The funny thing is, I teach this stuff about why math works and what it is *in high school*. This is stuff one should be able to expect any adult to know.

"How do round things know how to roll? I just don't understand, must be ghosts." - Craig, probably

Reasonable Faith: How can a tool created for the express purpose of describing the world possibly describe the world? Me: I think you just answered your own question.

The fundamental question really is: What has the supernatural/magic ever actually explained? Nothing. Ever.

I think that point about "if it didn't work, we'd make another model" cannot be overstated enough. Take something as simple as counting. Normally, when you count, you go: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... and you *never* get a number twice and no one things anything of it. BUT the minute we start talking about clocks, suddenly that all goes out the window and now the number after 12 is 1 and things repeat infinitely. There's nothing particularly special about the math that we haven't chosen _specifically_ to fit whatever situation we're trying to describe.

Math is meant to be a descriptive tool for how the many nuances of nature works; NOT a prescriptive dictate from some from some higher power as many cultists would like to have us believe.

I'm happy to see more content by you, especially in times like these. You're an adept philosopher. I've viewed all your Vids several times and got a lot out of them. Atheism empowered!

Edit: Also I wrote this 40 seconds in after the opening British guy but before the explanation that basically said exactly what I said here but better. Ah the old "rain in a pothole" fallacy again. "Math describes nature therefore math was used to *create* nature, ergo God." Except _we_ invented math to describe nature. Of course it fits. If it didn't, we would have used different math and we'd be right back to having this exact same conversation with different numbers. Anyway, good vid. Rebranding is hard, but good job all around.

I love getting updates about new videos from you.

As a fellow engineer, I absolutely support and am a huge fan of the new channel name! Engineers just have a particular way of thinking about things that just appeals to me

Glad to see back! I'm exciting for this new chapter of videos.

Oooh, another blast from the past. My feed has been full of old returnees lately. Love it.

Man, the very first channel I subscribed to. Crazy to see new videos.

This is a real theist sentence: It's not magic if God does it. How does one even talk to a person who thinks like that?

"Reflect." "If the math doesn't work, throw out the math."

Glad your back, happy to be able to see more stuff from you. Can’t wait for more content I wonder if you will cover more “omni” trait related things, those are my favorite logical discussions tbh

Thank you. Sincerely, a math educator.

Thank you kind human for blessing with another video.

Math works, because we adjusted the formulas until they fit the observations. It's kind of sad that this isn't obvious to everyone.

@24:11 "We know what nath is, we know where it comes from..." that is so trivially true that it's hard to imagine someone pretending otherwise. "Hey teacher, where does the Pythagorean therom come from?" "It came from Pythagoras." "Oh. Well what about euclidean geometry?" "That came from Euclid." "Ok, but what about Newton's laws if motion? Where did they come from?" "They came from Newtown." "Alright, but what about..." "Listen kid, if you have any more questions about the history or origins of mathematical concepts, then just Google them and read who discovered them and how."

Cool! I thought I saw you tweet about a new upload. I'mma gonna enjoy dis and comment later. Cheers!

The man, the myth, the legend! He hath return'd! Praise be to the mighty nice KZfaq fella! May the fleas of a thousand camels descend on the groins of your most short-armed enemies. Amen!

I love this channel.

Welcome back! Solid rebuttal of Craig's work, and perhaps more convincing is that other mathematicians support your logic. That said, it's probable other false premises underpin his religious belief such as rewards/blessings for rejecting logical propositions. For this reason I think most believers suspend logic and deliberately choose irrationality, which may explain Craig's flawed association.

There he is. Thanks for the upload.

Really happy you made another vid, Anti. You're one of my favorite content creators. Hope all is well with you! :D

I have to believe that Craig knows exactly what he's doing. This might sound convincing to someone who is unwilling or unable to think through what he's saying (because they want to believe in the religious justification), but surely he's educated enough to know how facile it is. Or maybe he's just blinded by The Inner Witness of the Holy Spirit™ too...

Rejects "coincidence" as a valid explanation. Accepts "magic" as a valid explanation. Can't understand why he isn't taken seriously.

Every time I see this argument I repeat one and the same thing: if you’re wondering why does mathematics “work” - you should also think why a hammer is so good at hammering nails! The answers to both of those questions are the same - and spoiler alert - it’s not “gawdeedeat!”

Why did you take the meditations on apologetics down? I loved listening to that one.

👏🙂 Amazing video as always.

It’s even more ridiculous when we consider that there is a plethora of religions and philosophies which make supernatural claims without any god, like Eastern Asian philosophy and many modern esoteric movements. They act like everyone who doesn’t believe in (a) god is automatically a naturalist.

Great to have you back man

@17:26 - Here we go - point PERFECTLY stated - & that which, to my knowledge, WLC has never even attempted to offer any response - though that question should be posed to any apologist who claims a 'philosophical necessity' for their supernatural godbeing/creator thing's existence.

I'm happy you are back to the videos.

Finally, your back. ABOUT FREAKING TIME!!!!

I would love to have a beer with this guy

Didn’t recall subscribing to a channel by this name. But the illustration looked… familiar. Then I heard the voice. Ah yes.

I think the theist types who use this sort of argumentation use the 'law' in two incompatible ways. We all know what a law in science is but they also suggest it has a legal sense in that matter has to 'obey' the laws.

Also, platonic idealists are terrible.

If math doesnt reflect reality then why can i test 2 + 2 = 4 as true or false emperically? I can go out and get 2 things and add 2 more things and get 4 and not 4000. Seems pretty objective to me

Wow, long time no see indeed!

Great video! Also, that Strogatz textbook is based. Top 5 textbooks in physics, ever

Newtonian gravity does indeed predict the precession of Mercury's orbit. It just gets the amount of precession a little bit wrong.

Yay! I missed you and your content.

Maybe WLC should read Sabine Hossenfelder's book "Lost in Mathematics" to see that just because you can do math doesn't mean you are in the right track to formulate a theory in physics

What do you think about Jay Dyer's Transcendental Argument for God (TAG Argument)? Maybe you could respond to one of his videos about it where he explains it, like here. The people who find it convincing feel very strongly about it, but that's Jay's entire audience pretty much (very pushy).

Excellent video AntiCitizenX. Have you ever thought of collaborating with Paulogia? You would make an excellent collaboration with him as he has collaborated with so many other individuals.

The only gap this argument fills is the rather cavernous one between WLC's ears. "Low bar Bill" really does strive to set the bar lower.

Wow. I've been out of this game for too long. When I first heard the opening statement from the Reasonable Faith video, I immediately thought "Is he arguing for Platonism?" Then I remembered what kind of guy Craig is and laughed at myself.

So, great video once again but I have one problem. I find the guy's animations quite distracting. He's too... exaggerated and I can't stop but stare at him and lose focus on what is being said. And not infrequently the poses seem to convey something different or are way too exaggerated for what is being said and that distracts me even more. I never ever had this issue with any of your previous work.

So excited for a new upload!!😆

Glad to see that you have a new video

back with a banger! KEvron

Good to see ya again. 😀

Remember ... according to Dr. Craig's own words, nothing in his video has anything to do with why he is a Christian. Did I hear someone say post hoc rationalization? Yes, I believe I did!

Good to see you back on YT!

Great dissection, well done 😊 I heard the experts point out that we still don't have the proper math for dealing with non-linear systems - that are most prominent in...oh yeah: our natural world 😊 That alone is enough to dismiss this argument

Really appreciate this video.

What happened to AntiCitizenX??? Did you kidnap him?

Thanks so much for sharing. 😉👌🏻

Happy Christmas, He is Risen.

You sound like David John Wellman

I thought you were changing the name? Edit: You did... but my noti still came up as AntiCitizen. Weird.

I love these videos so much

Glad to see you are back in full swing! Splendid content! At 08:08 you mention that subatomic particles are demonstrably random in their behaviour. But there are interpretations of quantum mechanics that are still deterministic, either trough hidden variables, many worlds or some other mechanism. Do you dismiss these interpretations as possibilities or did you not mention them as they where less relevant to your point? Not that it harms any part of you argument/video, nor does non-determinism open the door to libertarian free will, I am just curious about your thoughts on the subject.

Hello! I have a couple suggestions. You should make a Discord server. That way you can have a community hub and have some proper conversations. Also, Discord servers are remarkably active compared to most other media, pretty much invariably. Also, I think The Art of Being Wrong should definitely be published as a video. Anyway, I have some thoughts about the video topic, but it's kinda something I either have to spend a while meticulously typing a long comment about, or just dynamically address in conversation. So I won't discuss it yet. Oh, also the animation looks pretty weird lol. I know it's automated but it just looks like filler that's pretty repetitive, fast and distracting with your arms going everywhere

I love your content but I think you should work on your titles so your videos would reach more people.

This basically comes down to the debate whether mathematics is discovered or invented. Craig adopts the former position because it serves his theist worldview. Nevertheless it's really absurd to claim that there exists only order in the universe, since chaos obviously exists as well. They coexist together. The problem is that a divine creator with a perfect orderly mind would have no reason to allow chaos. It would be a contradiction if he did. That's why silly theists like Craig pretend that chaos doesn't exist.

I think you are overusing the character gestures a bit. I found it distracting. Overall, actually, i liked the old character more, for some reason. Which isnt just a "old things are always better" argument, as i quite enjoyed the rework of similar characters on completely unrelated channels previously, but here something didnt click for me. Maybe it's a bit of an uncanny vally thing. The old character was intentionally a bit rough and crazy looking and offered a weird sense of entertainment. This one is supposed to look a bit more professional, but while doing so just ends up weirding me out and even distracting me. I mean 16:05 for example, it's just way too much. For me personally at least. Others may like it.

Nailed it again. You are the most underrated debunker of Christian apologetics I know. You certainly deserve more views

In short, numbers are adjectives not nouns. Adjectives are descriptions of reality and if accurate, have predictive power when used in well defined and consistent ways.

Professor Yorke said that 2+2=5. You have not been paying attention.

more videos with Q from Star Trek in it pls

This explains so much.

Good video.

I dunno I'm pretty surprised and awed when my hammer works so well on nails. #CantExplainThat

Maybe I'm alone in this opinion, but I have to say that I find your avatar animations incredibly distracting. I really enjoy your content but for this video I ended up having to cover the left side of the screen with my hand to follow along. Personally, I would prefer just the slideshow and the audio - but I understand that other people may prefer your format and, more importantly, you may prefer this format. All I'm saying, is that you may be able to save some time in making videos by simply reducing the avatar animations a bit.

Well, it's not the worst thing I heard a theist say about math all week.

Because video of dr craig is little bit short. So it is hard to not misunderstand some concept. Im sure dr craig aware many people believe math is human invention, but he doesnt believe in it for some reason. I never see any video of dr craig explain why he doesnt believe about it, but may be you should email or debate online with him

Long time no see!!!!

Nice video. Only one thing: Einstein's theories have not replaced Newton's. They have added to our knowledge and expanded existing theories. Parts of Newton are incomplete and, if you look very closely, certainly wrong. That doesn't mean the whole theory is wrong. That's one thing that a lot of people misunderstand about science. It's not about one being right and one being wrong. It's about expanding our knowledge and building on the theories of those who came before us. "We all stand on the shoulders of giants."

Nice work 👍btw, what kind of Modality do you accept?

i am four apparently

8:40 easy, craig doesn't give a rats behind if it contradicts his own theology, as long as she sheep don't get that.

Thanks for the video :)

Hey man your videos are based.

as typical, they are putting the cart before the horse here, math "makes" things work, or so they sort of claim.

Easiest question for me to ask and hardest for craig to answer would be: Which base?

Here I thought I would have to comment on 10 year old videos. Well done. Needs a rebuttal from WLC.

I miss the old avatar. It is a bit like when a weird human shows up in one of Viced Rhinos episodes. Totally out of place.

If 2+2=4 because God wills it, then the equation is arbitrary, God could also will 2+2 to be 5 then all math is render meaningless. If 2+2 = 5 is true, as a brute fact we don't need God to account for its validity.

Math isn't even perfect either so this whole argument is jist silly but I guess it's something different from the norm.

11:25 Hmm... I'm a bit miffed about you calling galilean coordinate transformations "wrong". I get it, you were referring to Laplacean transformation / Poincare' transformations. Calling it "wrong" is silly. It's just not precisely applicable to macro situations. Plus, the underlying Galelean Principal of Relativity (which is what we're really talking about here) was re-expressed in Newton's 1st and is the bedrock of, well, relativity. In its essence it was the right answer, the precise terms of the transform are detail. A bit like my tax submission. Ok listen, I like Galileo's transformations. They're cool. Galileo rocked. Did you know he used to correspond with Kepler? Another guy who rocked. Don't diss Galileo's transforms.

You sound an awful lot like AntiCitizenX!

So I'm just gonna put that out there, as I am sure many people have before me... I was a completely faithful Jehovah's Witness for the good part of 20 years. I reaaally did believe in that whole fatherly figure who's gonna take care of you if you follow his tenets kind of bullshit for so much time it basically destroyed my adolescence. I was raised with moralistic principles that made me believe I was superior to others by simply believing in something else that I could not prove, and that I had the moral duty of helping them, as if they utterly needed the help of a 14 year-old inexperienced piece of carbon. Surely then, I joined Music School and by sheer luck, I had a great teacher who was a huge nerd in propositional philosophy and all matters rational. He taught Music Theory and it was such an elegant way of displaying the artistic experience I had been craving and enjoying. The inciting incident was that, he had no need to separate what is technical from what is artistic. Several times after class we talked, and I, most likely babbled arrogantly about many aspects I didn't know or could demonstrate about the nature of the universe and other stuff (though, to my credit, I listened a whole lot of what he said, and that is what prompted my change). After a while, I started to realize how arrogant and ridiculous some of my arguments were, as well as I could emotionally feel the sheer lack of existence of such a deity I believed existed for my sole well being because... I wasn't well at all. At that moment, I hadn't even touched a woman in my entire life, I constantly felt isolated from my peers, I missed affection I could not express and I constantly got depressed due to all the previous knowledge I had that used to be useful in describing the universe (which is nothing to be ashamed of, since, as with science and our study of it, we constantly learn how ignorant we are). So I decided I had had enough of that lie and became an atheist. Little by little I would remove every brick that was painstakingly put around myself and relieved my mind of the mental encumbrance of all those years of faith, and traded that, SLOWLY AND PAINSTAKINGLY for little orbs of understanding that floated around, unconnected to anything else. It was a fearsome and challenging experience. But curiously, I didn't feel alone anymore. Instead, I slowly began to perceive that I felt more confident, not in myself, but in the tools I had learned how to use. I felt confident in my mind, because I had the arguments to defend the things I thought, just like I had the argument as to why Beethoven's 9th Symphony is an undeniable masterpiece. Knowledge and art, as much as metaphysics and mathematics were not excluding to each other: I had just calibrated them very wrongly at the beginning of my life, as so many had done before me. And found out I was wrong. Which again, is completely fine. Today I have no problem with self esteem, I dare say I can easily make any woman satisfied in bed, I care about my friends and found the few good ones that care about me, I have graduated in English Letters, and though haven't followed up in that area, I am grateful for all the knowledge that has been bestowed upon me in both Music School and the English one. That makes who I am and now I can take empirically useful decisions guided by a pragmatic understanding of reality to my benefit and those I love. I am a better man, a competent lover, an inquiring student and a reasonable private teacher. Because I know how to question and I know who is worth listening to. I have learned that "to sharpen up a sword, you have to remove pieces from it forcefully". Thank you for making these videos. Many times during my journey I had thought if I was right in the beginning and doing something "wrong", or betraying myself. Your pure and cohesive logic has clearly demonstrated that I didn't. And to those that say that AntiCitizedX (that name was dope, btw) is unnecessarily angry in his propositions and disrespectful... his "enthusiasm" is well appropriate. These types of ideas are DESTROYING the lives of people around the world. I will never get my youth back, the most precious time in life, which I squandered worshiping an imaginary absent father figure that is basically described in his way of acting as a spoiled child. I thank you, sir, again. We have crafted science "a ferro e fogo". It it is the most precious thing humanity has ever engineered. And I hope we can keep improving it.

Excellent video. WLC / Low Bar Bill has a low opinion of his target audience - it's unsurprising he's so lazy & smug.

The math=god argument has always been very strange to me. You could calculate a 1-ton vehicle hitting a wall at 50mph would have a force of so many pounds per square inch. But that math has no meaning unless humans have defined tons, miles, hours, pounds, and inches. Any resulting number means nothing unless humans have defined what that unit of measurement is.

Great stuff...btw, what's your thought on contingency argument?do you think contingent facts can be explained by a necessary existence?

What tool do you use to make and edit your videos