teacher told us to; we must do the work/tests, and experiments to learn this stuff. Prophet Daniel from Australia, believes there is one god for the entirety of existence and the interpretation of dreams made in the Book of Daniel prove his existence. How do you think this story has been adapted to meet the events that actually transpired? Why would this book be a reliable source when Daniel speaks with a dragon? Jamie the Blind Limey, our backup host joins to close out the show and offer some post thoughts on some of the calls. Thank you for joining us this week and we will see you next time! Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

  --------  

  1:50:34
• The Atheist Experience 29.22 with Secular Rarity and Jmike

  In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, JMike and Secular Rarity tackle fallacies, logic, and questions of ontology!Sura in India believes that because religion exists with stories, there must be supernatural things such as beings. Would these supernatural beings exist without religions? Once you wiggle the terms of supernatural beings with wiggle room, the more meaningless these wiggly terms become.Arec in Norway is questioning if it is fair to criticize people who use faith rather than reason when there is no other answer. Why do you think it is important that people play by the same rules when having these conversations? We like to have reliable ways to get to conclusions, and that does not include the use of faith. Keep investigating this and call us back with what you find. Rajin in NY wants some science based reasoning for the lack of god’s existence. Logic and science are terms that should be used separately. Why is it that in all possible worlds, god has to exist? If god has to exist from all points of view, what is the point of talking about it? What does “something from nothing” even mean? The Motte-and-bailey fallacy describes the method many theists use when trying to prove god. Why should we accept “nothing” as a possibility?Rostaman in Mexico describes how none of us have access to ontology because it belongs with metaphysics. Categorizing beliefs can make us feel like there is substance, but why use labels and terms if the meaning can be explained?JMike has to bail so Scott Dickie takes over for him to talk with Dave in India who believes that science has not been fully discovered and therefore we don’t know what that means for our soul and body. How does the lack of our understanding or ability to prove things through science prove that magic happens? Is god causing the things we don’t understand or are these things themselves god?Tom in MS has some thoughts about the Catholic Church and how things have historically not changed when having different popes. If god can do everything, wouldn't he be able to choose the next pope? The actions over the millenia are a good indication of what will change with each pope. Dee in IA has some questions about a logic problem that is apparently not solvable. Some of these logic problems are weird and reading up on them by diving head first can be super cool. Unfortunately, we don’t have access to the physical foundations of the universe. Sometimes we need to look in the direction Occam's Razor points to. Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

  --------  

  1:49:35
• The Atheist Experience 29.21 with Secular Rarity and Scott Dickie 2025-05-25

  (00:00:00) The Atheist Experience 29.21 with Secular Rarity and Scott Dickie 2025-05-25 (00:10:43) Hannah - MS | Materialism And Physicalism (00:43:43) Watcher 215 - PA | Love Is The Fruit Of The Holy Spirit (01:03:18) Paul - AZ | Foundherentism And Munchhausen’s Trilemma (01:25:50) James - (CA) | Proof Of Evolution? (01:45:04) Ulrich - (MX) | Church Is Evidence For God Hannah calls in from Mississippi to talk about materialism and physicalism. The hosts say that they mostly subscribe to methodological and practical materialism. Hannah argues that the hard problem of consciousness undermines materialism. She says that materialism denies the existence of consciousness as a nonmaterial thing. The hosts point out that it’s only a problem if you presuppose that consciousness is immaterial. Hannah believes that consciousness is immaterial because you can’t observe consciousness. She shifts the burden of proof by saying that she would need to see a falsifiable experiment that shows the material nature of consciousness. It isn’t our responsibility to prove a counterexample to a claim without evidence.Watcher 215 from Pennsylvania calls in to talk about his relationship with the holy spirit as evidence for god. The hosts explain that believers in other religions use the same evidence as proof of their gods, so it isn’t convincing. Watcher says that if other people got the same benefits as him from other religions, he would have to seriously investigate those religions. What if people also get the same experience from leaving religion? If you want people to believe in a specific god, you need to narrow down the evidence to show that religion/god is the correct one. Watcher uses circular reasoning and says that he knows that love is the fruit of the holy spirit, and he knows that by believing the word of the bible. Paul from Arizona calls to talk about the hosts’ ground for knowledge. What is the ontology behind the hosts epistemology for the grounding of knowledge about their atheist worldview? Paul and the hosts discuss Foundherentism (a blending of coherentism and foundationalism), Munchhausen’s trilemma, and theories about infinite regress. The hosts say that there can’t be an infinite future without the possibility of an infinite past as well. Paul thinks that there needs to be a start to something, so there can’t be an infinite past because it would eventually run into a starting point. But why does there need to be a start?James in Canada starts with the premise that all we know is that we are here and we don’t know how we got here. The hosts can agree that they are here and it’s not 100% known how we got here. James says that there is no proof, but the hosts can’t totally agree to that. There is solid proof about evolution and the genetic code, etc. James points out that evolution is a theory and describes a theory as an idea that may be true but isn’t proven. However, in scientific communities, it has a different meaning. A scientific theory is pretty much a fact. When asked, James says that you can’t have evidence of god, but he also believes that we shouldn’t believe evolution if there was no evidence for it. If we’re held to that standard, why isn’t religion as well?Ulrich from Mexico claims that the existence of churches proves that God is real. The bible says that there will be churches for God, so the fact that there are churches means the bible is true. He says that no other holy books have fulfilled prophecies. When asked for an example of a fulfilled biblical prophecy, he brings up a prophecy of Jews returning to Jerusalem before the end of days. Does he think the end times are happening right now? He says maybe. When arguing his case, Ulrich couldn’t engage in an honest conversation, so he got hung up on.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

  --------  

  2:01:56

Fler podcasts i Näringsliv

Trendiga poddar i Näringsliv

Om The Atheist Experience