This is why scientists tend to be atheists
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лип 2024
- Most scientists and people who have learned science are atheists. Some may not be open about it, some may be agnostic. Why? What makes them bring this belief into question? Let’s analyse using the scientific method.
One-time donation:
UPI: scienceisdope@icici
buymeacoffee.com/scienceisdope
Community:
UA-cam Membership: / @scienceisdope
Patreon: / scienceisdope_
Discord: / discord
#Scientist
#Atheist
#ScientificMethod
Chapters:
00:00 - Intro
00:51 - What makes something true?
03:04 - What makes something scientific?
07:27 - Unfalsifiability
11:20 - The idea of God
14:28 - Scientists who are atheists
15:38 - Why do people have a belief in God?
Patrons that support me at the highest tiers:
Jack Cameroon
Prabhakar Bhat
Dev Agrawal
Jeevan
Prince Rachit
Sarthak Kapoor
Sushanth
Kashmira wagh
Kiran CJ
Prachet Verma
sashipraveen kalli
Suds Mekathotti
tariq sharif
Akshay Gupta
Thinking Humanist
Dheeraj
Viswanathan Gopalan
Wrichik Basu
Sumana Gopinath
Video Edited by:
/ jungleebulla
Music Credits:
DJ Freedom
Cheel - Smokey Eye
Follow me on social media:
Instagram: / scienceisdope_
Twitter: / scienceisdope_
UA-cam: / scienceisdope
Reddit: / scienceisdope
The sheer effort you put into explaining what evidence is with patience. Props to you 🙌
Thanks man!!
@@scienceisdope hello bro what is your take on buddha
@@scienceisdope
I really like your videos...
I am intrigued by the Vedas...
And as Carl Sagan says we Indians have the tradition of skeptical questioning and unselfconscious humility before the great cosmic mysteries.
What do you think about this ?
Nasadiya Sukta (Hymn of non-Eternity, origin of universe):
There was neither non-existence nor existence then;
Neither the realm of space, nor the sky which is beyond;
What stirred? Where? In whose protection?
There was neither death nor immortality then;
No distinguishing sign of night nor of day;
That One breathed, windless, by its own impulse;
Other than that there was nothing beyond.
Darkness there was at first, by darkness hidden;
Without distinctive marks, this all was water;
That which, becoming, by the void was covered;
That One by force of heat came into being;
Who really knows? Who will here proclaim it?
Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
Gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
Who then knows whence it has arisen?
Whether God's will created it, or whether He was mute;
Perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps it did not;
Only He who is its overseer in highest heaven knows,
Only He knows, or perhaps He does not know.
@@krishnatyagi9881 I think there is huge diffrence btw buddha and buddhism,buddha was rational but buddhism is not.
@@scienceisdope We now know cellular structure of creatures. We have created artificials cells in labs but have never been able to create that spark which starts life chemically. I am not talking about a complex animal or something, just a unicellular creature created by man. A question for those who beleive science is absolute and there is no pushing force that lead our planet to be habitable and create such a huge ecosystem of flora and fauna, where everything is perfect and complements each other. Can you create something artificially that nature was able to create out of nothing ? Life ?
I feel even if there's any existence of God, I swear not a single religion exactly know about it 😂😂.
That's agnostic mean. A person believe God exist but don't follow any current religion
@@rudra20048 Is it available anywhere on paper to opt as religion ??
@@Varun4_here not in India but in west yes
@@Varun4_here so studied about all the 4200 religion?
It’s Unfortunate. God is simply the Existence of Love
Everybody Believes Love exists
Atheists unnecessary overcomplicate it
It’s a Shame
One of the brilliant UA-cam channels in todays time when reels and shorts are feeding on the dopamine pathway and decreasing the scientific temperament of the youth. This channel Deserves much more!! 🌸🌸
Do you think it's some kind of a purposeful concerted effort to dumb down the public by feeding such things into their brains ?
Freedom in thought, pursuit of wonder ,aperture
Proud to see Dr. Saha in thumbnail, he is probably most underrated scientist from India.
Seriously bhai.
Where is sadguru ?
Also he was a dalit and in india dalits are always ignored ,.... Meghnand Saha was a kohinoor ❤️
@@bhimanjali sahas are bengali merchant class not dalit.
Bro, I have a video on him in my channel.....
I am a small UA-camr. I make videos on science. Please help bro...🙏🙏🙏
Honestly, one of your best videos so far. Loved it. I am sure some people might still come back and say things like “we do not need science to prove one’s belief.” Or “somethings do not need proof” or “Modern Science has not reached to that stage yet” or whatever.
These things should be taught in schools in my opinion. I wonder why no one teaches about evidence in schools. Isn’t that like the basis of science? How are we not teaching this to our kids?
Thanks a lot!!
The video isn't even up yet
@@ankushds7018 she's a channel patron. She already saw
It's because of this lack of rational thinking people can end up saying things like "not everything is about science" or "our ancestors were ahead of today's science" among other condensing beliefs.
The entire video is based on an assumption that natural science is the parameter to judge what Exists and what doesn't. You are asking the wrong question, god's existence cannot be proved by science, you are asking empirical proof for something that cannot be proved empirically. The question for god's existence belongs to philosophy not to natural science. For eg using natural science you can't even prove that there is an external world independent of mind, nor can you prove that people other than yourself have 'mind'. Such questions belongs to philosophers not scientists because science works on physical objects it cannot go beyond it.
Now there have been many scientists who believed in God,
Einstein, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, bohrs,etc
9:31
If anyone is confused that why cant "person not getting cured even after eating the apple" be used as falsification , its because the statement says "may be cured" , not "will be cured for sure" .
"May be", "probably" , "I think so" are unfalsifiable statements . They can be used for expressing probabilities or possibilities , but not for making claims .
Maybe God do exist 😅
@@theadarshguy yep just like that 😝.
Another example : may be the creator is a cruel and sadistic devil
@@vishwakumar2864 not maybe but sure 😂
@@Void_from_Abyss shh 🤫 ! Saying that would shift the burden of proof on us . And also it would imply that we admit that creator exists .
Saying this 👇 would put us on safe side :
"We have not found evidence for creator's existence, so it is irrational to blindly believe in it"
@@vishwakumar2864 I know god doesn't exist but if you observe movement of atom that is going order to disorder then you realise that we are already living in hell I mean observe in everything every F single thing is going order to disorder for example: your bed room always gets dirty (disorder) to clean you have you to put energy by yourself to keep it clean (order) observe this in everything
If you think about it deeply then you realise that God doesn't exist but if it is then this reality is hell made by devil
honestly, your channel is one of the best youtube channel i've came across so far, one of my friend recommended me your "how beerbiceps finds science in spirituality" and I got so interested, that I almost checked out all your vids, thank you so much for taking a step forward towards making us believe that science is REALLY dope.
Scientists look for answers.
Religions hide the questions.
Simple !
Uhm no. Religious people do. Religion doesn’t need to hide question, it’s philosophical in nature. It answers most question. Just bc you can’t get answers from one religious person doesn’t mean studying the religion won’t eventually get you the answers. Why is everyone in this comment section such unreasonably anti-religious zealots
Riga veda start with a line 'keep asking questions ' in brief the gita is a q & a btw krishan and arjun hide the question plz elaborate 😀😀
@@gautamsaha6368 he meant islam and Christianity which are based on blind belief and no question can be asked.
@@bhaveshtochabbra6853 do u think believing in thousands of gods isn't blind
@@dr.viktor5291 if you think an average hindu believe in thousand gods and worship them regularly. Bro you need to learn about hindiusm more. Second, God in hindiusm doesnt force people to believe in it and dump disbelievers in hell eternally. Hindiusm is more of karma based rather than belief based religon.
Hey Pranav, great video as always! I have always argued with people having irrational, pseudoscientific beliefs and i always find it difficult to gather as much patience as you did while explaining all that you explained in this video. Hats off to you for that!
You paraphrased Stephen Hawking at 17:15 in the video! In Stephen Hawking's book 'A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME', chapter 1 "Our Picture of the Universe" page 1, there are the words "but why do we think we know better"! And i'm happy to see you adhering to the philosophy that those words teach us; not meeting any question/statement/belief with ridicule but to actually provide a complete explanation for it to that person, no matter how stubborn that person is in accepting it. i highly recommend you and everybody else here to read that book if you haven't already, since that book doesn't delve much into calculations but simply improves your understanding of science and ultimately, moulds you into asking more and more questions about the world around us.
I'm sure the haters are gonna swarm here . Pranav we love your content man .
Wouldn't expect anything else. No matter how f-ed up someone's opinions are, we'll deal with everything in the spirit of science!
If you want to stand by Science, you have to accept criticism. Otherwise you better stick to Pseudoscience.
@Cynic yezz , I accidentally typed critism instead of haters .
@@nishantshade668 well said my man
Your*
Someone - Religions hide questions.
Me - Proof?
Proof - TRUST ME BRO!
god of the gaps fallacy is literally named god of the gaps because it hides questions. that's how religion hides questions. We earlier believed that eclipses occurred through ram and setu it was hiding and not understanding the question and a flawed judgement.
Some of us are so heavily indoctrinated since birth, that the gradual process towards questioning our beliefs and the transition towards agnosticism/atheism is super painful. When all we've been taught regarding our purpose, aim, happiness, peace, well being is god, and we no more identify as theists, the whole structure of validation comes down. Religious trauma is as real as it gets,esp if you're coming from a extremist/radical systems.
Sometimes we wish we remained in the blissfully ignorant status quo of the past, bcz the ostracization from our own families/relations is unprecedented. Atheism is therefore a painful choice in our country, in our families who know no opinion that is not communally inclined. Our questions are termed as a work of the devil, or an influence of demons.
Your channel gives ones like us the validation that we crave for, amidst the name calling and demonization that we face. Please keep it up 💘
Yes exactly. Its called manipulation
Hey! Pranav, this video is absolutely fantastic. You have really explained everything with such simplicity...great job as always :)
Absolutely fantastic video! You really explained this with such simplicity. I’ve attempted it before but I don’t think I’ve managed to do the topic as much justice as you have. Awesome work!
Amazing video man! The way you explained things in such a simple and well thaught out manner is really appreciated. Keep it up my guy! 👍👍👍
That intro alone 👏🏿
"Your beliefs are your own"
Live and let live people
yup that what we should do....religion should be a personal thing...why to force on other
Brilliant content pranav!
We need more people like you!
Keep up the good work❤️
Your videos are awesome. And specially this one is a masterpiece. I don't know how to prove this scientifically but after learning history, philosophy and the nature of science, i can say this empirically. 😃
I seriously appreciate the efforts you put in for making people aware about scientific thinking. I hope this reaches to many people and they learn how to think.
One of the most underrated channel. Rooting for you because hey science is dope and everyone should witness the grandeur of pursuit of knowledge.
You're undoubtedly the best UA-camr in India. You have no idea how relieved I am to know that there are people like you here. You explained scientific method awesomely.
Hey Pranav,great and quality work.
A worthy Indian creator in science and other areas.
And yes we got very same taste!
What can be claimed without proof can be denied without proof.
😂😂😂 nice man
Science is something that allow something to make it false ,
Whereas religions said something to be true and you can't question it ! .
That's the thing that make science trustfull ! .
That's why humanity becoming advance by adopting science ! .
Salute to this man . For a very long time I had certain questions in my mind your videos give me idea and new perspective to look at them in a logical way. Thankyou.
10:56
No offense but the monkey model has already been labelled as wrong and is denied in Scientific Communities. They use a different type of evolutionary model which is similar to an horse on how we evolved (Not saying we are related to horses).
Love you Videos and appreciate your work man. India really need some lecture on Science.
Yes you are right
That model is misleading
Because it portraits evolution as a level up process but evolution is a branching process
@@Chopped_Liver Yup, the branching model. I forgot the name and thanks for the reminder.
Yeah it's kinda misleading
Source?
@@sniper74839 it's in every Bio book
Thanks Pranav. I learned a lot from your videos. I am a math teacher but unfortunately can't share these videos with my students.
@Dalit Shiv the parents of the students maybe religious and he most important thing "WE ARE IN INDIA" and yk what it means
Been waiting for someone to post this video for a longtime. Now finally during any argument about athiesm all I need to do is to send link of your videos. Me as a person who believes in science and nature is fed up of people alienating me.
Very well put Pranav. I believe there is place for belief in God. Life has this tendency to throw a curve ball and things can get so sad and miserable that only the belief in a higher power can give us hope, so that we can pull through. But organized religion though meh. It always comes in the garb of spreading love, but in reality is a tool to manipulate people emotionally for monetary gain.
Exactly, my thoughts
crisp and precise
I personally believe religion and gods as a source of morals and ethics which we must learn to impart in life, unless we consider it as a means to change our fortunes, treat our diseases or anything that involves contradicting with the practical things we are capable of doing ourselves.
Shout out to your efforts, but in criticism I want to say you lack perception, you have blocked your mind of any question which do not fall under scientific parlance and which don't come under evaluation of scientific method. theist and atheist both are same. philosophically i would say being skeptic is good and its even a natural human tendency but after some time it will make you tired because it will not lead you to all answers. science is just limited to physical aspect of universe. why someone wants to limit their thinking and prison themselves in smallness of logic and to scientific methods.
yes science has achieved many things but science knows nothing about origin or end of anything but explaining something which is in between, it is just revolving around circumference and not touching its core. science just consider physical aspect of life but what about emotional, consciousness and beingness of life itself, what about most fundamental questions of life like who am I or meaning of life. it is unable to answers them because its lacks clarity and perception beyond physical.
if you believe in science it would become a religion, if you limit yourself to just to some theories of science you are doing a crime towards human potential of brain. have scientific acumen but not like this otherwise being scientific would just be a ideocracy towards one's own self.
@@Rahul-Jain I agree, people like these believe in practical things which isn't wrong but are too one sided or very close minded regarding the other aspects of life. Science is limited only to the physical reality but can't fully explain everything about this material reality, science as a tool keeps changing or updating but I still don't think it will ever precisely answer how it all started & how or when it will end. They key here is to question everything but not criticize every single thing which is not scientifically answerable.
Amazing video man although one thing I am still not sure you said at last is true or not because interestingly I find many famous scientists who were or are religious like numerous not one or two, Aryabhatta, Ramanujan, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell,
Erwin Schrödinger, A.P.J Abdul Kalam, Vikram Sarabhai, Werner Heisenberg, Robert Boyle, Max Planck, John Dalton ,Carl Friedrich Gauss, J. J. Thomson, Manjul Bhargava, Christian Anfinsen 😅
And the list goes on & on. So it's difficult to conclude whether majority of scientists are atheist or not. As an atheist I would prefer that kind of thinking in all good scientists but at the end that's doesn't matter if they are contributing something good or revolutionary inventions whether they are theist or atheist. Awesome video keep making these kind of content love to see more of your content. 👍
We can also not deny that there are many scientists who are influenced by Upnishads and Tao te Ching.
@@Ritesh-pv4yi thanks man for sharing your point of view on this. could also suggest any of those research paper title or name I would love to read about that .
Being believing on religious god and believing on creator is quite diffrent thing .Mostly who believe on god is not about personal god or gods from scripture,they may believe on creator may be they are deist.
@Darshana Ambulkar thanks for providing info regarding royal society. Could you also share some reference link or page name for research paper I would like to read that. So basically you mean to say modern scientists are mostly agnostic or atheist. And about mentioning of past scientists well I mentioned those because Pranav also mentioned past scientists mostly in his video like Karl Sagan Stephan Hawkins, C.V Raman they are considered past only not current. 😅 If you define any specific era for scientists then I would have included that but anyway that doesn't matter.
Shout out to your efforts, but in criticism I want to say you lack perception, you have blocked your mind of any question which do not fall under scientific parlance and which don't come under evaluation of scientific method. theist and atheist both are same. philosophically i would say being skeptic is good and its even a natural human tendency but after some time it will make you tired because it will not lead you to all answers. science is just limited to physical aspect of universe. why someone wants to limit their thinking and prison themselves in smallness of logic and to scientific methods.
yes science has achieved many things but science knows nothing about origin or end of anything but explaining something which is in between, it is just revolving around circumference and not touching its core. science just consider physical aspect of life but what about emotional, consciousness and beingness of life itself, what about most fundamental questions of life like who am I or meaning of life. it is unable to answers them because its lacks clarity and perception beyond physical.
if you believe in science it would become a religion, if you limit yourself to just to some theories of science you are doing a crime towards human potential of brain. have scientific acumen but not like this otherwise being scientific would just be a ideocracy towards one's own self.
This channel is gold! So glad I came across it 🙌🏻
What about the great Ramanujan? CV Raman, Aryabhatta , Abdul Kalam etc? Not all scientists were atheists. Including great sages like shrushruta.
God word was dedicated for tathagat ☑️
Science is the logical analysis of the items existing in this creation based on only one authority that is perception (Pratyaksha Pramanam). Even in the ancient logic, all the authorities (Pramanas) are based on perception only. You see the fire giving smoke. This is deduction or perception. When you see the smoke coming from a distance and do not see the fire, you say that fire exists there and this is induction or inference (Anumana Pramanam). But this induction is based on your previous deduction only. Somebody says to you that fire gives smoke. If that person is your dearest, you believe it and infer the fire from the smoke. This is authority of word ‘Shabdha Pramanam’.
Though you have not seen the fire, your dearest person has seen the smoke coming from fire. Like this all the authorities are based on perception only. I do not find any scripture of any Religion, which contradicts the experience of perception. There are four ways of authority. 1) Sruthi, which is the original scripture. 2) Smrithi, which is the commentaries of Scholars on the original scripture. 3) Yukthi, the logical analysis based on deduction, induction etc., 4) Anubhava, the experience based on the perception of the items in this world, which may be direct or indirect. Out of these four ways, the fourth way is the most powerful. If anything contradicts the fourth way, that is not valid or it may be a misinterpretation based on misunderstanding of the Sruthi or Smrithi or Yukthi. Thus Science and Philosophy are not separate. The very frame of the spiritual knowledge is Science only. Thus Science is the basic foundation and over all underlying structure of all the Scriptures.
A true Scientist should always stand on the perception and should not deny the experience derived by perception. If he denies, he is not a scientist. All top most scientists were philosophers and spiritual people only. Those scientists have travelled along the river of Science and reached its end, which is the ocean of spiritual knowledge called as philosophy. Philosophy is pervading all the branches of Science. Every branch of Science gives Ph.D as the final degree. Ph.D means Doctor in Philosophy. If Science and philosophy are different,why this word philosophy is regarded so much by all the branches of science ? Philosophy means the essence of knowledge of every branch that is experienced when one reaches at the end of branch.
Therefore, the spiritual knowledge, which is the ocean, is the Philosophy in which all branches of Science and all the Religions merge and loose their identity. A scientist who has not reached the end of Science and who is still traveling in the river only denies the existence of the ocean, since he is still perceiving the limiting boundaries of his knowledge - river. Such river-travelers are called as atheists.
I just love the flowcharts and those random video of pranav in between doing experiments 😂😂😂
Hi Pranav great video as always.
Please make a detailed video on Adam's bridge.
This is such a good video. It explains what makes something scientific or unscientific with such simplicity, so that anyone can follow it.
Thank you! I'm glad you liked it :)
@@scienceisdope And I am glad you exist, lol.
You mentioned Bertrand Russell's flying teapot analogy. Impressive. 👍🏻
The last "why do most people believe in god?" , I was literally thinking about this today and giving the answers to myself as same as what you told in this video.
And In most cases caste/ religion leading to war , discrimination and oppression.🤕
Nice video 👏 keep your work up man. It's needed 💯
Lenin ,stallion ,mao they were not rigious than why they massacred million of people's ?
@@kapilbisht1811 Lenin, Stalin, mao aren't religious but they were strongly dictated with some other ideology. Blind faith in any means is bliss in ignorance!!
being atheistic doesn't mean you're good in all ways and having pure heart. In fact, there are people who do more harm to others indirectly in name of some metaphysical indoctrination.
Being theist doesn't mean you're cruel and becoming atheist doesn't mean you're an empath.
It has all to do with ignorance.
@@aarthiramesh4584 thts exactly m saying ,just bcz u said religious people do discrimination so I replied ,
Nd yeah but religious people stuck with their religious doctrine,nd it's all about peace nd love
@@kapilbisht1811 yup! 👍
'You hurt my sentiments by saying that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist , do you have 'meatballs' to prove that it doesn't exist ?'
That's some great content right here. I sent this on my family whatsapp group, now I'm not a part of the family group.
Tomorrow this video is going to be more interesting after looking at the comments of religious people. Damn 🔥
Edit- We already watched the video yesterday.
Lol 3 hours to go!
Good precaution against Sadguru fans' whataboutery in thumbnail🤣
@@scienceisdope yess
Glad that you put Meghnad Saha in the Thumbnail. He is one of the most underrated Scientists of India.
Thank you , Pranav ji. Please keep doing this great work. It is very much needed. :)
0:26 why the second image is censored
I'm so glad your channel is getting recognition it deserves 👏, finally we might get a community of rationalist
Bro what about newton, Einstein, tesla, ramanujan, Galileo and various other great scientists....
@DELTA DEFENCE Einstein was Tesla was agnostic Galileo was charged with false accusations of calling earth round by jews back then Newton belived in Christianity but he is over 600 years old ramunjan never opened much on religious topic but he did say he worship maths more then anything
Old time
Justice by popes in church
You deny the existence means you are reincarnation of Satan
Then death sentences
I'll recommend the book "Pale Blue Dot - A vision of the human future in space"
Bro the last section of your video reminded me of "sapiens" by yuval noah harari! He also gave a nice explanation of the emergence of this idea of god. BTW, as always amazing video from your end i have shared it to my theist friends and relatives but am sure they'll skip it just after a min or so :))
Fav book 💘
This I feel is your best work so far. Delightful content.
When I saw the censored written, I thought "oog intersting, wonder whose religious symbol is controversial". Later realised it was my own religion, lol.
Where?
@@SomethingaboutScreens Next to Jesus
0:26 which one is that censored religion?
Might be Islam idk
Very well explained 👏, though I had been using many similar arguments to explain, it was never as structured and content full.
Hey Pranav. I am a mix between agonist with a touch of religious due to social obligations (because of a religious mathematician's theory that on the 1% chance that hell is real, its better to be on the safe side). What I believe doesn't matter. I am here to ask you about what do you think about Ian Stevenson's research which was sent to me by an atheist friend regarding whether reincarnation is real through a scientific falsifiable statement and concluded that it is true. This may prove that reincarnation may be true but doesn't prove whether god exists or not so my beliefs are unchanged. But what would you say about its scientificness?
Little knowledge is dangerous bro, Buddhist doesn't consider Lord Buddha as Creator God nor they think there is any creator Capital GOD , who created this world .According to Buddhism every phenomenon arises due to various cause and effects.
Little knowledge of science makes you an atheist
But in depth of knowledge makes you beleive in god
You got deep knowledge?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 dinosaur 🦕
Great content. Glad there are people all over the world spreading this message.
Thia video is so nicely made, well done. Just a slight correction though, the spellings of atheist and theist are wrong in the thumbnail.
Make this video viral
This is the basic things some Indians need to learn
The statement that God works in a mysterious way is unfalsifiable as - if we decode the way then the mystery is decoded and then they will bring on more and more example to decode and will say these are the ones which are able to decode but there are some which we cannot decode
I'm very glad to have this channel, because when i try to explain people something who are fed up with the things and gone crazy about unscientific stuffs. They usually like to call me a mad 🤦 even i don't care about that, i tried to do good for their emotions about worrying for illogical things 🤦.
Awesome video Pranav. Keep up the good work!
Love The medical doctor touch at the end, as always you rock with your content
But it seems like you've toned down the amount of comical sketches in your videos which i used to like. But this might reach more people as you said on the podcast
Hey Man great video 🔥 following your channel for a long time. I had some questions though.
I'm an agnostic with some bias towards the belief in theism.
You very well explained the scientific method and Karl Poppers theory of falsifiability.
There are some serious issues which you didn't discuss specially epistemology and specifically Philosophy of Science, like the two views in science 1) Scientific Realism 2) Scientific Instrumentalism - which proposes that science is useful and instrumental for understanding reality but doesn't give 100% accurate representation of reality.
There are some presuppositions in science that can't be proven like
1) Science presumes naturalism.
2) The Scientific Method can't prove itself to be objectively true (here's why we need philosophy).
3) Reliability of the human mind (you basically have to believe and can't be proven from first principles)/ Evolutionary Reliabilism and limits of human senses to conclude empirical evidence as the only form of information to be true.
If we assume that life started from non-concious chemical matter after reacting with each other. We literally can't prove how can non-concious matter give rise to concious living beings. In a perfectly naturalistic worldview it's impossible for anyone to prove that the human mind can truly understand and observe nature as it is not 100% reliable to comprehend reality, i.e. proving Evolutionary Reliabilism to be true from first principles is next to impossible.
Science is great for building models that work, innovation and technology, advances in medicine, etc.
When it comes to the topic of God its better to argue philosophically rather than scientifically (limited to proving unscientific claims in religious scriptures).
I was a huge fan of Richard Dawkins but philosophy made me understand where he was wrong and where Atheist philosophers like Daniel Dennete were correct.
What gives me a bias of there being a creator is the Argument of Existence of A Nessecary Being who is eternal because if the universe had a beginning the universe can't really be eternal. Multiverse is another but a pseudoscientific theory which lacks evidence. Believing in Multiverse is simply an alternative to Believing in a Single Creator who is eternal.
Thank you looking forward towards your next videos✌️.
@Darshana Ambulkar all the refutations have their own issues and they too have been refuted.
Science from an epistemological level and an empirical level can't even prove Evolutionary Reliabilism.
As for refuting the argument of a necessary being you will always fall either into the fallacy of infinite regress or into the belief that the universe is eternal, as for the later we have enough evidence that the universe had a beginning and is not eternal.
The more you go deep into philosophy and the more you will realise why the argument for an eternal necessary being makes so much sense. Hence my bias towards it but still am an agnostic.
@Darshana Ambulkar Sure, caricatures of Aquinas' arguments have been utterly demolished. State your counter argument against the argument from motion and please do not start with the pseudo-premise everything that has a beginning is set in motion. Also, don't ask who caused God(It is meaningless to assert that something actualize pure actuality)?
@@galibjamadar129 No, we don't know that the universe has a beginning. GR breaks down when you approach the primeval atom. The universe could still be eternal. We don't know. That is a common misconception about the big bang.
"Scientists tend to be Atheists" but some scientists of India supported pseudoscience. I've heard a video in which Dawkins was saying that there was a Biologist who believed evolution never happened and life on earth started 5000 years ago.
And people use these scientists as authoritative figures to justify their pseudoscience. A lot of noble-prize winner scientists used to believe in pseudo-science and people used to justify it as authority of science.
Govt should provide a option of Non-religious
Atheist, agnostic,
Humanity etc also.
Great content! Simply asking out of curiosity 'the universe exist' is it a falsifiable statement?
That's a great question. All science and philosophy is fundamentally based on the assumption (axiom) that our senses provide us reliable data. The existence of universe is considered self evident based on this axiom. and so, If the universe didn't existed, we wouldn't have been able to experience it.
Honestly, I believe that religion and science are two different things, and should be treated as such.
Science is explanation of reality, if God's existence is false by science then it simply means it doesn't exist
To whoever replied, please send ur comment again. I cannot see it cuz utube is shit
This was a good content... Pranav, just a small suggestion: This video covered the topics very well, but it is only good for pseudoscience enthusiasts... I mean, people who think they are rational...cuz there is a very important point you missing in your all videos, I might tell you in somewhere else, not here in comment section ...but that's very important.
Have a great day, keep making such videos, it was very helpful :)
what is the point exactly???
I guess he is trying to convey the idea to target a more general audience. He is saying that pranav should focus to target normal believers, rather his target audience is rational thinkers. And that's a very good approach. Presenting the idea in such a way, making the viewer to rethink on his beliefs and what myths they developed. Making people question their ideas and then making them realize that they were wrong. Pranav does most of it but some improvement will help him to get better.
@Neeraj ya I have experience the same thing when I tried to debate with my friends on this topic. They ignore any logic and state that god is beyond logic and senses. But i feel this mindset is a problem. Let me explain
e.g If a child is born in religious environment. When he gets 3 he starts asking questions about existence and how things work. He asks for sun formed his family replies god made it. He asks more question but answer stays the same god. Then he suddenly gains infinite knowledge as answer to every question is God . He is no more curious as he already knows the answer. And he loses the scientific temperament. If this happens with enough large population he lose a large amount of great thinkers, scientists etc. I think this is a major problem and we should create a counter to it.
Very informative video. Is it possible to add Hindi subtitles as well for this video to be shared more?
Hi Pranav, you are doing a wonderful job, in a country which is filled with blind beliefs which are sometimes potentially dangerous ! Your videos are eye opening which throw light on realities ! Well done! Keep going!
I'm making my family to sit and watch this video. I'm from a Bengali family that has the culture of reading great works of literature, I grew up seeing my mom and dad always reading something, so I naturally developed a hobby of reading books but being a science enthusiast by book shelf only consisted of non fictions like "A Brief History of Time", "The Origin of Species" and many more. I later became an atheist after reading some of these books and my book shelf later was joined by books like "The God Delusion", "God is Not Great" and so on. My family never had any problems with me being an atheist..
Don't force 'em, the intention of the video is not to sermonize atheism or question others beliefs
Bro you have 1st edition on "The origin of species" ?
@@deathstroke9944 I'm not forcing anyone or asking them to change their beliefs... I only will insist them to watch this video to let them know when an idea or statement is called scientific...
The fact that The One Above All from Marvel comics made the list of gods😭
This video is superb....as most of your videos are!! Kudos and keep it up!!.
Amazing explanation! Amazing work Pranav. Love from BANGLADESH
A scientist can be theist , atheist , agnostic etc based on his personal experience and choice ,but I think , science is agnostic .
And also , what are your views on buddha , his teachings , philosophy of buddhisam and relationship between buddhisam and india's only golden period during buddhisam before falling down.??.
true
Science and laws should remain secular.
From a Christian.
You are asking his views on Buddhism. As if he is practicing Buddhist?
I just want to say that you are doing a great job. Your videos kind of turned me from an extremist to somewhat agnostic
No... You should remain an agnostic atheist. Not a plain agnostic, not an extremist atheist.
@@scienceisdope Hey Man great video 🔥 following your channel for a long time. I had some questions though.
I'm an agnostic with some bias towards the belief in theism.
You very well explained the scientific method and Karl Poppers theory of falsifiability.
There are some serious issues which you didn't discuss specially epistemology and specifically Philosophy of Science, like the two views in science 1) Scientific Realism 2) Scientific Instrumentalism - which proposes that science is useful and instrumental for understanding reality but doesn't give 100% accurate representation of reality.
There are some presuppositions in science that can't be proven like
1) Science presumes naturalism.
2) The Scientific Method can't prove itself to be objectively true (here's why we need philosophy).
3) Reliability of the human mind (you basically have to believe and can't be proven from first principles)/ Evolutionary Reliabilism and limits of human senses to conclude empirical evidence as the only form of information to be true.
If we assume that life started from non-concious chemical matter after reacting with each other. We literally can't prove how can non-concious matter give rise to concious living beings. In a perfectly naturalistic worldview it's impossible for anyone to prove that the human mind can truly understand and observe nature as it is not 100% reliable to comprehend reality, i.e. proving Evolutionary Reliabilism to be true from first principles is next to impossible.
Science is great for building models that work, innovation and technology, advances in medicine, etc.
When it comes to the topic of God its better to argue philosophically rather than scientifically (limited to proving unscientific claims in religious scriptures).
I was a huge fan of Richard Dawkins but philosophy made me understand where he was wrong and where Atheist philosophers like Daniel Dennete were correct.
What gives me a bias of there being a creator is the Argument of Existence of A Nessecary Being who is eternal because if the universe had a beginning the universe can't really be eternal. Multiverse is another but a pseudoscientific theory which lacks evidence. Believing in Multiverse is simply an alternative to Believing in a Single Creator who is eternal.
Thank you looking forward towards your next videos✌️.
@@scienceisdope Shout out to your efforts, but in criticism I want to say you lack perception, you have blocked your mind of any question which do not fall under scientific parlance and which don't come under evaluation of scientific method. theist and atheist both are same. philosophically i would say being skeptic is good and its even a natural human tendency but after some time it will make you tired because it will not lead you to all answers. science is just limited to physical aspect of universe. why someone wants to limit their thinking and prison themselves in smallness of logic and to scientific methods.
yes science has achieved many things but science knows nothing about origin or end of anything but explaining something which is in between, it is just revolving around circumference and not touching its core. science just consider physical aspect of life but what about emotional, consciousness and beingness of life itself, what about most fundamental questions of life like who am I or meaning of life. it is unable to answers them because its lacks clarity and perception beyond physical.
if you believe in science it would become a religion, if you limit yourself to just to some theories of science you are doing a crime towards human potential of brain. have scientific acumen but not like this otherwise being scientific would just be a ideocracy towards one's own self.
@@scienceisdope you are not atheist??
So the last part of your video is completely wrong would u like me to send you studies that say otherwise ?
What do you think about Carl Sagan,and openheimer
Please don't use this 10:56 picture for Theory of evolution, it's false, it makes people think that we have evolved from monkeys/chimps, whereas theory states that humans and chimps had a common ancestor. Please use the correct picture where evolution is shown as tree branches. BTW, i like your videos, keep posting amazing videos. Thanks.
How about this. Suppose your general statement is all leaves are green. And this has been accepted by the world. But somehow someone was able to find a brown leaf and now that brown leaf is gone. How does that someone convince the world of the wrong that is there in the general statement ?
Basically the evidence was short-lived. How do u resolve something like this ?
Also i am a physics student so not trying to embarrass you. Just a question 😁
Love u btw
So in this case I'd personally say that the evidence of the original statement being false would not be considered valid, considering a very small group of people or just one person had actually observed that evidence. In the eyes of the rest of the world they have no reason to believe the guy,even if he's telling the truth. The truth will only be accepted when the observation of the evidence would be broadcasted to the authorities of the world, and that's how it should be in my opinion since that prevents any form of false truth being believed in the field of science. The only downside to this method is that the development would be slower, but if it makes the facts obtained accurate then it's a right decision.
Edit:- Also wanted to say that was a really good question. Well done! It's so cool that you're a physics student. I myself am in high school rn.
@@antagonisticalex401 yeah my profs also said something similar. Thanks dude
Counter example for simulation -
We must be able to see the glitches in the simulations too
9:30 In the video, you say "can" while the text on screen says "may". That caused a lot of confusion for me.
Same
This is the basic things that all indian school system should have taught before teaching science
I found that, after studying science so many of indian student who learned science are just making non-sense claims
I just get infuriate seeing these people
Disclaimer: I am an atheist myself.
This concept of unfalsibiality is really a good way to keep actual science from pseudo science but I think now science has developed so much that if we falsify one theory we may need to change many things across different domains. Since everything is interconnected. Let's take an example of law of gravitation which you showed. Now it is accepted that gravity is not a force but an illusion due to curvature of space time.we still use newtonian gravitational theory many times while talking about gravity but it is now falsified by general relativity.
I think we might need to rephrase our definition of scientific🤔 but what even I am not sure.
Newtonian theory of gravitation, though technically incorrect is pretty darn accurate in terms of numbers for the most part. This combined with the fact that it is already what an average person without much knowledge of physics, finds difficult to understand, relativity isn't something that you can explain to the masses, justifies using the Newtonian theory.
Newton's laws are falsified laws for sure. But it's still perfectly applicable for all earthbound mechanics and very barely differs from the results from relativity. So of course we would teach it in schools because it's much simpler than relativity.
But no scientist actually pursues Newton's models today. Because we have better models
A heart from science is dope 😁
Yes I agree with that newton gravitational theory is still a very good approximation
You even use newtonian mechanics in engineering...
Hello Pranav massive fan of yours,
Please make a video on the topic of moon landing and the theories around it. Would appreciate it
Dear brother, please reduce the volume of background sound or mute it as it is dominating your voice and not allowing to understand some words.
Can't wait for this video.. You're doing awesome work man!
Thank you!
@@scienceisdopeExpose bhageshwar dham sarkar....
Finally something to send to family members when they ask me why I an Atheist!!!
@DELTA DEFENCE I am Atheist because Hinduism didn't treat me equally .
Most Atheist are dalits who were discriminated. You guys want to keep Dalit in Hinduism and continue to discriminate
Tell your family to turn on TV. Current situation of country is enough to convince them
@DELTA DEFENCE you are wrong. I am not an atheist because it sounds cool, I am an atheist because based on facts presented to me I have come to conclude that there is no God and the other thing is even if there is a God I don't think I will worship that God as I have a lot of problems with organised religion itself.
And to the fact that I will pray when there's something horrible that happens to me or the people around me is also not true in my case as the pandemic years have not been that great for me or my family and I didn't turn to god but to doctors and medical professionals who can help me.
@@rudra20048 it's true religion just divides and divides people , they kill eachother for no reason
@DELTA DEFENCE people like you are immature and try to invalidate atheists everytime.
Just coz you did it to be cool doesn't mean everyone is like you .
Thanks youtube for recommending this video to me, hope this channel is going to be one of my favorite channels
Keep doing the good work...
there are very few like us who truly believes in science and not in rubbish myths that are forcefully embedded to us without any logical proof.
This truly sucks how people believe so easily and are manipulative rather than thinking of any logic behind it and questioning.
Also I found it a reason of good education as it truly enables us to questions instead of accepting everything.
ThankYou for making videos...
For me...both theist snd atheist are believe but agnosticm is fact..
agnostics are basically clueless and they are aware of it n admit it.
I'm an agnostic too but I disagree cuz agnosticism simply means "we don't know"
Being ignorant or confused about something is not a fact it's rather an attitude towards that thing.
@@Akira-dm3tj you do realise we are trying to find a definitive answer to the question of existence of creator...i mean just think how big and importance of this question...so answering it with your gut feeling that 'i believe' or 'i do not believe' in existence of god is pointless....i'm waiting for this qestion to be answered by science...as of now...our science is not that advance enough...and according to our current understanding of science....it neither claims or denies the existence of god cause it is not advance enough to answer this question yet...so the question is still unanswered...so i'm waiting for the day when science brings us a defintive answer....till then...the most logical thing is being clueless rather believing in something not proved yet....it is similar to question of existence of aliens....some believe they do exist and some don't...but scientists say that we don't know yet....that's exactly my point of view towards both god and aliens or any other question that is not answered by science yet..
atheism means the disbelief in god
it is not a belief that god doesn’t exist
@@hajimeisayama9842 this is ridiculous, if science was asked a question what happen before big bang it says it doesn't know!! That's a valid answer, you, me and every life are made up of atoms which produces consciousness, intelligence, the atoms produce because some of the fundamental of the universe contants the numbers are not accuarate (G, SPEED OF LIGHT ETC) from the time of the big bang till now we clearly observe the stars, black holes, quasers, planets, solar system doesnt have any particular purpose ,if our solar system die in this galaxy there is no special in that, with repeated stimulatary, observation we conclude that, similar does with evolution of life no particular animal is chosen to solve a particular problem, out evoltionary brain made understand this way since its easy to grasp, if natural selection force to do a carnivore to eat plant based good it has to do for its survival,( natural selection doesnt care about the pain and suffering of the organism )by the way natural selection is not deterministic, (only aplicable in forest based life not to humans living in present) it has no brain, to think, from this conclusion the god is not ominipotent, diestic , he is so good etc. He is not worth to prat doing rituals etc. Nobody can certainly say god existed or not but the evidence. Clearly shows he never existed, and it is growing stronger
Talking about evidence all the time, i like it. BTW what's your eligibility for doing analysis... Are you qualified enough to analyse any subject and provide right information ? Or are you just a youtube scientist ?
UA-cam scientists 😂
What is your opinion on UFO/UAP issue being currently being pursued in USA right now. Trained pilots have seen unconventional crafts flying over military establishments. Would love if you cover this topic. BTW I love your content. I will leave this same comment on your other videos to make it more visible. Thank you.
Pranav, you are amazing. I have been binge watching all your videos.
You are doing great job man. Happy to see you grow.
Pranav, check out Abhijit Chavda. He peddles revisionist history and claims that he it's based in science.
Wow! Amazing video! Loved it❤️❤️
Alot of times I don't agree with his out look but I have to say his videos are truly detailed. Kudos!
When I saw Zakir Naik on thumbnai, I knew I had to skip this bullsh*t.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has on record said that he is neither a theist nor an atheist but considers himself as an agnostic.
Which of course means that he is unsure of the presence of a higher being or God if u want to call it that way.
Many popular atheist activists define "Atheism" as "not believing in god's existence" .
So it includes both :
1) Agnostic atheists (who dont believe because they dont know due to the lack of belief)
2) Gnostic atheists (who believe in god's non-existence)
Universities of philosophy like Stanford includes this definition as "psychological state" .
Words get their meaning by their popularity .
I really dont care even if tomorrow if Neil D Tyson surprisingly starts believing in god and becomes a theist, but atleast for now , by the above definition he can be called as agnostic atheist. Even then if he doesnt wanna be identified as an atheist. Fine ! Let it be . Who cares .
@@Ritesh-pv4yi All agnostic atheists are by default agnostic about a deist god. A non deistic god would've revealed himself in some material form.
@@sai_69 Agnostic atheism is basically that you don't know if a god exists because of lack of positive evidence so you live your life as an Atheist
Material forms don't need the concept of supernatural or God to be explained. A deistic God comes into picture because of the necessity to explain why is there something rather than nothing . Read the mathematician Leibniz on this. He was a brilliant philospher who believed in a deistic God, someone who is outside of material realm i.e. space, time and energy.
I just found your channel at 50k subs. Can't wait for when you get huge. 😊
Ah man! It will be criminal if we didn't liked this video. Great video Pranav, kudos for your effort.
Ohh no ... I become a criminal...pls don't send me in jail 😆😅😂🤣🤣🤣🤣