Debate: Is Evolution Faith Based? Jay Dyer Destroys atheism Livestream Clip

[00:00:00]If you could summarize religion, if you could, you know, put it into some, you know, it is a part of what we are as as humans, as primates, and what it's come from. It was our first explanation of the world. [snorts] It's our explanation of, you know, everything. Uh our first attempt at science.

[00:00:23]And so you would have to believe that for hundreds of thousands of years that uh you know, the world just exists and then a few thousand years ago uh God comes along in in in this place and says, "Okay, we've got to do something about this." And and and here we go. Here's, you know, we're we're we're going to get involved and then, >> [snorts] >> Uh but I I I just I can't reconcile the science, the archaeology, the uh the observations we have around us, the the t- the science we have with >> Oh, like would this be like the same science that says that uh biology is not determined by chromosomes? That science?

[00:01:09]What science?

[00:01:11]>> Biology's not determined by chromosomes.

[00:01:14]>> Yeah, your gender.

[00:01:16]>> No, not at all.

[00:01:18]>> Oh, so that's not good science. Is that good Is that cuz that's the science today, right?

[00:01:25]>> Uh I don't think so. I think there are two sexes.

[00:01:30]As far as I know.

[00:01:30]>> Okay, but what I'm saying is so what's the true science here?

[00:01:36]>> Okay, so I would land on the side of observable sci- I mean, science that you can be, you know, actually, you know, tested in in reality.

[00:01:47]>> Mhm.

[00:01:48]>> Not not not social science. Not not any any type of >> Is a Is a Is a doctor count?

[00:01:57]Does the the The doctors count because I mean they're the ones saying that they do a lot of observable I mean they're the ones that are actually like changing the pepees, right?

[00:02:11]>> Well, okay. I I I mean No, I I I am against all that. I mean let me take it Okay, let me ask you this, you know, as as I respect you as as a fellow primate as as a fellow human.

[00:02:25]But you know, we we come from other humans. We are Homo sapiens sapiens now, but we have come from a long line of other, you know, >> Okay, what does that What What's that to do with anything to do with God's existence? So.

[00:02:41]>> Okay, I I I can understand that, but I mean you would have to believe that for 300,000 years there was no Christianity as we are talking about today.

[00:02:54]I there was there was no there was no >> Where are you getting the 300,000 years?

[00:02:58]Is that an observable thing? Or did you observe that?

[00:03:01]>> Well, would you give me 100,000?

[00:03:04]>> You can make it as many eons as you want. Are any of those eons observable?

[00:03:09]>> Are those people any less valuable than than the humans that exist today?

[00:03:13]>> I asked you a question, so then you two quote with me. Are any of those humans observe Is that Is that observable at all? The humans in the the the eight men, the Piltdown man in the 100,000 year time frame that you're talking about. Have you observed that?

[00:03:27]>> Okay, well, they would be observable in archaeological evidence. Yes, I mean we we have proof that there were, >> Like like Piltdown Like Like who? Like Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man? Are those good examples?

[00:03:41]>> There are I I Yeah, I mean there would be some there would be a few >> Oh, well, those are frauds though. Well, those are frauds.

[00:03:50]>> Go ahead.

[00:03:50]>> Those are frauds.

[00:03:54]>> Okay.

[00:03:55]>> They're famous they're famous frauds.

[00:03:56]>> I don't deny that there are.

[00:03:58]Um but you I mean you would also there is archaeological evidence that does go back hundreds of thousands of years, correct?

[00:04:06]>> Says who?

[00:04:09]>> Uh >> Science?

[00:04:12]>> Well, I I >> Okay. Yeah, so it's funny. But now wait a minute, you said it was observable science. So, I'm just wondering like that you didn't observe it. So, but a scientific establishment claims to have observed it, but they didn't observe it either, right?

[00:04:27]>> Well, yes. I mean we are we we are assuming that it is, you know, it is something that is you know >> That's a pretty big pretty big assumption.

[00:04:35]>> has been excavated from the ground, has been studied, has been, you know, I I mean it has been built upon for many years.

[00:04:43]And it's something that's not, you know, it's not a uh in the sense that science it's not something that's perfect, but it is something that does, you know, have a usefulness, right? It's something that we can measure, right? I mean we can measure ice cores. We can measure tree ring.

[00:05:03]>> Okay. How do how are how are there fossils that extend below and between various ice cores that should not be there?

[00:05:15]>> In in what in what instance?

[00:05:17]>> There are there's many of them. You There's many of them. You can There's many of them. You can look them up, right? What about the Fly Geyser? The Fly Geyser is supposedly, you know, that's something that takes I think 200,000 or 300,000 years to form and it formed in 40 years. So, how's that possible?

[00:05:35]>> Well, I I I would I wouldn't doubt there are events and I'm not a scientist at all.

[00:05:40]>> Oh, now wait a minute. So, you're not a scientist. So, this is not your observation.

[00:05:46]>> No, it's not.

[00:05:47]>> Right. So, you've accepted a a new you've accepted a new authority.

[00:05:52]That's not based on any of your own.

[00:05:55]>> For the vast majority of humans, it's never going to be you know, something that they're assigned.

[00:06:00]>> But that that that that same scientific establishment now says that a man can be a woman.

[00:06:06]And you said no, I don't believe that.

[00:06:08]So you don't you so you don't follow the science.

[00:06:11]>> Well, I I I don't think that the serious scientists >> Oh really? Like the like the Tavistock Institute? The Tavistock Institute? So Tavistock is not a serious science entity.

[00:06:22]You don't you don't think the biggest, most powerful clinics in the the United States which are pushing out Vanderbilt University is not an authoritative scientific institution?

[00:06:33]I thought it was like the preeminent medical institution.

[00:06:38]>> I I I wouldn't give it that. I I don't I don't I don't know.

[00:06:41]>> Vanderbilt University, okay. All right.

[00:06:44]>> All right.

[00:06:44]>> So Vanderbilt is the premier the premier medical institution in the United States according to you now isn't that because you haven't given it that title.

[00:06:52]>> The United States is 200 years old. I mean these things go back far beyond, you know, even our own country.

[00:06:59]>> I gave you an example of a medical institution that is esteemed as one of the top medical institutions in the country which is a spearhead of the idea that you can become a woman if you're a man.

[00:07:11]And you're saying I don't accept that authority.

[00:07:13]>> I think that's twisted by social sciences. I I I think that's >> So they're not really doing that. It's social science but they're not really doing it. They're not really changing.

[00:07:26]>> I I I think they're trying to do things.

[00:07:28]I think they're trying to change things.

[00:07:30]I I I don't >> all you've done is adopt all you've done is adopt a new authority structure. And when it comes down to it, there's not actually any real basis for you to believe these things other than that a lot of people believe it and a lot of powerful people believe it. But you yourself have not verified any of these things.

[00:07:49]>> But Well, yes. I mean I mean there's only so much that one human can do. I mean I mean >> So it operates kind of like on a faith-based thing. Sounds like a faith-based thing for you.

[00:08:00]>> I I see what you're saying in that sense, but Okay.

[00:08:05]That's true.

[00:08:07]You're also making a faith-based claim.

[00:08:10]>> Correct, because I believe everything at root Yeah. Correct.

[00:08:14]>> Right.

[00:08:14]>> Yep.

[00:08:14]>> And and you know >> So who's So who's worldview is So who No. Well, whose worldview is more consistent? Because likelihood is going to depend upon more fundamental presuppositions. So I think I have a consistent worldview which can give an account for how we know things, how we have ethics, how we live in the world.

[00:08:33]But I don't I I don't believe that the atheist naturalist worldview that I hear you presenting can give an account for any of those things.

[00:08:44]>> I don't necessarily think that any of the scientific world accounts that you're you're you're you're refuting a lot of a lot of things that there are probably is probably a lot of evidence for.

[00:08:57]And that it probably cannot be disproven.

[00:09:00]>> you don't know that. It's probably Maybe. Maybe probably. Well, let me ask you this way. Can Can science provide us with ethics?

[00:09:10]>> [snorts and clears throat] >> No, that's I mean that's not its job.

[00:09:13]That's not That's not what it should do.

[00:09:15]>> Okay, but it can provide truth?

[00:09:20]>> Well, I think it can provide insight into reality, yes.

[00:09:23]>> Oh.

[00:09:24]>> In into what exists.

[00:09:25]>> Okay. But it can't do anything with values. Do you think truth pertains to values?

[00:09:31]The true and the false don't relate to values? Should you follow the true as opposed to the false.

[00:09:40]>> Yeah, I I I think you should not deceive yourself. Yes, I I I think you should not be >> Oh, so it does pertain to values.

[00:09:47]>> Well, I I don't think that believing in in in fairy tales is >> Well, you're calling it a fairy tale.

[00:09:53]Well, I'm I'm saying on your position it sounds like all values would be a fairy tale.

[00:09:58]But, you just told me that you should follow what's true. Why ought I follow what's true in your worldview?

[00:10:08]>> Follow what's true?

[00:10:10]Uh well, what do we know that's true? How do we know you >> Well, you said science can give us You said science gives us an insight into to reality. You said that it pertains to what is true, and I said does the true relate to value judgments like the true versus the false. Ought I follow the true versus the false? Well, that's value judgments, but you said science doesn't give value judgments. So, I'm trying to figure out why ought I follow what's true in your view. What what's the basis for your ethics?

[00:10:42]>> Well, I think ethics are an extension of what we are as humans over many many years.

[00:10:48]>> Okay, but that wasn't an ex- explanation That's not explanation for why ought to.

[00:10:51]>> And and if you look I mean if you look at evolution and and >> That's not an explanation for why I ought to do something, right? That's a That's a story about the past.

[00:11:04]>> But, but it it gives us an insight into what we are today.

[00:11:07]>> Well, there's no but What Why is that telling me what I ought to do?

[00:11:11]Ought? Can you get an ought from an is?

[00:11:16]>> I I mean, you would have to nail that down for me. What do you mean exactly mean by that?

[00:11:21]>> By stating how things are doesn't tell me how they ought to be.

[00:11:26]So, you can tell me all day long that we're primates and we're apes and we came from you know, blah blah blah.

[00:11:30]Okay, but how ought we live?

[00:11:33]What's the basis for the ethics of the value judgments there? Because you a minute ago you were saying we should follow what's true.

[00:11:38]Why should I do anything? In your worldview, what's the basis for the shoulds, the ought, the value judgments, the ethics?

[00:11:46]>> Would Would that not come I mean I don't One thing is I have to tell you I don't discount religion as part of the of the overall human process of trying to find uh >> [clears throat and snorts] >> the truth the reality. So I mean I would never say that, you know, we we don't need religion historically. I mean it we it was part of what got us to the point where we are now.

[00:12:13]But going forward, do we still need to believe in Zeus and Thor and, you know, >> So none of that was an answer to a very simple question. I would think that with all of your sophistication and the knowledge of science that you're propounding that we would have some way to account for what we ought to do. But I'm not hearing why I ought to follow what you're saying or any other value judgment.

[00:12:38]>> I I don't ask you to follow me though. I >> Well, wait a minute. You said that I should No, no, you said I should follow what's true, namely the science. Why should I follow anything?

[00:12:48]That's an ought. That's a That's a value judgment, ethics.

[00:12:52]>> Right. Well, I I would not follow another primate another human who >> Okay, then I don't then I shouldn't listen to So I shouldn't listen to your arguments.

[00:13:01]>> what you know, what are believable what are are provable or even >> Yeah, but I'm asking you a >> assumptions. I mean >> I'm asking you a question that's I'm asking you a question that's prior to that claim, which is about value judgments themselves. How are they possible in your worldview? It's a very simple question.

[00:13:23]>> How How are >> Okay.

[00:13:25]>> Can you rephrase?

[00:13:26]>> So ethics, value judgments, it's a specific domain of philosophy, right? When you said that you should follow what's true, namely the science, that is an ethical value judgment claim.

[00:13:41]But you're going to have to make good on that given your naturalistic worldview.

[00:13:45]In the history of philosophy, this is called can I get an ought from an is?

[00:13:49]And the answer, of course, is that you can't. There's no ought. There's science can't give you value judgments. But you told me I should follow what's true versus what's false.

[00:13:58]So, that's an inconsistency in your position, and I'm saying that your position as an atheist naturalist can't even tell me if there are value judgments. It makes them all the time.

[00:14:08]And yet you're turning around and saying, well, I don't have any basis.

[00:14:10]>> Value judgments come from, you know, our experience as humans.

[00:14:14]>> Okay, that's not That doesn't tell me what's right or wrong. Their origin doesn't tell me what's right or wrong.

[00:14:22]What basis should I follow it?

[00:14:24]>> Why not?

[00:14:25]>> Because it could be false.

[00:14:27]Because it's a fallacy. Do you know what a Do you know what fallacies are? It's called the genetic fallacy. So, the origin of something doesn't entail whether it's true or false. That's your genetic fallacy.

[00:14:38]>> If we can't cooperate with each other, if we don't understand that murder is not wrong, that stealing is not >> For all of the sophistica >> If we don't understand these things, how how can you progress at all as a society? How have we built this this civilization?

[00:14:50]>> Value judg- progressing is a value judgment. So, you can't tell me what it means to progress.

[00:14:57]>> Well, here we are. We We've done it.

[00:15:01]>> All right.

[00:15:03]Good try, but we're going to have to move on.