part of a longer talk at Skepticon 5
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Sean-Carroll-Higgs-boson-fundamental-nature-of-reality

Sean Carroll: Higgs boson & fundamental nature of reality has been added as a related post - related requested by kulpims.

Discovery Retreats: Dr. Sean Carroll on "What Inspires Him?" has been added as a related post - related requested by kulpims on that post.

There is actually room for eternal life within certain interpretations of quantum mechanics. I refer to the article on Quantum suicide and immortality on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality
Of course, this is highly speculative at best, and impossible to test in an objective manner. But given the many worlds interpretation, or an infinite universe with infinite variety, it is at least plausible (to some tiny extent) that, say, some advanced aliens could make maybe a robot or something with a randomized personaily and experience, and that that randomized person would match you exactly as you were when you died, "moving" your experience from your life over to that new life as a robot. Very fascinating. And completely irrelevant to everyday life.

Point is, life after death cannot be 100% ruled out (maybe 99%). That was the only part of the video I disagreed with.

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by WaterDweller.

Forces and particles don't exist as much as they are an observation. Lets not figure out why we think there are particles or forces. That could never lead to something useful.

Telepathy, knowing the future, skewing random events to one direction or another. Those are part of everyday life. Maybe we are more sensitive to quantum effects than some think or?

People who believe in the supernatural seriously underestimate the power of the human mind and of intuition. It might seem spooky how good it is and it might seem close to supernatural, but that's billions of years worth of evolution for you.

This is all given within the context of a materialistic worldview. If you believe matter is all there is, then yes, a spiritual reality is improbable. However, according to most physicists time space matter and energy began at the big bang. So, whatever created the Universe is transcendent of all of those things and not restricted by our limitations. A temporal being can never conceive of an eternal being. A material being cannot conceive of an immaterial being. Our senses are not the key to the door, they are the blinds that keep the sun out.

If you want to get philosophical, if you say that empiricism is the only source of truth, how do you test that idea empirically? To even begin testing something, you have already made certain assumptions (axioms) which cannot be proven empirically to begin with. That is the fundamental limitation of empiricism.

Sure we can. There's a being that lives outside of time and space. Conceived of, done. We may not understand the mechanics of it but the fact that we're discussing it means that by definition we can conceive of it.

All of which is ultimately irrelevant. Because there is no proof that such a being exists and no proof that he/she/it interacts with our everyday lives in any meaningful sense. Hence the point of the video.

Ugh... what supernatural force compels me to hit "show it anyway" when I see a SB post? Is it some immaterial, eternal being guiding my hand, or just my temporal, material desire to lmao?

SB, the universe was shat out by a giant magic turtle named Phil. The universe is a turtle turd, and there are an infinite number of turtle turds, as Phil is eternal. I believe it, and you can't prove to me it's not the truth, as Phil is transcendent and immaterial. If you try to engage me in debate on empirical truths, I will simply declare Phil outside empirical reality, and remind you that you have no humanly possible way of even conceiving of a being such as Phil... which means I don't either... but what i say is true... because I believe it is.

If only you knew the slightest bit about philosophy. But no, you have an understanding of what your religion says, which is *THEOLOGY*, not philosophy.

Proof: You attempt to 'prove' that empiricism, a 'theory of knowledge' that was ancient when his religion was founded, and is still considered an important pillar in modern philosophy and theology, is "false" in a self-referential statement.

In the entirety of civilization, in EVERY SINGLE ERA of man, the greatest thinkers have been consumed with empiricism... but unfortunately they lacked SB's supreme insight... too bad SB wasn't born 2500 years ago... he could have ensured that Aristotle didn't waste his time.... OH, and he could have warned Jesus about that bastard Judas.

The video attempted to demonstrate the impossibility of the existence a spiritual reality through our understanding of the material reality. Yet, even if we had perfect understanding of it, how would that rule out a spiritual reality? I don't see how the video has refuted supernatural beliefs at all.

Perhaps conceive wasn't the right word, but how does a being who has a beginning understand a being who doesn't? That is something which is completely alien to our experience. We are inclined to doubt such beings exist simply because we there is nothing in our experience to suggest they could or do exist. I agree with that much. You have to look a little deeper than that, though. All you could really say in the end is that you have seen no such proof, but it doesn't mean there isn't any.

Is it really so implausible to believe the Universe has an intelligent causation? It seems like a highly rational question. How would you tell the difference between a Universe that was designed and one that wasn't? How would you know which one you were in?

I do know a little bit about philosophy. For instance, epiricism is theory of epistemology, which is itself a branch of philosophy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Therefore empiricism is a philosophical position within epistemology. The main problem with empiricism is called the problem of induction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

Because empiricism relies upon inductive reasoning, it makes certain presuppositions, such as the uniformity in nature. Unfortunately, this leaves no justification for its truth claims beyond circular reasoning. For instance, if I were to say that the sun will rise tomorrow, I could only justify this by its past performances since there is no certainty the future will be like the past. Therefore, my knowledge claim says that the future will be like the past, because of the past, which is circular reasoning.

As far as great thinkers go, if the reason that you're here is to come to know God personally, and you miss it, how could you be considered a great thinker?

Oh, the irony, a christian lecturing someone about Circular Reasoning.

Tell me again how you know your God is the "True God"?

Oh, the Bible says? And how do you know the Bible is God's Word?

Oh, the Bible says?

An awfully big problem, but thankfully Christians have a solution... they know that God exists because they've.... wait for it... EXPERIENCED him. They've sensed him in their life. Hmm... Sounds like they're relying on Empiricism themselves without even realizing it.

Unless you want to go on towards Idealism.... but how could there be so many non-believers if we're all born with so much innate knowledge of everything.

There's no application of Philosophy that will lead you towards being a christian... Also nothing that will prove the absence of God, either. Just like in hard science, whether or not there is a God is purely in the realm of Theology.

Preach it brother, good to see there's another Philistine here on the sift.

Exactly.

The only evidence SB will ever provide here for the certainty of his faith is his own experience in direct communication with Yahweh. Even while repeatedly proclaiming that all humans are flawed, he claims that his own human perception allows him to 100% reliably identify his perceived experience with Yahweh as 1) not imagined, and 2) Yahweh himself, a "perfect" entity. The impossibility of a human making this claim doesn't phase him.

As Carroll says, when you hear a claim like that, you can just, "tune them out without listening to the details". You're talking to someone who doesn't understand the scope and real implications of what they're proposing.

There aren't really that many non-believers, actually. Worldwide belief in God is usually pegged at 85 to 90 percent. A gallup poll from last year places belief in God in America at 92 percent:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147887/americans-continue-believe-god.aspx

But I am not going to go into idealism. Let's say some of our experience of God is in natural terms, in that we experience Him through our senses (I will leave out the spiritual aspect). Well, if someone comes up to you and says "Thus sayeth the Lord..lightning will strike just west of your house at 12:33 pm" and then it happens, are you going to conclude coincidence, or are you going to conclude God supernaturally influenced reality? That's a way you can use empiricism to deduce a supernatural reality. This sort of thing happens all the time to people who know God. He makes impossible things happen in their lives and sometimes even lets them know before hand.

The central question of philosophy is this: what is truth?

Jesus says He is the truth:

John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

If that's true, and you are honestly searching for the truth, you will find Jesus.

Hmm... funny, a couple posts ago, you were arguing against Empiricism... and yet, you can't offer up anything that isn't Empiricist, or suffer from the same logical problems that Empiricism has.

"Truth" isn't a democracy... it doesn't matter how many people do or don't believe in a God. (Though I argue that in this country, the demonization of the non-religious scares people into continuing to go to church, despite their belief... though I say that through self experience, as it's hard to poll about that). The "truth" is that you'll never be able to use Science or Philosophy argue for or against the very abstract idea of whether there is a God or not.

One can, certainly, use logic to determine that the bible is self-contradictory, and biblical scholars (and believers) have determined that not a single book in the bible is the "original"... they've all been modified well after it had already been proclaimed to be the "Word of God". There is utterly no logic as to how a perfect being could have such a shoddy and terrible track record with his followers. It certainly doesn't make sense that he could create wars where his followers kill each other (see any and all European Wars.).

The truth is that all science and philosophy points to Christianity being bullshit. And you've already pointed out the holes in the only possible philosophical arguments that could allow you to maintain belief while being truthful to yourself.


And honestly, if you think that someone praying, and then seeing a piece of Toast with Jesus' image on it, or some mold in their bathroom in HIS image is proof enough to devote your life to that sham... well, you really don't have any sort of a grasp on what philosophy is about.

You have no "proof" but one book written by hundreds of people over hundreds of years, translated into so many different versions... and despite the revisions, it's not possible to get through the first chapter without having MAJOR inconsistencies.

But unlike you, I have truly examined the logic of my situation. I know exactly what would convince me of a super-natural power... it's exactly what would convince me of Aliens or Telepathy. A personal experience that can be independently verified by people I trust, and cannot be explained by hallucinations, slight-of-hand or illusions.

That is ALL it takes. It should be the smallest of things for an omnipotent being... after all, he certainly was never shy with appearances or miracles, according to the bible...

But alas, there remains nothing, no shred of evidence... for Jesus or for Telepathy, or for Aliens.... though I imagine that the Aliens at least have a good reason for not making their presence known.

I'm not about to go chasing religion's tail again, but the claim being made in this video is pretty freaking strong. It sounds remarkably similar to claims made by classical physicists...they didn't have any measurements that didn't fit within their framework, so obviously it was complete. Now, you have physical evidence of the accuracy of quantum mechanics in the computer you're currently using. Transistors could not work under classical physics.

In the next century or two, I'm pretty sure we'll have developed technology that requires fundamental changes in our knowledge of physics, and those technologies will provide physical evidence of the superiority of that new knowledge. Physics students of that time will laugh at claims like this, just as we do at those who made them centuries ago.

Hmm... funny, a couple posts ago, you were arguing against Empiricism... and yet, you can't offer up anything that isn't Empiricist, or suffer from the same logical problems that Empiricism has.

I argued against empiricism being the only route to truth, but I didn't say that you couldn't find any truth through empirical means. You would however have no way to confirm it except through God.

"Truth" isn't a democracy... it doesn't matter how many people do or don't believe in a God. (Though I argue that in this country, the demonization of the non-religious scares people into continuing to go to church, despite their belief... though I say that through self experience, as it's hard to poll about that). The "truth" is that you'll never be able to use Science or Philosophy argue for or against the very abstract idea of whether there is a God or not.

I apologize if you were demonized. I love you and God loves you. It doesn't anger me that you're an atheist; I hope that you come to know who God is, and my heart aches for you, but it's your choice.

There are only two ways you can know truth: Either you are omnipotent or an omnipotent being reveals it to you.

One can, certainly, use logic to determine that the bible is self-contradictory, and biblical scholars (and believers) have determined that not a single book in the bible is the "original"... they've all been modified well after it had already been proclaimed to be the "Word of God". There is utterly no logic as to how a perfect being could have such a shoddy and terrible track record with his followers. It certainly doesn't make sense that he could create wars where his followers kill each other (see any and all European Wars.).

The bible is the most well attested book in ancient history. There is manuscript evidence goes back to the late 1st century, and the manuscripts agree with eachother 99.5 percent of the time. It hasn't been modified.

The bible never claims Christians will be perfect; it really says the opposite. Jesus predicts in Matthew 24 that Christians will fall into a massive apostasy and that there will be many wars, especially in the last days.

The truth is that all science and philosophy points to Christianity being bullshit. And you've already pointed out the holes in the only possible philosophical arguments that could allow you to maintain belief while being truthful to yourself.

Only God can prove Himself to anyone, and faith is a gift from God. What I've pointed out, really, is that atheists have no possible route to the truth.



God works by personal revelation; I couldn't prove He exists to you. You could hopefully see the evidence of His existence working in my life, but it takes His Spirit changing your heart and opening your eyes for you to realize that He is there.

And honestly, if you think that someone praying, and then seeing a piece of Toast with Jesus' image on it, or some mold in their bathroom in HIS image is proof enough to devote your life to that sham... well, you really don't have any sort of a grasp on what philosophy is about.

Philosophy is about a search for the truth, and when I searched for the truth, God revealed Himself to me.

But unlike you, I have truly examined the logic of my situation. I know exactly what would convince me of a super-natural power... it's exactly what would convince me of Aliens or Telepathy. A personal experience that can be independently verified by people I trust, and cannot be explained by hallucinations, slight-of-hand or illusions.

That is ALL it takes. It should be the smallest of things for an omnipotent being... after all, he certainly was never shy with appearances or miracles, according to the bible...

But alas, there remains nothing, no shred of evidence... for Jesus or for Telepathy, or for Aliens.... though I imagine that the Aliens at least have a good reason for not making their presence known.

It's no secret what God can do. If you really wanted to know Him, you would know Him already. The reason people don't come to God is because they don't want to change their life and live for Him. Would you lay down everything in your life to know God? If not, it explains why you don't know Him yet.

Hey friend..I miss when you talked to me rather than snipe at me.

I've always told you that only God can prove Himself. I couldn't prove to you what God has revealed to me, but He could reveal it to you, and would, if you wanted Him to. What you have said many times is that you don't want Him to and you don't care. Well, God is giving you exactly what you want isn't He? Even still He'll be knocking on your door and I hope one day you will answer it.

The bible is very highly contested, even among Christians. Heck, the major denominations can't even agree with which books belong as part of the Bible. Compare the Old Testament (of any bible) to the Torah and tell me they're the same... They were 99% the same 2000 years ago, but while the Torah hasn't changed, the OT definitely has.

Here is just one hotly debated topic: The Q Source... or, how did the order of the writing of the Gospels affect each other?... and as it's obvious that some other writing inspired two of the gospels, and hence is the Word of God, how could it have gotten lost? (and keep in mind, again, these are Christians arguing over it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source

Watch this series to get a better understanding of what has really happened over the years:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70SYwkoH_yc



I am such a huge fan of your blatant intellectual dishonesty. I've seen you here enough to know that you aren't naive, so you're either dishonest or delusional. Seldom do I find someone that can switch back and forth as much as you do... Claiming that Empiricism is only ineffective in finding the truth when God isn't involved... but when he is involved, Empiricism is the only way TO the truth. Nice.

And it really is a secret what God can do. I certainly haven't heard anyone predict lightning at a specific time and had it happen, and for every person that is "cured" through prayer, millions die despite their piety.


Anyways, I'm yet again reminded of how futile it is to have any sort of discussion with you, so I'll end it here.

The bible is very highly contested, even among Christians. Heck, the major denominations can't even agree with which books belong as part of the Bible. Compare the Old Testament (of any bible) to the Torah and tell me they're the same... They were 99% the same 2000 years ago, but while the Torah hasn't changed, the OT definitely has.

The bible isn't contested between any of the major denominations and I can't think of any denominations where it is contested. This simply isn't true. The only bone of contention is that the catholic bible contains a few more books, which were taken from the Septuagint.

Compare the books of the Old Testament to the books in the Hebrew bibles found in the dead sea scrolls. The manuscripts are pretty much exactly the same and they date to before Christ.

Here is just one hotly debated topic: The Q Source... or, how did the order of the writing of the Gospels affect each other?... and as it's obvious that some other writing inspired two of the gospels, and hence is the Word of God, how could it have gotten lost? (and keep in mind, again, these are Christians arguing over it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source

Watch this series to get a better understanding of what has really happened over the years:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70SYwkoH_yc

I am familiar with higher criticism, and there is no proof there was a Q source. How can you use it to try to discredit the bible when there is no evidence it existed? If you want to present evidence for it, I'll be happy to address it.

I am such a huge fan of your blatant intellectual dishonesty. I've seen you here enough to know that you aren't naive, so you're either dishonest or delusional. Seldom do I find someone that can switch back and forth as much as you do... Claiming that Empiricism is only ineffective in finding the truth when God isn't involved... but when he is involved, Empiricism is the only way TO the truth. Nice.

I'd accept your charge of intellectual dishonesty if it were true but that isn't what I said. I said that you couldn't actually be sure of anything you found out through empiricism without God confirming it. Meaning, God is the only one who can tell you what is true, empirically or otherwise.

And it really is a secret what God can do. I certainly haven't heard anyone predict lightning at a specific time and had it happen, and for every person that is "cured" through prayer, millions die despite their piety.

You haven't heard it because you're not looking for Him. If you were you would hear it. Everone dies; the important thing is where you go afterward.

Anyways, I'm yet again reminded of how futile it is to have any sort of discussion with you, so I'll end it here.

God bless.

Yeah, SB needs evidence! LOL!

@hatsix, I vote "delusional".

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by kulpims.

Awarding eric3579 with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.

Our Greatest Delusion As Humans - Veritasium has been added as a related post - related requested by ChaosEngine on that post.