Young Academic Atheist Asks Muslim Questions (2019-12-09) #

0:00:08 salamualikum' when I met you I better
0:00:09 care to pose this isn't dear friends
0:00:11 online EFT we have Jacob handsome man
0:00:14 charismatic his defense is impregnable
0:00:18 on my right we have a boy jockey so we
0:00:24 have my mini jab and Paulo Jacob Jacob
0:00:26 are smoking some couple of weeks ago
0:00:27 about contingency and he just wants to
0:00:29 ask me some questions I'm gonna be back
0:00:36 I'll give it to him I'll give it to him
0:00:43 so can you introduce yourself tell me
0:00:46 what who you are what you support what
0:00:48 your background is and why you wanted to
0:00:50 talk to me I've been wanting to meet a
0:01:02 little bit of a fan boy and I disagree
0:01:05 with pretty much everything he says but
0:01:06 in terms of a sort of intellectually
0:01:08 debating type fella he's a bit of a bit
0:01:12 of a hero of mine especially after
0:01:13 watching to be honest I don't fit cosmic
0:01:15 skeptic corazon in that the paper
0:01:17 reviews to be honest with general
0:01:22 non-believer libertarian nationalist
0:01:25 type as well but against against anyone
0:01:32 who's to support violence well i think i
0:01:34 find that i reconcile I love Tommy very
0:01:37 easily although he's a violent person
0:01:38 nothing yet he made some mistakes in his
0:01:40 past but I think he's a very good man I
0:01:41 think he's fighting for England as I do
0:01:44 for a lot of someone who's described me
0:01:49 as a hero and Tim Robinson is a urinal
0:01:51 is a very possible in very different
0:01:54 whoa all right so you said you read my
0:01:57 book
0:01:57 I wanna come inside so what kind of
0:02:00 we'll talk about Kalam cosmological
0:02:02 arguments well I'll make the kind of
0:02:04 what's referred to as the argument of
0:02:06 contingency yeah - yeah
0:02:08 what Leibniz is who kind of he's my main
0:02:11 proponent now yeah well Aristotle had
0:02:14 his own version right the Greeks had
0:02:16 their own version yet the Arabs and then
0:02:18 the Enlightenment all right so what were
0:02:21 your thoughts on the argument can you
0:02:23 summarize what you understand from okay
0:02:25 so as I understand it thank you it's
0:02:27 sort of it's basically Aquinas its Third
0:02:29 Way isn't it he's I think it's his third
0:02:31 way he says he he says I think yeah and
0:02:33 I'm glad that sort of adapted it from
0:02:34 him he says there are contingent things
0:02:36 or possible existences in this world and
0:02:39 obviously everything needs to have some
0:02:42 sort of cause otherwise it wouldn't be
0:02:43 contingent and this must be basically a
0:02:46 chain of causality terminating in a
0:02:48 necessary being and we the Christian or
0:02:50 the Muslim cause that being God correct
0:02:53 me nervous yes you're right some extent
0:02:56 there are two ways there's two ways of
0:02:57 doing contingency right one of them is
0:03:01 through causality and the other one is
0:03:02 through explanation that's traditionally
0:03:05 so in other words there the contingency
0:03:07 argument or what I think I think it is a
0:03:11 Kalam cosmological argument as well yeah
0:03:13 I disagree with that yeah there's a
0:03:15 difference of opinion on either way it
0:03:18 can either be done from close ality or
0:03:20 it can be done through a explanation it
0:03:23 doesn't need causation right but yeah
0:03:26 you could go through that way and say
0:03:28 okay well if you believe in there's an
0:03:30 effect
0:03:31 a priori as well as cosmologically like
0:03:35 in other words things in the
0:03:37 cosmological environment which are
0:03:39 affected by something have a course a
0:03:42 phenomena which has something that
0:03:45 brought rise to it which is the textbook
0:03:48 definition of the course hi basically
0:03:53 has a course that phenomena has a cause
0:03:55 if you believe in that a priori or if
0:03:58 you believe in that even from a
0:03:59 cosmological perspective you could argue
0:04:01 that well then they have to have a first
0:04:04 cause or whatever right but that's not
0:04:06 the only way of doing contingency so you
0:04:08 can do it through dependents as well
0:04:12 yeah yeah so what what do you think
0:04:15 about their argument about the
0:04:17 dependency one yeah yeah so I separate
0:04:20 that by the way from the clan the kalam
0:04:22 I hold to be the sort of traditional one
0:04:23 the Craig popularized the sort of you
0:04:26 whatever it begins to exist as cause
0:04:28 universe began to exist therefore
0:04:29 therefore God basically and then the
0:04:31 contingency one I think I think it's
0:04:34 stronger to be honest of you I mean the
0:04:35 Kalam really is on shaky ground on both
0:04:38 its premises but the contingency one is
0:04:39 more it's much more impressive because
0:04:41 at face value it does seem as if okay
0:04:44 you know an infinite regression seems
0:04:46 incompatible with everything that we
0:04:48 understand about the world and so it
0:04:51 sort of it seems very reasonable to say
0:04:53 yes this this must terminate somewhere
0:04:55 in necessity I think it's a bit of a
0:04:58 leap that they then call that God so
0:05:00 people like David Toombs said no why
0:05:01 can't it be I think I was using the
0:05:03 persona of Cleon theis he said like
0:05:05 although he said he says first to his
0:05:09 debate he says first first of all you
0:05:12 know you're assuming that there is
0:05:13 something necessary being a no hehe t he
0:05:15 doubts whether you can even use the term
0:05:17 necessary with us having any coherent
0:05:19 meaning and then he says okay suppose
0:05:21 suppose there is he says why can't this
0:05:24 just be the totality of the universe and
0:05:26 then so for me there's several issues
0:05:28 with it it says for one if there is
0:05:30 something necessary okay it could just
0:05:32 be the totality of all that exists I
0:05:34 realize there's problems with analyst
0:05:35 per implanted pattern argument you make
0:05:37 one could simply be that there that
0:05:40 there are just contingent things okay
0:05:42 and it doesn't seem like sort of logical
0:05:45 you know 100% that there must be
0:05:46 something necessary see well I say these
0:05:51 are the two main the other problem is
0:05:52 from an objective is going to be right
0:05:54 we might say you know necessary could is
0:05:57 anything that you you couldn't conceive
0:06:00 like you couldn't conceive otherwise
0:06:02 like some people say no the planet
0:06:05 Jupiter is actually necessary and you
0:06:07 might say are you can conceive of a
0:06:09 planet Jupiter not being there I can you
0:06:11 really is impossible to I'm not sure if
0:06:14 you can conceive of a universe in which
0:06:15 there are things that are not there
0:06:17 which leads me to believe maybe there
0:06:19 are more than one necessary existences
0:06:22 so that's about three arguments in one
0:06:24 all right so the first thing you
0:06:26 mentioned was that the first thing you
0:06:28 mentioned was the the William Lane Craig
0:06:30 types of modes both he wrote a book in
0:06:32 79 called Kalam cosmological argument
0:06:34 why would he still Carolyn because words
0:06:36 go give us so with that the reason why I
0:06:39 called it that is to show that this is
0:06:41 not one argument right they wonder
0:06:49 William Lane Craig focuses on is the has
0:06:52 alien was but even as early in his most
0:06:55 famous book at horrific philosopher
0:06:57 which is the incoherence of the
0:06:59 philosophers good even he he postulates
0:07:03 more than one argument which is so he
0:07:06 makes an argument from movement which is
0:07:07 quite similar to you talking about - he
0:07:11 says look he says that
0:07:13 for example this is one of his other
0:07:15 because you talked about one of his
0:07:16 arguments he mentioned it someone of his
0:07:17 book he says everything that begins to
0:07:19 exist has a cause the universe began to
0:07:21 die l'm by the way the universe is not a
0:07:24 good translation of what the hell he
0:07:25 actually said he says the world hasn't
0:07:27 began to exist not the universe the
0:07:30 universe is a new term right so he says
0:07:32 Allah eylem
0:07:33 or the the world began to exist
0:07:35 therefore the world hasn't course right
0:07:38 so it William Lane Craig latched on to
0:07:41 this he makes all his make if you see
0:07:43 William Lane Craig argue that's he
0:07:45 that's like necessarily made that
0:07:47 argument and more than that argument so
0:07:49 for example he said look one of his
0:07:51 arguments I made which is also a
0:07:52 cosmological argument because a
0:07:54 cosmological argument is an argument
0:07:55 that makes reference to the cosmos
0:07:58 literally to the world around us he said
0:08:01 look he said that movement is really
0:08:04 what is its time and movement the time
0:08:09 has paid he says look he says that if
0:08:12 you believe in movement he made an
0:08:14 argument for movement the first mover
0:08:15 argument which is the same argument as I
0:08:17 started to say if you believe in time he
0:08:19 believed in movement so long as there is
0:08:21 time there is movement and if there is
0:08:23 and if and if there is movement there
0:08:25 must be a mover that's another argument
0:08:27 right so the argument i Rossella made
0:08:29 the argument has Allah made the argument
0:08:32 I V Sanders didn't reject the argument
0:08:34 what Abby said is not about that in his
0:08:36 book he said look he suggests if you eat
0:08:39 and this is a good point I'll be son I
0:08:41 said just because there's a first mover
0:08:43 it doesn't necessarily
0:08:47 is the cause of everything that exists
0:08:48 yes so you can believe in a DA stick
0:08:51 first mover yeah you can believe in the
0:08:53 Albert Einstein grab anyway the first
0:08:55 mover argument may it may give us
0:08:58 evidence that there were there was in
0:09:00 fact a first mover or an eternal mover
0:09:02 however it doesn't give us evidence that
0:09:04 that move has intelligence without that
0:09:06 mover is equivalent to make chart from
0:09:07 the isn't it absolutely yes now all of
0:09:10 the argument look I'll be frank with you
0:09:11 the maximum we can prove from a logical
0:09:13 perspective is deistic really
0:09:16 yeah if you put a look if you if you
0:09:21 define theism as a as a personal God
0:09:24 then you cut there's no real first
0:09:27 principles you can use to establish them
0:09:29 here's what we say we say as Muslims is
0:09:31 that our fundamental foundational
0:09:33 definition of God doesn't depend
0:09:35 necessarily on a personal God that's
0:09:38 additional information that we've got
0:09:40 Christian yeah
0:09:42 that's additional information that we
0:09:44 only come to know it's so facto through
0:09:46 revelation so look the necessary causes
0:09:49 this everything in the world is
0:09:51 dependent whether like this book is
0:09:54 dependent on the materials oh whatever
0:09:56 and it goes back and you can't have that
0:09:59 process not going back to something
0:10:00 which is necessary in other words
0:10:02 something which does not depend on
0:10:04 anything else simply simple as that so
0:10:07 you have to have an independent to have
0:10:08 all other dependent things if you want
0:10:11 to simplify the argument to the lowest
0:10:12 common multiple you have to have an
0:10:14 independent to have all other
0:10:16 dependencies what are the attributes of
0:10:19 that independent that independent must
0:10:21 be eternal because it couldn't be
0:10:23 conceived of any other way at any other
0:10:25 time so it has to be like that forever
0:10:27 in the past put a pre-eternal and
0:10:30 post-eternal it has to be necessary in
0:10:32 the fact that it can't be conceived of
0:10:34 any other way and it has to be this has
0:10:38 to be the reason for everything else
0:10:39 that exists the ultimate reason so your
0:10:42 objection that you mentioned about the
0:10:44 universe being the universe it's not
0:10:45 actually an objection because all you're
0:10:47 doing is you're saying that I believe in
0:10:49 an unnecessary since Canon can be can
0:10:52 exist what that necessary existence
0:10:54 could be the universe
0:10:56 so someone could say okay well so you
0:10:58 agree with the premise of the argument
0:10:59 that you just agree with the nature of
0:11:01 the necessary existence
0:11:03 so really the postulation which is what
0:11:05 Bertrand Russell kind of alluded to
0:11:07 himself and others as well that you know
0:11:09 the universes is the necessary existence
0:11:11 is not I think it comes from yes because
0:11:15 he came before but you the point is that
0:11:17 if you say that it's not a rejection of
0:11:19 the argument then you see the point so
0:11:22 you accept the argument but you just
0:11:24 have a different nature you have a
0:11:25 different understanding of what could be
0:11:27 right yes I wouldn't use the word go out
0:11:31 the necessary so at this point that's
0:11:35 not a rejection it's not it's not an
0:11:37 objection to the argument or a rejection
0:11:39 of the ugh yeah you agree the argument
0:11:41 but it's okay it could be the universe
0:11:42 oh no problem so now we won't rule the
0:11:44 universe out but for now we'll explain
0:11:46 why it won't be the universe in a second
0:11:48 right but for now but let's agree that
0:11:50 first of all you accept that there must
0:11:52 be a necessary existence