Godless Business

2.8 – Kalam is Krap

Ollie, Jim, and Andrew discuss the finer points of Mormonism, delve into the depths of the cosmological and kalam arguments for the existence of god, and bring you up to date with some interesting news.

News

Standard Podcast [ 1:51:43 ] Play Now | Download

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Godless Business – 2.8 – Kalam is Krap -- Topsy.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/anwyll David Gibson

    I enjoyed this podcast guys – thanks :)

    I'm glad you picked up on their interpretation of the results in the 'Atheist doctors 'more likely to hasten death'' story. I am perpetually frustrated by the media's misrepresentation of scientific research especially the messy, murky world of real world science (that's my little dig at scientists who spend their lives in labs while the rest of us deal with the difficult questions! haha). I had heard of a similar study a couple of years ago (never kept the reference) which looked at almost the same issue from a patient perspective where religious patients and families of patients were more likely to drag out and prolong the dying process or delay turning off life support systems than the non-religious patients and families. At the time it was similarly reported in the media as atheistic patients and families more likely to give up on life. As far as I could tell it showed those who weren't religious placed a higher value on the experience here and now, such as pain, suffering and quality of life.

    I wonder if it all stems from serious doubt about their beliefs, that for all their loud piety in good health and when taking a stand on issues that influence the lives of others, when it comes to real decisions and personal risk they can't make the leap they really should feel confident in taking.

    Also, tongue piercings most certainly introduce a new element to the experience of the recipient ;).

    • http://www.godless.biz/ askegg

      Thanks David. I really enjoyed this podcast too :)

  • http://twitter.com/WatcherMastema @WatcherMastema

    I'm an ex-Mormon who grew up in Salt Lake City. I have no desire to defend their bullshit, but in the spirit of accuracy and truth, some of the claims in the film should be taken with a grain of salt. Some of it's true. Don't get me wrong. There's A LOT of bullshit in Mormonism. I began to have serious doubts when I moved beyond the "Book of Mormon" for kids bullshit (kinda like how mainstream Christian kids get watered down Bibles), and started to seriously study the BoM when I was 14.

    Things like "dark skinned" people being cursed because they were neutral in the spiritual war isn't correct. They just weren't as "valiant" as the people who were later rewarded with light skin on Earth. Another thing is that Mormons don't preach that God had physical sex with Mary. They preach that she was a virgin before and after she gave birth. As in mainstream Christianity, it was the Holy Ghost who impregnated her. God doesn't live on Kolob, but on a planet near a star named Kolob.

    As for what's accurate? Mormons really believe that Lucifer and Jesus were brothers. I guess that would mean that they think all of us are brothers and sisters of Lucifer and Jesus too, but I don't remember what their position is on that. For some reason I have probably blocked out, Lucifer and Jesus were super good or smart or something. Lucifer wanted to force everyone to believe in and worship God. Jesus wanted to give them a choice. This is a HUGE difference between Mormons and other Christian denomination. (I know Christians will object to my comparing Mormons to them. I'm just explaining this from their perspective. I really don't give a fuck who is a "true" Christian. Maybe they can lock themselves in a room, and fight it out to come to an agreement themselves.)

    There are a lot of little things like that that caught my eye the first time I saw the video a few years ago. It'll be hard to find a Mormon who has ever seen the cartoon. They're brainwashed to mentally shut down, bear their testimony, and get away from any criticism to their faith. They don't have to think about it. It becomes so ingrained into them that it's as easy and automatic as breathing.

    After listening to that section in your podcast, I looked up a Mormon response to the film, and found this: http://www.lightplanet.com/response/godmaker.htm. I find some of the responses are accurate, but some are outright lies. Joseph Smith was not only a "treasure hunter" who told tall tales, but he was convicted of fraud. The person who wrote that response, like all good Mormons, refuses to believe that their prophet was anything less than perfect. So, take the response with a grain of salt as well. Mormons are ignorant of a lot of unflattering incidents in their cult's past.

    The South Park episode was great, for the most part. Again, it's not 100% accurate. I came across an ex-Mormon website that had information on the episode, and compared what was said in the episode with what the historical record said. The only places the episode differed from what is said in the documents that exist, it turns out that what really happened was even more bizarre and stupid than what Matt and Trey claimed. I wish I had the link.

    Sorry for the long response. I am by no means a Mormon apologist, and would be delighted if the LDS church went bankrupt and the leaders exposed as frauds. There's enough silliness, bullshit, and danger (look at how they orchestrated Prop 8 in California) in Mormonism, that there's really no need to make shit up or exaggerate beyond necessity.

    I'm not done with the episode yet, but I am enjoying it so far. If you have any questions about Mormonism, I am probably the worst ex-Mormon to ask. There's only so much space in my head, and I'd rather not use it up remembering utter nonsense from what, for all intents and purposes, was from a different lifetime.

    • http://www.godless.biz/ askegg

      Thanks for the corrections. Will all the insanity within religions it's hard to tell the "real" stuff from the fiction :P

  • nuytsia

    I always thought that pantheon was the collective term for gods, however according to dictionary.com this might be restricted to the greek gods. Perhaps it's a dress code thing?

    • http://www.godless.biz/ askegg

      You are correct – "pantheon" is the correct word.

  • AndrewFinden

    You seem to have an overly simplistic understanding of the Kalam argument. Indeed, it's surprising to see you so blithely discard the first premise while most of the professional objections to the argument are about the premise that the universe had a beginning.
    Craig seems to refute your objections here (from 6:00 mark).

    Consider, nonetheless, Jonathan Edwards's argument on behalf of the causal principle: if something can come into being uncaused out of nothing, then it is inexplicable why anything and everything does not do so. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=Ne…

    On the question of whether people believe in God in a vaccuum – look at the research of Dr Olivera Petrovich: http://www.publicchristianity.com/Videos/petrovic…

  • Anonymous Atheist

    Here's the info about that cartoon:
    It is the animated segment from a 1-hour movie called "The God Makers" made by Christians in 1982 to explain the differences between Mormonism and 'regular' Christianity. As @WatcherMastema said, despite Mormon objections to the contrary and the filmmakers' bias, it is mostly accurate except for things that seem to me to be mere minor quibbles compared to the rest of it.

    More details will be posted in replies, as the site keeps saying my comments are too long (despite being shorter than WatcherMastema's).

    • Anonymous Atheist

      Here's a good comment about the cartoon from http://scienceblogs.com/grrlscientist/2010/01/mor… :

      "Dear God, Mormons seem to be a little bit on edge these days.
      A blog links to a YouTube video you don't like, so you descend on it by the dozen spouting pre-fabricated talking points? Yup, that's gonna convince the general public you're not a brainwashing cult, because that's exactly how rational human beings are supposed to behave.
      Your 'corrections' of 'inaccuracies' are duly noted, but the differences between the version in the video, the 'authentic' version and a random Final Fantasy plot are so subtle they matter only to you.
      I'm sorry, but any religious belief can be easily depicted in a ridiculing fashion – that comes with the metaphysical nature. You want respect? Stick to reality."

    • Anonymous Atheist

      Highlights from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Makers , part 1:

      "The God Makers is a counterculture apologetic book and film highlighting the inner workings and perceived negative aspects of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (abbreviated as the LDS Church and colloquially known as the Mormon Church). The book and film was co-authored by Ed Decker and Dave Hunt."

      "The film, produced by Jeremiah Films in 1982, takes a highly critical view of the LDS Church, its practices, and its teachings. The film is marketed as an exposé of the Church's secrets, which has been controversial among church members and non-members since its release, provoking passionate debates about its veracity and message."

    • Anonymous Atheist

      Highlights from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Makers , part 2:

      "The film depicts a meeting between Ed Decker and Dick Baer with two actors who portray Los Angeles attorneys. The film states that Decker and Baer are there to consult "with a Los Angeles-based law firm about filing a class action lawsuit" against the LDS Church. … Much of the dialogue occurs between Decker, Baer and the two actor/lawyers, in addition to interview segments with various other people interspersed throughout the film."

    • Anonymous Atheist

      Highlights from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Makers , part 3:

      "Decker and Baer run an animated film that is claimed to illustrate the differences between Mormonism and Christianity. … Upon viewing the animation, one of the actor/lawyers comments that it sounds like something from von Däniken or Battlestar Galactica. … Parts of the animated segment were featured in Bill Maher's anti-religion documentary Religulous"

      "The film concludes with the two actors playing lawyers stating that they cannot take the case, because they don't believe that a jury will believe them. They state that the Mormon church has "billions" with which to fight the case and that it would take years."

  • Anonymous Atheist

    It was difficult to track down, but I have found the story you were thinking of! Although based on / inspired by some of Asimov's ideas, it is actually from an unpublished amateur author!
    http://www.kuro5hin.org/prime-intellect/
    The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect
    A Novel by Roger Williams

    ~60,000 words, written as a private project in 1994, released free online in Jan 2003: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/1/12/155436/89…

    Available in printed form (175 pages) as print-on-demand for $14 plus shipping: http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-metamor…

    • Anonymous Atheist

      The first chapter opens with the distinctive rabies situation you recalled:
      "… she had once been infected with rabies. Caroline was rather proud of this distinction, though it had also been a long time ago. There was a certain class of people who were quite impressed with Caroline's bout with rabies, not so much because she survived it but because she hadn't. It had taken Prime Intellect fifty-six hours to realize it couldn't repair the damage to her nervous system, to backtrack, and to put her together again like Humpty Dumpty. For fifty-six hours, she had not existed. She had been dead."

      • askegg

        Thank you, thank you, thank you.

        This has been rattling around in my brain for a very long time. While the name of the story was on the tip of my tongue many times, I could never materialize the name. I have no idea what you did to track it down since all my attempts failed. Again, thank you.

  • Anonymous Atheist

    Today I found another atheist content creator ("TheThinkingAtheist") who's made some great videos summarizing a lot of topics, including:
    Magic Mormon Underwear – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cbfgmorIGE
    Scientology, Circus of the Stars – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwiYjQyu0Tw

    So yes, there are videos like that Mormonism one about Scientology's absurdities too! :-)

    • http://www.godless.biz/ askegg

      TheThinkingAtheist is great. He is obviously a professional for both videos and his radio show. I aspire to produce such excellent content.

      • http://www.facebook.com/anwyll David Gibson

        From what I gather from his posts on Facebook TTA actually invests in a lot of professional work but not necessarily one himself (he has commented on contracting new animation for videos), certainly involves quite a commitment to an activity which probably doesn't give much finance in return (I think he has some shirts and what not).

        • Anonymous Atheist

          He describes himself as "A former Christian of 30 years, I use my background and skills as a video producer to explore questions about God, religion and other absurdities in the world."

          And he mentioned in a comment, "Custom art, stock art, licensed music, professional narrators, etc cost money."

          He is a producer (plan/design, finance, find/contract, and combine pieces into a finished product) and puts in plenty of effort, even if not creating everything from scratch by himself (gosh, the female voiceovers weren't done by him too? ;-) ). Professional-quality videos seldom have everything done by one person, so this is to be expected for this level of work.

          I think he actually runs a video production company for a living that does millions of dollars of business, but keeps pretty quiet about himself due to being located in a religious-dominated part of the US.

  • http://happyevilslosh.blogspot.com/ HappyEvilSlosh

    So yeah, someone on the show kinda muffed different sizes of infinities a bit and thought I’d post a correction.

    The smallest two infinities are countable infinity and uncountable infinite, also known as the continuum. Despite the claim on the show I’m pretty sure no ‘biggest infinity’ has been determined, Additionally the space of functions is (hypothetically) the third smallest size of infinity. For more see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_number

    Now in your example you accidentally call the real numbers the rational numbers and then use an incorrect argument as to why they are bigger than the natural numbers. I’m going to take this next part slowly starting with some definitions.

    The natural numbers are all positive whole numbers and countably infinite is defined as the size of that set. Then the argument goes that if you can find any function that maps a number from a set to a unique natural number then that other set also has size countable infinity. So for example the integers (all positive and negative numbers, and zero) are also countably infinite. You could list them (0, 1, -1, 2, -2, 3, -3,…), noting that defining such a list is equivalent to defining a functional map between the two sets.

    So what about the rational numbers? These are numbers that can be expressed as a/b where a is an integer and b is a natural number. Rather counter intuitively these are also countably infinite and this can be proven fairly easily. For the sake of example I’ll restrict my attention to the positive rationals. You construct a (countably infinite) table as follows:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 …
    ————————
    1|1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1
    2|1/2 2/2 3/2 4/2 5/2 6/2
    3|1/3 2/3 3/3 4/3 5/3 6/3
    4|1/4 2/4 3/4 4/4 5/4 6/4
    5|1/5 2/5 3/5 4/5 5/5 6/5
    6|1/6 2/6 3/6 4/6 5/6 6/6
    (hopefully the formatting in this turns out understanble)

    From this you go diagonally across the table and can enumerate all positive natural numbers by (1/1, 1/2, 2/1, 1/3, 2/2, 3/1,…) from this you can see that it must be bounded above by the size of countable infinity. However this isn’t quite enough because you’ll note that in the table some numbers occur more than once. However you know that all the natural numbers are also positive rational numbers so the positive rationals must be at least as large as the natural numbers and by the squeezing theorem therefore the rational numbers are the same size as countable infinity.

    Now finally the real numbers. The formal definition of real numbers is ‘the set of the limits of all convergent rational number sequences’. The proof that these are not countable infinity is done by contradiction and using what’s called Cantor’s diagonal argument. You suppose that you have a complete countably infinite list that contains all real numbers. You then go down this list and you create a new number by taking the ith digit after the decimal place of the ith number in the list and making sure that in your new number the ith position is a different number, it doesn’t really matter what. By construction this new number isn’t already in your list, since it differs with the ith number in your list at the ith position after the decimal point, and thus you can’t have had a complete list of real numbers to start off with. Even if you add this new number you end up with the same problem by using this method again.

    One of the cool little relationships between the real and the rational numbers is that even though the former is _significantly_ larger than the latter if you pick any two different real numbers there are an infinite number of rational numbers between them, and if you pick any two different rational numbers there are an infinite number of real numbers between them. This is formally termed as ‘the rational numbers are dense within the real numbers’. Another place where this comes up is a result which follows from Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem and the result says that the things that are true which you can prove in mathematics are dense within the things that are true but you can’t prove.

    Just a little something to keep you up at night. :)

Subscribe to the Podcast

44 – An Atheist Temple

BBC News – Row over Indonesia atheist Facebook post Priority is to protect marriage | Herald Sun No Fetus Can Feed Us | Unreasonable Faith Alain de Botton: Atheism 2.0 | Video on TED.com

Standard Podcast [ 1:44:50 ] Play Now | Download

Further Reading

ACL lie about census

The Australian Christian Lobby are lying again. This time they are mischaracterising the Atheist Foundation of Australia’s “No Religion” campaign by stating (emphasis mine): “While the census data is rightly used to assist the government to plan for services and infrastructure, other groups, including some atheists, are seeking to push their  agendas by encouraging people [...]

Dog Heads

The excellent British broadcaster BBC 4 recently aired a fascinating program called “The Medieval Mind” which explores the philosophy, theology, and predominate thinking of the dark ages.  The first episode deals with knowledge and revealed numerous intriguing insights into how the medieval mind determined epistemological truths. Monks, priests, and other godly people were in possession [...]

Atheists n Agnostics speak out in Arabic

I flagged this video a few days ago, but only watched it this evening. It’s is not often we see ex-muslims speaking out against the “religion of peace”. What these people have done is extraordinary and brave given the fundamentalists attraction to extreme violence.

The perfect God

I want a god whose ultimate goals which do not necessitate the creation of mysterious suffering and death. I want a god who doesn’t violate causation by causing things to begin to exist from nothing in the absence of time. I want a god who does not give us “free will” then punishes us for [...]

Atheism 2.0

“Atheism 2.0” is a 20 minute TED presentation by Alain de Botton in which he proposes a new approach to evangelising atheism. Alain suggests (apparently without evidence) that we have “secularised badly” and we should sift through the rituals, traditions, and behaviours of religion to identify and adopt their efficient mechanisms. “I have come here [...]

The Bizarre Bible

Atheists are often told by believers to read the Bible and it will all become clear.  Trouble is, many of us have tried that and it doesn’t seem to have helped.  Take these verses for example: This does not sound like a great night out to me. “But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master [...]