I say it every time I hear this caller; He reminds me a lot of myself. I was trying to fill the hole of a mostly absent father by looking up to strongman characters who are "edgy" but also allowed me to fit in with the christian tradition of my family that I felt completely separate from. He's filled his headpiece with Peterson's straw so that he can fit in with people around him. That's what I believe anyways.
@@ahh_yes_mr_bax but what do you mean by 'interested' and 'the' and 'this' and 'I' ? The metaphysical substrates of fictive imagination requires a level of ubiquity unbeknownst to the lay person and their idolatrous imaginations of course.
By the way he kept trying to obfuscate the point by trying to be pedantic about terminology, then the definitions of the terminology, you can tell he was role-playing as Jordan Peterson before he brought him up.
exactly i was thinking the same. if i were a christian on the fence about my faith and heard callers like this it would make me question more. they should keep calling in 😂😂
@@MarcillaSmith Meanwhile, Jesus uses male pronouns despite allegedly only having female genes (since his only human parent is his mother who would only be able to give him X Chromosomes), but he is also so nonbinary that he identifies as a Trinity.
The fact that Jackie is approaching this as an opponent tells me that they aren't interested in a dialogue and are more interested in being oppositional. The fact that Jackie is getting hung up on "how do you define reality" confirms this.
That's the entire right wing in America right now. "You think this so the opposite must be right!" On our side we have science and evidence and on their side they have context-less Twitter headlines, religious dogma and an orange idiot who screams lies to a cult ready to believe 1 x 1 = 2
He has all the confidence I did at 16. If Jackie legitimately continues to search for truth (big IF implied) he will change his mind on many things as he matures. Don’t want to hear from him again in the near future, but big hopes for Jackie
“what do you mean by truth?” “what do you mean by reality?” yeah this guy listens to peterson. so dishonest he’ll try to make you define every single word before answering a question just to try to find a way out.
"What do you mean by reality?" has got to be one of the most dishonest questions I've ever heard from a believer, and that's really saying something LOL
"I don't have a real problem with ignorance. We are all ignorant about a variety of subjects we are not currently aware of. The real problem is when that ignorance is wilful, intentional and used as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with you, or anyone who has the nerve to present facts you don't want to accept." - anyone who actually cares about verifiable reality
Yep, and that special pleading isn't special pleading because euh..euh..euh.. I say so and because clearly my mind is vastly superior then yours you MUST listen to me spouting Jordan Peterson level of word salad. Heck, I'm surprised he didn't bring up the meta-strata of the darwinistic socialism and how it pertains to the ID that clearly shows how the lobster mind is affected. I never understood how anyone can take the Kalam seriously once past the age of 6.
If Jackie actually knew Occam's Razor, he'd have realized that he's multiplying entities by assuming a first cause is "a creator", and actually violating Occam's Razor himself 😂😂
Honestly i thought the kalam violates Occum’s Razor way before that. Compounding assumptions leading up was wild enough. I cant believe i used to talk similar to this… although less versed on philosopher’s names to drop.
@@ahh_yes_mr_bax While I like to point out that Pascal's Wager is the most dishonest argument for God, I think the Kalam may be the most wrong argument for a god. Its premises are either false or unfaslfiable, it employs a non sequitur, composition fallacy, etc and its conclusion doesn't even reach a god, which was what it is supposed to do. It's wrong in every way it can be as an argument for a god.
If he really followed Occam's razor he'd invert Kalam: P1 - Nothing that did not begin to exist had a cause. P2 - The Universe did not begin to exist. C - The Universe did not have a cause. Call it the Malak Cosmological Argument.
It's like he's a phenomenal archetype of a d-bag. His arguments are inherently valuable because they're more ridiculous than ridiculous, therefore they're beyond the satire/existance paradigm...
Ugh, seriously. People like him really hurt the process of debate. It’s such an important tool, but when folks pervert it, it can make you feel so discouraged to continue.
"I'm calling in today to regurgitate a bunch of presuppositional word salad garbage I heard Jordon Peterson say, while being as pedantic as possible the entire time". I can barely stomach JP as it is, Jackie here has me banging my head against the wall. This call was infuriating to say the least.
Im so glad i got away from all that nonsense in (unnamed political party) before JP became famous. I know my dumb younger self would have fallen for his half assed “self help.”
Jackie is yet another theist who talks but cannot provide a single piece of valid and verified evidence that his god thing ever existed. Crashing and burning at philosophy, is just the icing on his cake of reality denial.
people like this will cram the wikipedia pages of the major philosophers in order to name drop and spew a mishmash of jargon while making broad arguments. like Peterson, they mistake the veneer of faux-intellectualism for erudition. meanwhile for a lot of us who’ve been calling out Peterson as a charlatan, we’ve actually read the books and studied this stuff in college. we took stuff from it, then mostly just moved on with our lives. so when we hear a 16-year-old ask “are you a Nietzschean?” or whatever, _it’s really not that deep._
This is how I felt too... so to pay penance and make myself feel better I donated some money to "recovering from religion" so others could get the help they need while deconstructing. Do it too! You'll feel awesome for being helpful to others like yourself!
At least Peterson is a PhD who has been cited by other psychologists, now he is losing popularity and the people who listened to him moved on to people like Andrew Tate who are just dumb
The special pleading built into the Kalam Cosmological Argument has always seemed self-defeating to me. It breaks my brain that theists find this convincing.
They don't find this convincing. Theists are not theists because of Kalam. They're theists because they were brainwashed as kids. They only use Kalam as a desperate attempt to justify their unjustified beliefs to non-theists.
Christofascists: "Our shit is literally 100% factually true and objectively morally correct." Also Christofascists: "Define truth. What is reality? 'Existence' is a loaded term."
I ‘choose to believe’ that women don’t fart, even though I have personally experienced women farting. So my belief is about as logically consistent as anything Jackie espoused in this call. 🙄
“There is a cult of ignorance… and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” - Isaac Asimov "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
23:18 YES! Why do so many conservatives think minorities are a liberals kryptonite? I'm not a liberal so that every trans person will personally like me, I'm a liberal because I agree with the policies. Does anybody actually get scared when people like Candace Owens say things like " I'm every liberals worst nightmare. I'm a black woman who disagrees." You never see the other side of this. Nobody is out here thinking " I'm a straight, white, male liberal. This is really going to shake up the system!"
Given the number of times ive been accused of being a lonely, jobless, pink haired they/them when i am in fact a bald, married man and an aerospace quality engineer, i do occasionally point that out. Not that it matters to me, its just funny.
😂😂😂 Very good point. People confuse being a decent human being who realizes that there are other people in the world besides themselves with performative allyship and virtue signaling.
So impressed by the patience of Eve and Arden. When he mentioned Jordan Peterson the second time as he was stirring up his word salad I had to get up and do something else for a moment
No, that's the final strike. If you are a follower of a person who do not understand simple concepts such as truth, reality, exists, level, basis, or even "and" you're done.
This caller has ZERO grasp of logic - as for most of his ilk. If I say "I don't know what colour your car is", he would come back with "Why are you saying my car is not red?"
Jackie starting out referring to the hosts as "opponents" and wanting to argue AGAINST the hosts rather than argue FOR his idea betrays the fact that he knows his position cant be reasonably substantiated, he just thinks he can outalk certain people. Also he was a chronic overtalker, very disrespectful.
@@the.punchline33 Talking Heads' song "Psycho Killer" has a great line about this lot. "You're talking a lot but you're not saying anything." Also, it's a great song.
Yeah, I'm surprised they stayed with him as long as they did. Matt D would have muted him several times for interrupting and trying to talk over the hosts.
He wanted them to tee up the ball or start pitching something that he could swing at. Jackie: "Say something dumb that I can pounce on". Arden: "Listen here you little shit."
It's 2024 and actually I'm a Kierkegaardian. You know, the guy who wrote "The human being is a spirit. But what is a spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self. The self is a relation which relates to itself, or that in the relation which is its relating to itself. The self is not the relation but the relation's relating to itself. A human being is a synthesis of the infinite and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity. In short a synthesis. A synthesis is a relation between two terms. Looked at in this way, a human being is not yet a self." O-o-okay.
@@HarryS77 right, navel gazing claptrap. Philosophy is not science. It’s mostly dudes journaling their musings, given an air of academia by way of arcane, proprietary vernacular. A fun and potentially beneficial meditation of sorts made all too pernicious in practice, as we see here with confused Jackie.
We should make a distinction however between philosophy enthusiasts and philosophy bros. The big difference is how the latter can only seem to make their arguments by quoting big names and their arguments, but have little to offer in terms of autonomous thinking, while the former learn the work of previous thinkers and build upon it to create original arguments and fresh ideas
@@vibelet The funniest part to me was Jackie saying “As Jordan Peterson says, ‘Actions speak louder than words,’” as if that’s not just a common expression people have been using since basically the dawn of time.
He had no idea what Occams Razor was. He was parroting an argument from someone who agreed with him and thought it sounded cool because of the "Razor" part.
I still remember the time Matt Dillahunty completely embarrassed Jordan Peterson in a live debate, so much so that Jordan refuses to debate him again. That's the guy that the caller listens to.
It also happens to people when they learn about a topic in order to support their own previously held beliefs. He's not "reading philosophy". He's taking the cherry picked ideas that he's picked up from apologists and media figures. I've certainly misunderstood some things for that reason.
nope, this happens to an uneducated mind, that reads about philosophy but only that which the pastor condones and never actually understands it nor cares for why this single author and school of thought did in fact not turned into the basic of every philosophying after them
He hasn't read much philosophy - he's trying to recycle what he's heard from Peterson and his fanboys. The rapid retreat from from Kierkegaard to the Kalam shows he's a poser.
This really highlights why Matt interrupts and mutes so frequently. Jackie was allowed to blather on and on and make so many fallacious statements stacked on top of each other. The hosts did a good job with a lot of them, but I believe he needed his feet held to the fire way way more.
Arden and Eve are awesome in this call. Yeah i prefer the Matt method for both entertainment and for practical purposes… but these girls hit most of the right points (in my opinion), and handled this arrogant jabber jaw well. The meltdown at the end was fun.
@@creamwobbly when the caller makes a shit ton of claims one after the one with no evidence or reason why do you want to hear more of them blathering on? Do you care if they are making fallacious claims? Or are you just wanting to hear nonsense?
Seems to me the logical conclusion to "Everything in the universe has a cause" would be "The universe itself does not need a cause" because it isn't 'in the universe".
He's wrong but it's definitely no word salad, listen carefully. He's asking coherent points, he's just speaking a little fast is all. I less you just don't know those terms on hand which is completely fine. I understood it though, and the girls did too
Clocks, we have learned, are made by humans. If you have never learned it, there is no reason to believe that a watch is made. In addition, if you think everything is manufactured, you cannot distinguish between the natural and the manufactured. The watchmaker analogy is useless.
@@platinumnitrocharge4218I think that's a bit harsh. There are some good ones who call in to actually have a discussion but to be fair it does seem much less common.
"Why assume that existence allways existed? That is complicated, lets simplify it with Occams Razor: Existence was created by all-mighty all-knowing all-loving immaterial timeless spaceless triune creator who allways existed." 🤣🤣🤣
Religion is the free interpretation of ones own faith and the Church is the mega corp that makes millions of the suckers who need to show of how much "holier than thou" they are.
Poor Jackie, when backed into a corner he resorts to "Special Pleading", oh my god is eternal. Then, when Jackie gets caught in a trap he resorts to the argument from incredulity/ignorance, what else could it be? Then, what it ultimately comes down to is the root problem of religion. When you subscribe to a certain set of beliefs, those beliefs inform your actions, like flying planes into buildings or limiting the rights of certain individuals because you believe your perfect entity doesn't like certain behavior. That is why it's important to keep doing what you are doing, keep up the good work.
"I'm going to say this one more time, and then I'm going to hang up." Says the thing, proceeds to keep going on the call for 10 more minutes. Cowardly liar.
@@TheNihonjin I hope my bunpou isn't getting even more "fraky" (as Sensei used to lovingly admonish) for lack of use for it in Mississippi 🤣 Edit: Should there be a "ni" between "baka" and "iru?"
@ThorsDecree No. It'd be a formal or familial so not really context appropriate. Don't even need the iru. But historically we generally didn't do a ton of "insult work". Except right before we merc'ed someone with 2 feet of steel. And at that point people don't remember what you said.
@@TheNihonjin Oh I'm never context appropriate even in English, I'm very informal as a rule. Sometimes I use "de gozaimasu" among friends just to buck conventions lol. Thanks for putting up with my Japanese linguistic incompetence every few weeks whenever we randomly bump into one another! m(_ _)m It's such a polite language. People tell me often that I don't have a Southern accent and English but I definitely have a weird hick accent in Japanese. I had gotten conversationally fluent in college but it's definitely been getting rusty since. As for my statesmen, I do everything in my power with my words to change perceptions and opinions and policies for the better. Mississippi feels in many ways like it's still culturally in the bronze age, but we are making progress. The education system has only been getting worse in the last few decades, though. I don't think pandering to the least, denominator among students has done much to help students in general. This particular caller kind of reminds me of myself when I was a Christian as a teenager. For me it took attempting to be a religious apologist to change my perspective and realize I didn't actually have good reasons for the conclusions I held. Dropping LSD for the first time when I was 16 or so also changed how I viewed other people and made me much more respectful and general especially towards people I disagreed with. It's not this kid's fault. He might actually be very intelligent, but the system he grew up in is designed to make him just the way he is on this call. There might be hope for him but there will probably be some element of luck involved. I shudder to think what my life would be like today had a particular set of circumstances not led me out of Christianity. It's terrifying how difficult it is to see the flaws in it from the inside through all the indoctrination.
He's kinda like a living oxymoron, right? It baffles my mind how someone can be a solipsist and believe in the Abrahamic god simultaneously, but oh well, lots of things go over my head.
...and questioning the underlying reality itself is exponentially more telling about his capacity for logical reasoning, honest discourse and wilful ignorance. “If you can’t beat ‘em with brilliance, baffle their brains with BS.” - BS artists/religious apologists/trump magats/poutine shills/brexiters/zionist extremists/genocide apologists/neo-nazis/“white replacement” fear mongers/gender critical science deniers/anti-vaxers/flerfs/sovereign citizens/MRA zealots/red pilled sociopathic trolls all over the world
Jackie was going off of a script, and when the hosts didn't bite, he got flustered. Someone in the background said something, about half way through and says 'yeah' and skips to the kalaam, which is thoroughly debunked. So he got butt hurt, started raising his voice and whined like a little B!😊
"What is 'truth'? What is 'reality'?" When some apologistia has to use such shallow sophistry to obfuscate everything, you know you've got a one-way ticket to Shittsburg.
Reality is also the thing u ignore to pretend "t-women are women". It's only in the mind but not in reality. They definitely exist and definitely deserve to live a happy and healthy life like every other living creature but u have to be religious in thinking to believe the phrase "t-women are women". We never get those points because ppl are silenced before it gets there. It's their show tho so no foul really
And let's be frank here: He's talking about that one popular middle eastern deity. Not a deistic 'thing', not a collective consciousness notion, not a bloody shinto storm god, but Yeshua the patron saint of lumpy white people.
3:45 "Christians live more happy fulfilled lives"??!! Really? Then explain to me why the divorce rate with married couples who ID as christian and hetero is almost 50%?
Because they are under imense preassure to get married, much like the morman Church and they just do it since, thats whats expected... hating their partner like the boomers did but with the option of divorce at least
@@WalterWhite-jz7ct FYI the Republican party is going to try to eliminate "no fault divorce" with Project 2025. This will force couples who hate each other to stay together. Choose wisely in November.
If you somehow are convinced that you are and are not reading this simultaneously because you chose to reject the laws of noncontradiction and excluded middle in order to square the circle of theistic cognitive dissonance by using motivating reasoning, have a nice day.
The Kalam. What a horrible argument. It has so many flaws, and it only appeals to those who either 1) just want an excuse to believe and who don't investigate it deeply, or 2) people who don't know a lot of physics, especially quantum physics.
@@AngryBoozerThe Kalam doesn’t even properly arrive at a cause, because it’s a circular argument. First issue, it smuggles in the assumption that there is something outside the universe by treating “universe” as a subset of everything instead of everything. Just substitute _everything_ for _universe_ in the second premise: “[Everything] began to exist.” - it’s just an assertion Moving on… The first premise implies two categories: that which begins to exist, and that which does not begin to exist. What falls in the _does not begin to exist_ category? If the only exception to _everything_ is the “uncaused cause” - the very thing you’re trying to prove - then you have a circular argument.
@@AngryBoozerI see so many videos where too much time is wasted wrapped around the Kalam. It should be explained and dismissed within two minutes as a circular argument… followed by The End.
@@derinderruheliegt Yeah, it makes less and less sense the more you think about it. You could spend all day poking holes in it. I don’t understand why apologists cling to it so much
"Everything that exists has to have a cause". First, Jackie has to PROVE that instead of simply CLAIM it. Second, if God exists...what was God's cause for existence? If God is excepted, how does Jackie know that everything that exists has to have a cause...since God is exempted from that claim?
Took 23 minutes when you finally got them repeating themselves like a broken record then the caller finally lets it slip and boom there it is. I'm sorry you have to put up with these horrible people that can't just let others be happy.
“If everything in the universe has a creator” is begging the question. We have no evidence that the universe at some point didn’t exist. We just have evidence that it was small, and then got bigger. Maybe the singularity was just matter that passed through a black hole. And then it passed the event horizon and expanded again. Occam’s Razor M-Fr.
We don't even know if everything in the universe has a cause... there's something like the observable universe i.e. the limit to which we can observe, JACKIE!
We don't even know that the universe was ever "small", at least if we're talking about volume. The OBSERVABLE universe was small at one point, but if the whole universe is infinite (unbounded), then it has been the same infinite volume all along. The only difference is that it used to be very densely packed, but since the Big Bang, the space between objects in the universe has been increasing.
There's no way Jackie doesn't rub his nipples when he hears his own voice. There really is a point where people get so deep into philosophy that they confuse themselves. They lose the ability to have a simple and honest conversation without muddying everything with unnecessary academic concepts.
Special pleading, assigning traits to a 'cause' such as a being with a mind, tri-omni, etc without knowing the cause has any of those properties, ad nasuam of repeating insistence everything has a cause, and so much more. Thank you two for putting him in his place
