Jack Symes

Like, I'm not religious, but I think we have to put our hands up and go, no, to those two problems, they've got really strong arguments for believing in God. But, you know, people like Dawkins, people like Hitchens and the like, even Dennett, I think Harris is a little bit more... I guess, sympathetic to those arguments than the other three. But they're not serious about following the arguments.

They're not serious about going wherever they take them. Like you say, there is a dogmatism there. They're not open-minded enough on these points.

They're not serious about going wherever they take them. Like you say, there is a dogmatism there. They're not open-minded enough on these points.

They're not serious about going wherever they take them. Like you say, there is a dogmatism there. They're not open-minded enough on these points.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

controversial ideas they're throwing around about like 22 billion years old or 23 billion years old oh well no it's interesting what you say first of all like about us being like so involved with our egos in terms of these arguments it's always baffled me that people can care about their like their views or their philosophies to such an extent that they're they're willing to die on these hills yeah and refusing to they count in their their wins and not their losses i just had a

controversial ideas they're throwing around about like 22 billion years old or 23 billion years old oh well no it's interesting what you say first of all like about us being like so involved with our egos in terms of these arguments it's always baffled me that people can care about their like their views or their philosophies to such an extent that they're they're willing to die on these hills yeah and refusing to they count in their their wins and not their losses i just had a

controversial ideas they're throwing around about like 22 billion years old or 23 billion years old oh well no it's interesting what you say first of all like about us being like so involved with our egos in terms of these arguments it's always baffled me that people can care about their like their views or their philosophies to such an extent that they're they're willing to die on these hills yeah and refusing to they count in their their wins and not their losses i just had a

two-and-a-half-hour conversation with Jordan Peterson on his podcast about his motivations for being religious. And so I basically sketched out my broad argument, which is atheism's shortcomings are it can't answer the two problems we've just spoke about, why there's something rather than nothing fine-tuning.

two-and-a-half-hour conversation with Jordan Peterson on his podcast about his motivations for being religious. And so I basically sketched out my broad argument, which is atheism's shortcomings are it can't answer the two problems we've just spoke about, why there's something rather than nothing fine-tuning.

two-and-a-half-hour conversation with Jordan Peterson on his podcast about his motivations for being religious. And so I basically sketched out my broad argument, which is atheism's shortcomings are it can't answer the two problems we've just spoke about, why there's something rather than nothing fine-tuning.

But then the problem with theism is that no perfectly good God would allow for evolution by natural selection. Like, what a wicked thing to do to create the rules of the game to be that... To have intelligent life, it necessitates the pain and suffering of countless sentient creatures over billions of years. If God exists, then God's a psychopath, right? God didn't have to do that.

But then the problem with theism is that no perfectly good God would allow for evolution by natural selection. Like, what a wicked thing to do to create the rules of the game to be that... To have intelligent life, it necessitates the pain and suffering of countless sentient creatures over billions of years. If God exists, then God's a psychopath, right? God didn't have to do that.

But then the problem with theism is that no perfectly good God would allow for evolution by natural selection. Like, what a wicked thing to do to create the rules of the game to be that... To have intelligent life, it necessitates the pain and suffering of countless sentient creatures over billions of years. If God exists, then God's a psychopath, right? God didn't have to do that.

It's logically and metaphysically possible for God to create it as the Christians thought God did in the Garden of Eden 5,000 years ago. That is way more compatible with the perfectly good God hypothesis, right?

It's logically and metaphysically possible for God to create it as the Christians thought God did in the Garden of Eden 5,000 years ago. That is way more compatible with the perfectly good God hypothesis, right?

It's logically and metaphysically possible for God to create it as the Christians thought God did in the Garden of Eden 5,000 years ago. That is way more compatible with the perfectly good God hypothesis, right?

Yeah. But then when I asked Jordan about this, again, I don't think he's serious again about following the evidence and argument. He just digs down. He builds a trench. He says, like I said, what do you think of what's called the systemic problem of evil? Why would God create the system? And he goes, we just need to keep working on it. It's like, no, you need to suspend belief in something.