Support me at: Buymeacoffee: buymeacoffee.c... Patreon: / scienceisdope_ YT Membership: / @scienceisdope UPI: scienceisdope@icici (QR Code available on www.scienceisd... )
Пікірлер: 146
@s_anandsurya Жыл бұрын
34:44 The point about the Caste System being upheld by Food Rules is quite relatable, it's so simple yet, it divides people across such great valleys. Very bad.
@SameerSamon Жыл бұрын
Got to Know a Lot of Stuff From This Stream. Thank you Pranav and Krish Ashok.
@jasonambrose99 Жыл бұрын
I think most religious leaders are (secretly) atheist. Majority of common people want to believe in God but have varying degrees of doubt. Probably a very small minority have a childlike faith in God. But people do not want to lose their religious identity and that is ok. Just try not to get played by religious/political leaders with vested interests.
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
Most political are ignorant to the religion that they are following especially BJP's but not religious leaders or i doubt that
@hieroprotoganist344010 ай бұрын
Ideology is worse than religion. It killed and oppressed more than religion ever did.
@Swapna99 ай бұрын
My 2 fav people in the same stream. Ashoks astrology talk is so similar to what I saw with astrologer in my family. Super rich coz of so many vulnerable people
@iArpanMishra Жыл бұрын
I follow only few accounts of non-friends on Instagram and this Masala Lab is one of them. The level of logic this guy has my guess always was he is an atheist. Thanks man from bringing him abroad!
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
Uhh... Level of logic doesn't equate to atheist Many people are aTHeIsT because there's no image of GOd So It doesn't makes any sense
@pranavyedlapalli2127 Жыл бұрын
@@mr.gamerkabir8142 Bro thinks he said something
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
@@pranavyedlapalli2127 every darshan of hinduism is debated for hundred of years From Buddha philosophy to Advaita vedanta to charvaka Every philosophy was logically formed and logically dissected with critical thinking and not fuelled by faith
@crap12345ful10 ай бұрын
Phew! The discussion I didnt know existed but always wished for. Lucky to find this piece.
@openatheism Жыл бұрын
Glad to see Pranav improving his livestreaming skills. Still need some work in the intro and outro, And how to manage the qna thing. Liked today's livestream.
@the3mevrick Жыл бұрын
to tu khol na podcast /live streaming channel, gyan chod rha hai
@openatheism Жыл бұрын
@@the3mevrick sorry for hurting your sentiments.
@ex.hindu.now.atheist Жыл бұрын
@@openatheism "sorry for hurting your sentiments." ================================= I wonder what in your comment got 'th3mevrick's' goat! 😂😂
@openatheism Жыл бұрын
@@ex.hindu.now.atheist it's useless to argue with such people. Thanks mate.
@ex.hindu.now.atheist Жыл бұрын
@@openatheism "it's useless to argue with such people. Thanks mate." ======================== You are welcome. :-)
@mrSubhroroy11 ай бұрын
Karl popper was the one who proposed the falsification principle. He influenced many scientists and philosophers. Even though Carl Sagan was a great scientific communicator and a likely proponent of falsifiability as a theory, it would be extremely unfair not to mention Popper in this context as the idea was conceived & presented to the world by him. Sagan like many would be a mere beneficiary of this hypothesis.
@johnxpaulson Жыл бұрын
Wonderful conversation you guys! I really enjoyed the listen! Thank you Pranav and Krish!😍🤍
@yenaremadun7184 Жыл бұрын
The best debate I have ever seen 😊
@ashakiran268 Жыл бұрын
It is not a debate 😂
@yenaremadun7184 Жыл бұрын
@@ashakiran268 I know. But the way they were putting points and discussing the topics, I liked it. I couldn't find any other word for it😅
@manojoy6913 Жыл бұрын
Hey Pranav 🙏 if you have no problem in Hindi discussion, please do a collaboration streams with science Journey 👌 Human with science 👌
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
Just no He makes false claims and fails to understand hinduism through Neo buddhists ambedkarites Also the fact He claimed that ramanujacharya created dvaita vedanta and not vishishtadvaita So He will collab with that MF?
@gukananand6647 Жыл бұрын
@@mr.gamerkabir8142Cry out loud gunzo😂😂☕
@manojoy6913 Жыл бұрын
@@mr.gamerkabir8142 🤣 wo MF hai ye aapko kaise pata 🤣 shayad M aapki hogi. Dusri baat ki jab tujhe nahi pata to mat bol, LINDUISM totally fake religion hai aur Buddhism open mind + reality base way of living hai ( i am not a Buddhist, and never will ) duniya ke saare dharam apni apni gali ke 🐕 hai 🤣 JABKI Rationalist kahin se bhi ho, wo ek hote hai ( kuch exceptions har jagah hote hai ) to tu apni MAYYIYA tere parampita Brahma se bacha pehle 🤣
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
@@manojoy6913 Adhikarana summary: Refutation of the Bauddha Idealists Brahma-Sutra 2.2.28: Sanskrit text and English translation. नाभावः, उपलब्धेः ॥ २८ ॥ nābhāvaḥ, upalabdheḥ || 28 || na-not; abhāvaḥ-non-existence; upalabdheḥ-on account of their being experienced. 28. Non-existence (of things external) is not (true), on account of their being experienced. From this Sutra begins the refutation of the Idealists among the Bauddhas, according to whom only ideas exist and nothing else. According to them the external world is nonexistent. Does it mean that the objective world is absolutely non-existent like the horns of a hare, or does it mean that it is unreal even as the world seen in a dream is unreal. The Sutra refutes the former view. In that case we could not have experienced it. The external world is an object of experience through the senses, and cannot therefore be altogether non-existent like the horns of a hare. The Buddhist may say that he does not affirm that he is conscious of no object, but only that what is seen in his consciousness alone shines as something external. But then the very nature of consciousness itself proves the existence of external things different from consciousness, for men are conscious of things or objects of perception, and nobody is conscious of his perception merely. The very fact that the Bauddhas say that the internal cognition appears ‘as something external’ shows that the external world is real. If it were not real, the comparison ‘like something external’ would be meaningless. No one says that Devadatta is like the son of a barren woman. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.29: Sanskrit text and English translation. वैधर्म्याच्च न स्वप्नादिवत् ॥ २९ ॥ vaidharmyācca na svapnādivat || 29 || vaidharmyāt-Owing to the difference of nature; ca-and; na-is not; svapnādivat-like dreams etc. 29. And owing to the difference of nature (in consciousness between the waking and the dream state, the experience of the waking state) is not like dreams etc. This Sutra refutes the alternative view given in the previous Sutra. The Bauddhas may say that perception of the external world is to be considered similar to dreams and the like. In a dream there are no external objcts; yet the ideas appear in a twofold form as subject and object. The appearance of an external world is similarly independent of any objective reality. This Sutra refutes that view. There is a difference between the dream state and the waking state. What is seen in a dream is contradicted by waking experience, it is unreal. The dream state is a kind of memory, but the waking state is a real perception; so it cannot be rejected as untrue. Moreover, what is the proof of the existence of consciousness except experience? If that is so, why should not an object which is experienced be taken also as existing ? It may be said that even the Vedantins acknowledge the unreality of the external world, since it is contradicted by the knowledge of Brahman, and that this view is based on the Srutis. But if the Bauddhas accept the authority of the Vedas, then they would be included within the Vedantic school and no longer remain outside it, but as a matter of fact they do not accept the Vedas. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.30: Sanskrit text and English translation. न भावः, उनुपलब्धेः ॥ ३० ॥ na bhāvaḥ, anupalabdheḥ || 30 || na-Is not; bhāvaḥ-existence; anupalabdheḥ-because (external things) are not experienced. 30. The existence (of Samskaras) is not (possible according to the Bauddhas), because (external things) are not experienced. The Bauddhas say that though external things do not exist, yet the actual variety of notions like pot, cloth, etc. can be accounted for by the preceding Samskaras or mental impressions left by previous experience, even as the impressions of the waking state give rise to the variety of experience in the dream state. This view is not tenable, says the Sutra, for mental impressions are impossible without the perception of external objects, and this the Bauddhas deny. The assumption of a beginningless series of mental impressions as cause rnd effect would only lead to a regressus in infinitum and not solve the difficulty. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.31: Sanskrit text and English translation. क्षणिकत्वाच्च ॥ ३१ ॥ Kṣaṇikatvācca || 31 || Kṣaṇikatvāt-On account of the momentariness; ca-and. 31. And on account of the momentariness (of the ego-consciousness it cannot be the abode of the Samskaras). The mental impressions must have an abode. Without that they cannot exist. But the doctrine of momentariness denies permanency to everything. Even the Alayavijnana or ego-consciousness, is momentary and cannot be that abode. Unless there is a permanent principle connecting the past, present, and future, there cannot be remembrance or recognition of an experience originating at a particular time and place. If the Alayavijnana is said to be something permanent, then that would go counter to the doctrine of momentariness. Brahma-Sutra 2.2.32: Sanskrit text and English translation. सर्वथानुपपत्तेश्च ॥ ३२ ॥ sarvathānupapatteśca || 32 || sarvathā-In every way; nupapatteḥ-being illogical; ca-and. 32. And (as the Bauddha system is) illogical in every way (it cannot be accepted). This Sutra can also be interpreted as refuting the Nihilists: The translation would then be : And (as Nihilism) is illogical etc. Nihilism of the Bauddhas goes counter to everything. It goes against the Sruti, the Smriti, perception, inference, and every other means of right knowledge and so has to be entirely disregarded by those who are mindful of their welfare. Refutatation of the main philosophy of Buddha by JAGADGURU ADI SHANKARACHARYA
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
@@manojoy6913 aage Dvaita vedanta created by RAMANUJA? iska jawab nahi hai? Kyu? Buddhism rational aur open minded? Ashoka ne kitne massacre karvaye the Buddhism ke naam par? Yaad hai? Pata hai Buddhism mein bhi heaven and hell ka concept hai? Maine na apke aur na aapke kisi bhi parivar ke baare mein bola magar tabh bhi apni aukat dikha di
@ubermensch197911 ай бұрын
I’ve always viewed Dravidian rationalism as an artefact of early 20th century politics. Nowadays, it is perhaps a respectable way off expressing social & political antagonism towards North Indians.
@avinashm225510 ай бұрын
Rationalism is never an artifact. May be u r pre existing biases makes you think so. What ever we say you find it antagonistic to you 😂😂😂. Simple question we are giving RS 100 as revenue to center and get only ₹ 27 back the rest ₹ 73 is split among north of India would you be willing to do the same ?? Inspite of this you say we are antagonistic i.e pre-existing bias against us south of india
@amangupta-rz7hn10 ай бұрын
@@avinashm2255Okay, try remembering that we are living in a concept called as country, now. People of North are very hardworking and honest at their work, it's just that their politicians are not so very good in terms of governance.
@avinashm225510 ай бұрын
@@amangupta-rz7hn tell that to @ubermensch1979 who started that and blamed us for being antagonistic to North. Don't lecture us about the concept of Country first you learn to respect and be accomodative to others. Only you are in a eco chamber believing that only North Indian caste Hindus are total representatives of india. I agree people are good every where and governance is not good but that's not relevant to this conversation
@Question-Research-wj5wr9 ай бұрын
Wonderful Pranav more of such men and more of such contents.....❤
@jaysnehpandey7089 Жыл бұрын
Please do an extensive debunk on rajiv dixit
@Atheistbinay1 Жыл бұрын
Good discussion 👍
@Question-Research-wj5wr9 ай бұрын
Wonderful ❤ more of such contents....
@nambakkatlaksh8 ай бұрын
Everyone holds on to some sort of superstition even though cold logic tells them that it is nonsense. There is also that aspect, as in the story about Neil Bohr and the horseshoe (highly improbable but a nice story nevertheless), that "it works just as well - even if one doesnt believe in it" 😊
@ravindrangg5 ай бұрын
I have only watched 4 minutes but this guy makes me want to throw up. Krish Ashok is articulate, scientific and is also humble. Why would he talk to this guy?
@shivangssinha19153 ай бұрын
I have seen many unethical theists in my life but there are many more ethical theists.Also I have observed that atheists are generally ethical since they advocate for rationality but I have also met an arrogant atheist too. So it seems being atheist or theist have nothing to do with being moral.
@sarthakd18403 ай бұрын
True. Look at religion as a tool and don't take details very seriously. Use your brain + be religious. Hindu religion especially is motivating you to asks questions. It reflects in different vedas. Such as asthavakra gita, and bhagwad gita too. The most important question - who are you?, whoever attempts to answer that and have a discussion in my eyes is the best religion. Just take the positive things and don't take what doesn't sit with you. Hindu religion is very tolerant, no hard lines in terms of how to be a hindu. Don't listen to anyone who claims they are the ideal hindu. The most ideal hindu will not boast, and will appreciate questioning on the core.
@shivangssinha19153 ай бұрын
@@sarthakd1840 thanks brother you are right.
@shivangssinha19153 ай бұрын
@@sarthakd1840 I have seen Mahabharata Gita on KZfaq it teaches nice things . Ramayana teaches never to be proud of ourselves like ravan etc. So we should take what sits with us from hindu religion not everything that people say which also includes pseudoscience etc.
@deveshsingh12336 ай бұрын
Hi Krish Ashok,I have been hogging most of your content on social media and am about to finish reading Masala Lab. I think I have found a soul-mate. You seem to have got your inspiration from Jared Diamond, Yuval Noah Harari & Daniel Kahneman,Michael Pollan and the likes. ;-)
@akhilraj1677 Жыл бұрын
Please expose bageshwar baba
@zaphbrox82396 ай бұрын
I don't fully agree with @krishashok on some of his takes on food (the teflon episode for eg.). However, this conversation was refreshing and, glad to know that he's rational even when it comes to religion and religious beliefs - something I found to be at odds among my Tamizh friends who are exrremently logical and good at STEM subjects but equally irrational when it comes to rituals and religion (a fact that Krish himself mentioned)
@Himanshu-vz5xe Жыл бұрын
As a montheist Hindu, though I don't agree with Krishalok on many views, one thing I admire is that he is more humble and tolerating of religion than anti-theists and anti-religionists like Pranav. He even said that going to temple and doing other rituals leads to formation of identity and it's important to associate with your identity through rituals even though you don't believe in them. He said he is not imposing his atheism on his child and will let him develop his views when he become mature. That's good of him. Pranav should learn something from his guest.
@ex.hindu.now.atheist Жыл бұрын
@Himanshu "As a montheist Hindu, I don't [...] from his guest." =========================================== What is a 'MONTHEIST'? Do you mean 'monOtheist' ?
@Himanshu-vz5xe Жыл бұрын
@@ex.hindu.now.atheist I have edited now.
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
@@Himanshu-vz5xe there's nothing monotheism in hinduism By monotheism Which philosophy do you follow? Bhagavd gita 9.3-4 is beyond any type of theism
@Himanshu-vz5xe Жыл бұрын
@@mr.gamerkabir8142 I follow the six schools of Hindu philosophy, particularly I am fond of Nyaya philosophy. How do verses 9.3 and 9.4 prove your point? I don't see that. What does "beyond theism" mean anyway? "There is nothing monotheism in Hinduism" Maybe I should have used just theism instead of "monotheism", but what I wanted to say is I believe God has one form, i.e, I don't subscribe to the notion of mainstream Hinduism where God is depicted in many human forms.
@mr.gamerkabir8142 Жыл бұрын
@@Himanshu-vz5xe bhagavd gita 9.3 means Everything pervades INSIDE ME That refers to pantheistic and panentheistic(universe inside god) Nonetheless Beyond theism is referring to Advaita which is not pantheistic(most probably) or panentheistic (quite accurate)not polytheistic monotheistic I hope this helps
@lolmaker7 ай бұрын
As an agnostic Hindu, Krish Ashok is bang on with my thoughts on this. Pranav’s extreme of eradicating all irrationality is in itself irrational. The basis of Human civilization is a result of shared belief systems that are irrational at the core of it all.
@ramyaan24763 ай бұрын
I am surprised that one guy could hold my attention for so long Take a bow Krish ashok
@amakmalik Жыл бұрын
Fantastic 🎉
@shrutijadhav96889 ай бұрын
🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻
@Vededits6542 Жыл бұрын
Concept of atheist in India is different people still identify themselves Hindu even if they do not believe in god and rituals like me
@prithwipatil5813 Жыл бұрын
Nastik and atheist are two different things..😂 ok if it's different thing then am i allowed to shout rama was a wife beater in ram mandir!
@Vededits6542 Жыл бұрын
@@prithwipatil5813 try it
@prithwipatil5813 Жыл бұрын
@@Vededits6542 😜i know the consequences "Thai teeli laam" army gonna eat me.. so stop your bullsh!t.. do u know who else are cool with thier children being atheist Christians, Jews, many African regions, Norse, zoroastrianism almost every religion except Islam so stop acting like your religion is "special"
@Ankita-vr8ri Жыл бұрын
@@Vededits6542 mob lynching ho jyga bhakts are illiterate too and hindu books are pure religious ...vedas says to punish the nasik
@ramavasu90794 ай бұрын
Yes
@annamalaian07119 ай бұрын
Wow. The clarity of Krish is unmatched . and the way conveys things. Sorry Pranav. Krish makes more sense to me in this discussion.
@VedaBhasya Жыл бұрын
Na-asti, which means does not exist is the principle behind buddhism. But it is also very close to advaita. Both buddhism and advaita say that that Universe functions on a dharma (law) and rta (order) which cannot be changed by anything. If human life cannot be changed by will and fancy of anyone, then how come asti (it's there) principle work..? Why should be worship..? Why should we have bhakti..? Buddhism answers that by saying it is nir-vAna meaning quietening at the end and there is no svarg or narag of any god. So no worship is needed, no bhakti is needed. Advaita answers that by saying the entire Universe works on the principle of observer and observed, puruSa and prakRti. The puruSa is the detached observer who is only a witness and hence will not change anything in the Universe. prakRti is the evolving /expanding one and that evolution/expansion is the brahman. If puruSa is only a witness and is not influenced by any worship or pooja then why we should have bhakti..? Advaita says that detached observer manifests in our manas as a sAksi, what we call manas-sAksi. One has to move their 'self' or 'aham' or 'identity' from manas that controls the body and senses to be with manas-sAksi, this witness. This means one should be detached (which is called vairagya), observing their mind/thoughts/actions as much as they observe other minds/thoughts/action. Such a detached observer in us helps us to evolve better. How to get that detached observation or witnessing capability..? Bhakti to an external divinity, whoever that divinity is a way. With that bhakti, we lose attachment to our thougths, actions, results as we realize that we could be wrong and there's someone who knows better than us. But that bhakti is just one step. If we want to be near that divinity, we have to be like that divinity. We know that divinity is detached, observing all equally. So we practice to be detached, observing us and others equally, learn multiple perspectives. That's the bhakti way to jnAna. If bhakti stops just as worship to a divinity, then that's tamasic bhakti. If bhakti becomes extreme attachment to a bhakti then that is rajasik bhakti. Both are not useful. If bhakti makes you to be detached, then that is sattvic bhakti. So Astik or nAsik, none can change the dharma and rta of this Universe. It does not mean everything is predetermined. If everything is predetermined, we don't need to do any karma. But advaita is clear. You have to do your karma, but with detachment, without anger, lust, jealous, greed etc. For that you can use bhakti as a tool. Finally in prasanottara malika, sankara asks a question. Kim samsare saram..? What's the essence of existence..? The answer to that question is introspection. This introspection leads to real jnAna. Introspection is anti-thesis of any 'ism'. Atheism or theism, if they are ideologies or 'isms', then you cannot question them. If we cannot question them, we cannot introspect. But essence of our existence is introspection. So all 'isms' are as bad as each other. Keep introspecting, be detached, do things without anger, jealousy, pride, lust etc, continue the journey of knowledge and never stop at it at one ideological point. Then you will realize that observer in you. Tht's advaita.
@matrixsmarther2325 Жыл бұрын
Not possible. Even if you're free of all desires, you're not free from the desire to be free of all desires. 😅😂
Жыл бұрын
Don’t stop discussion for super chats it’s very disrespectful for the guest even if he says he is okay
@AP-eb8hd7 ай бұрын
@krishashok, 12.38 into the video .., I hope you weren't making it up.. But in general this is what happens in real life.., One blind shot that hits the bulls eye.. then you never know what follows :-)
@hkrtrivedi8 ай бұрын
Someone is neither a good cook, nor a very successful professional, nor a good scientist ( sic).But he wants to show off his adha adhura gyan.
@AP-eb8hd7 ай бұрын
mirchi lagi kya..? it's always good to be on learning path rather than falling for some mumbo-jumbo..
@hkrtrivedi7 ай бұрын
@@AP-eb8hd Mereko kyon mirchi lagegi ? Wikipedia professor ko jo upload karna hai wo kare mari balaa se.
@kalyannnBH9 ай бұрын
Good to hear Krish is Atheist
@good6043 Жыл бұрын
Krish Ashok is unable to let go of his privileged religious, caste identity. Defending and trivializing the most harmful effect of religion, that is killing critical thinking. Making people blind and acting in ways to harm themselves and others. He sounds like a typical US return privileged person who thinks India is fluid etc. Pranav good for sticking to reality and the true essence of this channel.👍🏽
@vaibhavpal37838 ай бұрын
I belong to Northern India, the social environment has been polluted and people have been polarized based on religion in the past decade. Instead of becoming more receptive to others, people are being brainwashed to judge others in the name of their religion and religious identity. Even I see my friends and colleagues have been easily taken for a ride by hardliners. It's all very depressing where our generation and new one is heading. People need to keep their religion and regulations their identity to themselves at the same time be ok with others beliefs.
@ex.hindu.now.atheist Жыл бұрын
1:02:29 TO 1:04:39 *I still DISAGREE with Krish Ashok* in so far as his claim that the "definition (of god) in the Bhagavad Gita very much is a very different kind of character (from supposedly other definitions of god in Hinduism). Krish Ashok states that if one goes to places such as Trichy of Kozhikode, the average person there might not give much importance to the "god of the Gita". INSTEAD, people there might be more devoted towards an Ayyappan (AKA, Aiyappan, Iyyappan, Dharmasastha, etc) or a "folk deity" such as Aiyanar. FINALLY, he seems to suggest that the idea of a "single unified article of faith" simply does not exist in Hinduism. HOWEVER, my counter-point is that the Ayyappan and the Aiyanar whom Krish Ashok uses as examples, ALSO demand veneration and worship, very much like Krishna does in the Bhagavad Gita. Therefore, the point that I have made regarding the mindset of Hinduism's concept of god is valid, regardless of the "form" in which that the god is worshipped.
@adi-qx8ls11 ай бұрын
Then simply drop the bhakti (devotional) path, try other onces if you find them intresting which doesn't require a literal faith in an anthropological godly being with a will to par take in human affair. Like Gyana (knowledge oriented) or karma (action oriented) path where the notion of non dualist immanent substrate of God is emphasized rather than the all loving deity aspect. Essentially core understanding of God in Hinduism is atheistic so it really doesn't matter which path you take when at the end it demands you to renounce the notion of personal god (except if you are part or Madhavacharya or Isckon cult). + idk how you find him that narcissistic when even surrendering water to him once a day will suffice the devotional commitment he excepts his followers to have.
@AP-eb8hd7 ай бұрын
Once you realize all this god stuff is what humans created out of free time, you'll pretty much get the answers..
@ex.hindu.now.atheist7 ай бұрын
@@adi-qx8ls "Then simply drop the bhakti (devotional) [...] commitment he excepts his followers to have." ====================== Why should I surrender ANY THING to ANY ('concept' of) god-even if it is the word-play, word-salad, 'non-dualist' (concept of) god advocated by Advaita (which is what you seem to be peddling)? There is NO VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE that I owe ANY THING to ANY god; heck, *there is NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that ANY god exists, in the first place!*
@ex.hindu.now.atheist7 ай бұрын
@@AP-eb8hd "Once you realize all this god stuff [...] you'll pretty much get the answers.." ======================= Yes, I agree with you. There is no credible evidence that any of the god-stuff is and/or has been created by any entity other than human beings (presumably to control other human beings). The only logical, rational answer is: 'stop basing your decisions and the choices that you make on the UNPROVEN CLAIMS that (ANY) god exists. At the very least, stop making laws, rules, and regulations based on religion-based, god-based beliefs.'
@ashwathvinay Жыл бұрын
49:49 it is possible to have a tribal identity around a shared set of believes, like all atheism starts by reading scriptures of sagan, hitchens, Harris etc who in all probability became atheists in response to Christianity.. and these people who belongs to a religion called atheism tries to paint the same picture to India and Hinduism and fail miserably
@grandmajolly5998 ай бұрын
Pranav.. you are such a big bore. But I am a big fan of Ashok.
@pepe-se3tr Жыл бұрын
athiesm and thiesm are both flawed both are just belivers
@KasimAnafo-re7wu Жыл бұрын
Well nothing atheism offers that religion is not already offering
@gukananand6647 Жыл бұрын
It does
@prithwipatil5813 Жыл бұрын
You don't need to offer anything to "atheist gurus/gods".. see it saves your time and money😜
@KasimAnafo-re7wu Жыл бұрын
@@gukananand6647 🤣😂 naaa!!!! It ONLY replaces one set of activities with another set of activities which can even be injurious to your body and soul
@gukananand6647 Жыл бұрын
@@KasimAnafo-re7wu what set of activities
@KasimAnafo-re7wu Жыл бұрын
@@prithwipatil5813 🤣😂☝️naaaa!!!! It only replaces one set of activities with another set of activities which can be injurious to your body and soul , u only thinking about the good side , but u must know every system has positive and negative sides , the other stuffs attached to atheism way of life will definitely come up and EAT your time and money
@good6043 Жыл бұрын
Krish Ashok is so attached to his religion and privileged caste!! The number of times he peddled "West" is rigid and "Indian" is fluid + has harmless religion ,HE BELONGS ON A "BEER BICEPS" PODCAST!!
@thenidhinpr Жыл бұрын
Just two people having a rational conversation with logical arguments, that's all I could see. When you have a 1hr 28min conversation you won't agree with everything that other individuals say! So your point is very subjective rather than objective!
@annamalaian07119 ай бұрын
I can sense your inability to digest views u don’t believe in