Neither Atheism Nor Theism Are Closer To The Truth (Here's Why) | Lex Fridman and John Vervaeke

In this video, we cover:

- The definition and implications of non-theism.
- How non-theism challenges the common ground between atheism and theism.
- The role of sacredness and meaning in non-theistic traditions.
- Insights into the views of Jordan Peterson and Jonathan Pageau on theism and non-theism.
- The philosophical and spiritual underpinnings of non-theistic beliefs.

[StormShadow]

I think if I were a Protestant or a Muslim I might be disturbed by this exchange but it seems to me that traditional Christianity has been thinking along these lines since the very beginning. It's very cool and refreshing that we can bridge the gap of understanding. I'm sick to death of dealing with shitty straw man conceptions I.E. flying spaghetti monsters and sky daddies

[jonmustang]

Can we all just go with "non duality" and be done with all this logical debate? I mean, from quantum physics to mystical and psychedelic experiences, the gist is all converging on a central epiphany: separation is not real.

The process of thinking in language creates the illusion of separation. This is because language is the system of naming different visual phenomenon which we could call "naming forms." Learning language is not a natural process. It's artificial and imposed on the mind when we were children. We are taught as children that different forms have different names and that "we" are a form as well (the body). It's actually NOT natural at all. The process of learning language creates a false belief that there are separate things which are called, 'tree' or 'person' or 'you' or 'me' -- strip away the illusion of language and non-separation (non-duality) is realized.

[peteraguilar]

After listening to this video and trying to be as charitable as possible, my disagreement with Mr. Vervaeke is that he seems to be using the philosophical definition of Atheism and not how Atheism is currently being used. Atheism is not the positive belief that no Gods exist. Atheism is the answer to one specific question: do you believe the claim that a God or Gods exist? If the answer is yes, then you are a Theist. If the answer is no, then you are an Atheist. I am an Atheist because so far no one has presented a God or Gods claim that meets its burden of proof. I have considered each claim based on its own merit, not because I already think "sacredness is to be understood as a personal being, that in some sense is the supreme being" as Mr. Vervaeke stated.

[irodjetson]

His proposition of Theism is not the Catholic position neither the Orthodox one. You have a category problem in English that we don't have in the Latin and Greek traditions, the word being in our language has two distinctions the essence of being and the essential act of being have different words for it, then existing is just being somewhere and something. The category problem John gives is maybe one of modern protestants maybe but not a problem in apostolic churches, we all know God in his essence is only known to himself because he is the cause of beings that ex-ist, so he transcends our categories, it's is through the person of Christ (God incarnate) that we get a down to earth personal revelation of that apofatic God, but God in essence is still beyond our creaturly understanding, we can only grasp what he allows us to participate in, the modes and degrees of being in which he lets us "be".

[Username]

"Nontheism" is simply another term for atheism. They are identical. They interviewee does not understand atheism and is misrepresenting a term they do not understand. An atheist is any person who is not a theist. IT is a complementary position to theism.

[Amor_fati.Memento_Mori]

This is not the position of most people who call themself atheist, including myself have.

Please have *Alex O Connor* in the show.

[ZenWithKen]

Atheism isn't a truth position, it is the denial of a truth position.
Theist: There is a god.
Atheist: I don't believe you.

[KendallKelly]

I love hearing these people come on these shows and telling everybody what atheists believe. Atheism is a non-belief. Stop telling everyone what atheists think. Because you don't know. All of these things that he's talking about here at the beginning about what an atheist believes, I don't! I'm an atheist. I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't have the beliefs he's saying atheists have. It's just a straw man over and over and over and over. Atheism is only not having a belief. That's it. While some atheists may have a belief that there isn't a god, I don't... these internet discussions are so freaking tiring.

[oliverjamito]

Beloved many my new minds in inner CITIES don't sleep without rest days and nights! Beloved put seeds upon their hands!

[johnstones]

Define words the way you want them to be understood. Use those words to show that something is true. Simple.

[blablacar]

I don't get it... Atheism is the rejection of a claim. By his logic, every time I give an answer to a proposal I share the same presuppositions...

[elguapochango]

I realize this is just a clip so maybe I’ve missed something but he’s not making any sense to me. I never got past his first premise because it made no sense.

[NicholasWilliams-ukxu]

I don't think that code runs. No being = No being. It can't be in the world and not have being (that doesn't make sense).

[ADude-fz]

Teaching, learning, and sharing do not need to be sporting events.

[mosesgarcia]

The Ground of Being can also manifest as a Being: Jesus Christ.

[rayleonard]

I'm an atheist, and tbh, science has a better understanding of what life is already

[jessewallaceable]

I am so grateful you are giving a platform for actual philosophy. Verveke is an actual philosopher, as in he is credentialed and works in the field.
The big takeaway from this conversation is that is is unclear what Jordan Peterson is. To that I could not agree more.

[johnandrews]

“Classical theism of the early church looks a lot like the non-theism.” It is the modern take on theology and philosophy which is perhaps problematic for Vervaeke.

[Vigula]

I don't understand how John imagines that God is a being from the point of view of the Christian faith when it is exactly the opposite. It's like he's rejecting a Theistic model that he imagines some believers in God possess when actually the majority don't. Surely he knows that that God is not a being from the Christian point of view? Classical or non-classical. He practically admits it at the end but places Jonathan in a category which he claims is not the norm when to Christians (Catholic and Orthodox Christians at least) it is the norm. Weird.
Perhaps he's been led by the way the subject is normally approached i.e. Does God exist? However, any real Christian should answer 'No', but He can enter existence.'

[ericb]

sort of. Theists call their presuppositions "god." Empiricists (which is often espoused by atheists) call their presuppositions "objectivity." These two presuppositions are themselves expressions of their shared idea that "humans are to know what is Real." When one makes the conscious effort to avoid such presuppositions, the result is to emphasize language as an "expression of human experience" rather than as a "revealer of Truth" and it often characterized by statements that, at first, appear paradoxical or self-contradictory. Several religious, notably Eastern, traditions have reached this conclusion, as has Western Philosophy now often expressed as "post-modernism" via the "linguistic turn." The most accessible of such philosophy is Pragmatism.