I used to be an agnostic leaning into atheism and Jonathan among others with time completely dismantled my materialist worldview and made me realize that Christianity is anything but stupid and superficial. The more I listen now, the more I understand how my old opinions on religion stemed from biases, ignorance and a lack of understanding for religious language. Be sure to know that your work is incredibly valuable for many people!

Pageau saying "bullshitting" makes my day

During that atheist spiel at the beginning I was basically thinking “wow he knows me exactly how the hell” I’m a proud atheist bordering on anti theist / new atheists and that was done perfectly! No straw man in sight. still love watching and I love Pageau especially! ✌️

I loved when Jonathan pointed out people saying “it’s just an illusion”, if the point is to suggest the thing is not real only an illusion, well the illusion itself is something which is made up of order and truth. To say there isn’t truth only an illusion of truth there must still be truth, because the illusion itself contains it, of which we recognize.

Speaking of patterns, that reminds me I coded an evolution simulator for my university project. I saw the program running and little pixels on the screen represented organisms and their environment. The organisms "morphed" as their enviornment changed, just like in reality. Species arise and go extinct, their mean is following the environment. Totally astonishing to me when I saw that on screen. But then it dawned on me: "The evolutionary mechanism is 'hard coded' into reality - it works an different scales, even on my computer" Suddenly the "evolutionary mechanism" was as real to me as the quantum field at the bottom of reality. Then I wondered: "Is 'truth' hard coded into reality?" I mean I just modelled evolution on my computer and I had a hands on model that shows that organisms change as their environment changes. What if I coded something where organisms competed against each other and some of them were truthful while others are lying? What if those who are truthful remain and those who perish are the lying ones? That would literally mean that patterns would fight against each other in that simulation. My head was blown. I went up the chain from there

Video title should be "Matt and Johnathan talk about boobs for ten minutes."

You cant understand the lord of the rings by taking apart the parts of the Television. You must analyse it from the signals that the TV gives out. Lost connections

Einstein said he believed in miracles. But that he thought even a blade of grass coming up through the dirt was a miracle. Personally in find myself mostly in the realm of beauty. A place where there isn't such a divide as talked about here.

You can even undercut that bags of flesh point at the use of metaphor. Boobs are actually not even bags at all that’s a metaphor. Metaphor bridges together two distant concepts to give a greater understanding to a chaotic world, I.e. impart heaven on earth.

QUOTING G.K. CHESTERTON, THEIR HAD TO BE A DEIST IN ORDER TO HAVE AN ATHIEST. 'Te Deum ' 5th Century Monastic Chant - Soleum '

Saying that a breast is just a bag of fat is not bringing it down it's actually an elevation through abstraction, it's abstracting intellectually the reality of the breast, it is finding the common denominator up in the realm of concepts and intellectual abstractions to describe the invisible and more abstract principles of the breast. This can be thought as bringing it down when you bring that idea back the the reality of that conceptualization, so "bag" is a concept an abstraction but when you bring it down from the realm of ideas into their hylomorphic reality you will se an actual bag of either plastic, paper or whatever and then you make a parallel from those with the breast and think of a fleshy bag instead of seeing the full reality, then that lifting up into abstraction works as a fragmentation of reality instead of a process of categorization for the sake of the intellection of reality.

If you're purely bottom up, only paying attention to quantitative things or outcomes/possibilities/statistics, then anything will be an illusion. Yes, these patterns work in the sense that they are useful, but if we introduced a technology or institution that shifts outcomes to a desired one, then those new patterns emerge and also "work." E.g. a technology that allows me to eat through my nose. But our experience with the world changes, "being" human becomes something else. If you're a Nominalist that is, then anything is permissable.

The problems with bottom up are: they are really doing middle out and bottom up implies that they are at the top. In other words, they use a middle out model (correct, we are between heaven and earth and cannot really have any other perspective) claim that it is a bottom up model, explainable by them, thus taking the position of God in their own conception. Of course, they don't have to claim, explicitly that this is what they are doing, no problem there. But this is still what they are doing. Plus one for cleverness, minus one for self deception.

Is your description supposed to say "atheism, science and swearing"? It currently says something else and it's kind of funny

I have tiny breast.

why does it need to be discussed over a pint of beer and a cigar? that seems like addictive rationalization . a glass of wine at most is all one “needs”