Transcript for:
Exploring Religion, Science, and Existence

I'm okay we were talking about uh religion and uh why we're here and how we how we came to be here before we even start um with the Rings sometimes people have their own preconceived notions that oh he must be a biker he must be this he might be that you are yeah okay give me rationale behind it and um the rationale no Aesthetics you just love the design yeah Aesthetics yes and the I love the weight on my fingers yeah Wicked and the bike you've got one of those those one of those nice hard because I didn't want to you know sometimes you bring up a certain stereotype and the person gets upset he's like I'm a teacher [Laughter] actually um you you can ask is it okay if he clips that mic on you sure so my name is Zan I'm ruie ruie ruie like Louie but with an R wicked wicked ruie so ruy you've spoken a bit about Islam and hopefully we'll uh we we'll come back to that but just out of interest um you're from the UK America no Portugal Portugal fantastic so seeing what's going on in the world at the moment and what you're hearing about Islam any misconceptions that come to your mind or any questions that you have at all I have I make no misconcept what I try at least I try to not not to make any any misconceptions and I definitely don't blame terrorism or whatever on a religion that's very interesting I blame I blame it I blame it on radicals that exist in every religion well in every culture actually okay fantastic what's helped you see things in a certain way because I've seen a lot of intelligent folk get you know um pigeonholed into believing that sort of thing or even falling in that rabbit hole you yourself are holding a view which we try to encourage people to do which is don't follow the adherence look at the religion don't judge the religion by the followers of the religion that that's just a thing I don't look at the religion I have my own beliefs or lack of um I look at people basically and there are good people everywhere in every religion in every non-religion everywhere everyone's everyone's basically different do you feel people good people and bad people everywhere do you do you feel that people judge you by the way you you look course of course they do and I just laugh I just laugh it off do you do you think that that contributes to you not want to repeat what you go through with other people well uh the best I can do is uh give them advice on how I deal with it which is basically if you don't like it there are whole lot of people to look at fair enough yeah fair enough so ruy ruy ruy so ruy um what is your current position about a creator of the cosmos uh well with the lack of evidence uh I trust in nature I believe I believe well not believe because there's no way yet um of knowing but uh I tend not to believe things without without actual proof So when you say proof are you talking about empirical Pro proof that you can touch empirical proof well I believe I trust in science basically trust in science science so if uh something has not been formulated by science yet you're inclined to disbelieve it I'm inclined not to disbelieve it uh I'm inclined to not believe it until I have proof of proof of it I'm doubtful and that proof would you say has to be empirical or you accept other proof like logical proofs philosophical proofs testimony proof is proof proof is proof brilliant fantastic because some people they try to use the word proof but they just go for empirical proof so the empirical well empirical proof will come uh soon sooner or later uh many of things that we have today as science were once magic yeah yeah yeah exactly so they were not empirical proof because uh technology or or process of thoughts uh we're not there we're not there yet to to reach the to reach those conclusions in fact even for example there are two principles that are somewhat popular like Einstein says moral questions moral questions is not something that science can answer or it claims to answer no so that's something there different different fields exactly moral morals are one thing science is different things spirituality is a whole a whole other different thing and also science explains the how but can't explain why that again is a subtlety that's also positive sometimes sometimes it can sometimes it can't I'll give you an example someday someday I trust it will so I'll give you an example because science relies on empirical empirical evidence more specifically induction yeah yeah and let's just say there's a cake that's baked and it's in the kitchen and somebody says using science prove to me why that create why that cake was made so you start you take out your your beer your bunson burner you set everything and then you take samples and everything yes a scientist will be able to tell you the composition of the cake they'll be able to tell you the nature of basically they they can tell me how it came to be not how it got there yes not why it's there and why can only be explained if I call my aunt and she comes and says oh I baked you that cake because you've done well in your studies this week exactly okay Wicked um so when it comes to science you do you believe in The Big Bang Theory steady state like where do you pitch your tent well I tend to believe I tend to believe Big Bang because currently it's the most plausible explanation but not a definite explanation yet okay and evolution you believe is a good working model yeah okay so when it comes to Islam and our belief in a God the reason why we say because we believe that Evolution Big Bang law of gravity whatever it is these are all mechanisms of course yeah and we believe you have mechanisms but we believe God is a creator of mechanisms that's why we don't yeah that's why we don't believe the two contradict what we say is God and the nature of things that is going into metaphysics and philosophy that's not something that science claims to answer and that's why we yet would science goes by induction things that you must experience or see and and and God by nature is something that you can't see yet yet that's my point so you believe that we can see God in the future I believe that that if there is a God someday yes we we might be able to see him like in person like in person some manifestation um something R ruy ruy ruy I would argue we already have the manifestation and the manifestation that I would argue using objective um criteria is design now there are certain objective like I know you've been given this argument um however certain objective designs for example the golden ratio yeah the golden ratio symmetry are objective ways that we can see beauty and design if I I would argue that that same design also has flaws and a perfect God would not create those flaws unpack that for me uh well um disease for instance no let's stick with the golden ratio the gold the the the gold subjective objective golden ratio okay so the golden ratio uh doesn't doesn't allow for some people in certain parts of the globe to to be as comfortable as other other people on the other side of the globe um it also gives you uh storms uh devast devastating earthquakes and and the such with in my view a perfect loving God who would create those wouldn't include that in the golden ratio okay this is we got solar flares that affect um people animals um you had which I do believe the the meteorite that that came came to be and and wiped the dinosaurs and a whole whole lot of other species and that was just one of the extensions that will someday happen again and wipe us all out that's for me it's more of a silver ratio not a golden ratio right so there's a few things that you brought in here I think you brought in the problem of evil here as well um no I didn't didn't bring evil because uh yeah evil evil is a is a concept evil evil evil is a a moral thing and it's different for we have about 8 billion people in in this planet and the concept of Good and Evil is probably you probably can have eight billion different concepts then why would you say a volcano or earthquake or these things that you mentioned to be um like the reason why you took it from gold to Silver obviously silver is less than gold so the examples that you've given me are examples of well the negative things otherwise you wouldn't have taken it down Sil isn't they are examples of a Not Perfect Design yeah but that's yeah but not perfect how though like a tornado why is that imperfect design I believe it's imperfect design uh according to to if it was created by a loving God but where is that criteria of a of a all loving God coming from when you say all loving you mean no love loving uh loving God that's loves but surely but surely you can be compat there can be compatibilism you can have a loving God but a loving God could also be doing things that seem negative to us or bad or whatever synonym you want to use um but there could be a reason for it and our reason or our understanding because our you know our entire scientific Endeavor relies upon induction which is the limited observations that we see in front of us yes so our limited observations today tell us that a tornado is committing destruction H but our limited observation is not telling us the positives that it is doing would you argue that there are positives that we may not know that's why we can't NE necessarily say that that's a negative I would agree uh I would agree that there might be positives but um a god that is all powerful that can create everything in a perfect way would create everything in a perfect way giving only positives and not negatives like why is that the criteria though why why is that why why why is not the baby one not the baby one we come to the baby that that is an example uh a tornado that just killed a newborn perfect God the loving God could could create somewhat somehow the same effect without killing that right okay so a few points to mention there our concept of God is we don't believe God is only all loving we believe he's the most kind the most merciful he is just and for justice and if we've got free will as well we believe in compatibilism as well that there's free will well Free Will and determinism yeah but a compatibilism of Free Will and determinism doesn't quite mix with me because if things are predetermined then how can we have free will no but it's the same with atheists because atheists have to pitch their tent somewhere whether it's free will whether it's determinism whether it's compatibilism that's why you you have your own schools of thought amongst atheism as well for me it's either one or the other or the other that's fine we'll come to that but here when you're saying that God is all loving we're saying that we believe God is just he is loving however just means that a bad punish a bad person or bad thing needs to be punished there has to be good there has to be bad and we believe this world to be a test and couped that with free will there is Choice there is consequences and we don't believe this world has been made to be perfect this is an assumption that we don't accept we believe the We Believe Paradise is perfect and when you go there there you can look at the um creation and stuff like and there you won't be able to find any flaws however in this world this assumption that because it's a perfect God therefore there needs to be a perfect uh creation we don't necessarily accept the Assumption what we say is this world has been created deliberately as a test therefore there are deliberate flaws that have been put in for example poverty killing murder these are negative things that have been put in to see how we will do away with these things and that is one of our tests in this world then with that I would argue if God is uh knows everything sees everything he already knows whether you're going to pass or fail that test so I don't see a reason why creat a world just for the test instead of just creating the the the paradise world no but there's the this is in the wisdom of God why he created us is only something that he can really answer and he does he says he's created us to get to know him to worship him to love him and that's another thing uh that sounds more like a narcissistic God creating creating people to worship me but this is based upon your understanding at the moment isn't it of course that remember you said even when it comes to Scientific principles scientific principles this is our understanding right now so that is your current understanding of God is a narcissistic God no it's not my current understanding of God my current understanding is because of all this I don't see being there being a god at least or at least not the the concept of an all loving all loving God because I did play Sims when I was a kid and I do remember how fun it was to leave him on a pool and let him drown m so so I I more inclined to believe that there are imperfect that if there is a God he would be an imperfect Gods with with emotions um someone like um the the Roman gods or the the Greek gods but why if God is perfect he must create perfect creation what's the link why is there a link why do we have to accept that link because no I I'm not saying that if he's if he's perfect he needs to create per he needs to create Perfection what I'm saying is if if he's loving he would not need to create suffering but then how does that how is that compatible with free will then because how determinism compatible with free will well that's uh that's the question of morality then isn't it that's what we'll have to go into and that's something even like that's that's one thing that's we we cannot we cannot know for sure we can have faith we can believe yes but we cannot know so we we don't know the mechanism mechanisms behind the compatibilism between determinism and free will like an analogy it's very difficult for people to give analogies of those things because because we don't know I cannot choose one answer or the other no but what I'm saying is that that doesn't like what that's something that somebody that believes in God doesn't believe in God both have to contend with that doesn't negate the existence of God no but it doesn't prove it either it doesn't it doesn't but that's that's exactly my point yeah but the but my point is slightly different my point is that if we have free will and those free will have consequences like a human being that has free will if you cross the road with your eyes closed you're going to get hurt yeah if you are you might get hurt well most likely most likely if you are in an area in which you've been warned that you know what this tornadoes come and you've been sitting that day with headphones in then you can't blame God for that that's why I'm saying but if you are in an area where you don't know what tornado is going to come that's not got nothing to do with Free Will and that's everything to do with God's creation that just came in and killed me without without warning but here's the difference between our theologies now why whereas you believe that when you die that's it everything ends we believe that I don't I don't believe I just don't know that's that's the issue don't know because I don't know anyone who went went to the other side and came back came back to say something right tell me how it was so at the moment do you believe in the afterlife at the moment I don't I don't believe or or don't believe I just don't know you're agnostic about it I don't know okay so whereas one person may say that uh of there is no after death once you die you die as Muslims we believe this world is finite so whereas people magnify the problems that happen in this world and they say oh God should have told you to protect you from that we say that look God not telling you doesn't necessarily mean that you've lost out because you have something called the Hereafter that we believe in that there's paradise and you will be rewarded for that action whereas somebody that doesn't believe in an afterlife and they believe all that there is is this world naturally they will assume that you've been wronged and if you die you know this is this is unfair yeah you've died in tornado and you didn't know and you know and that's why there's a concept in Islam as well that if a person is in a remote Village and they haven't known God no one's told them about God they're not going to be penalized for eternity in the Hellfire yeah um Islam has to have reached you in a pristine form not even in a distorted form as well and there are many cases in which there is in intervention of God but for people to say oh according to me that baby died and you know oh no terrible God is terrible we would say but why end the story there that baby when it passes away we believe that an innocent baby if it passes away goes straight to paradise it doesn't have to go through the trials and tribulations of this world so why did he come come into this world who that baby why so if he if if is born and immediately he if he's born he's here for let's say a year he gets leukemia he suffers he dies he makes his whole family friends suffer and goes straight to paradise because why did he come here yeah because coupling with free will you have something called cause and effect now if two people have intercourse and the sperm and the ovom they fertilize the child is going to come that's a natural consequence otherwise if a person so so you're telling me that there is that baby should should have never come come it was just a product of Free Will of two other people and because he should have never come he's immediately taken to Paradise I'm saying that couple both of them together the baby is a product of cause and effect however if we now go to the moral side of the argument about the fate of the baby I say the baby is going straight to paradise without going through the trials and tribulations of this world so there he did go through the Char and tribulations of this world not necessarily he went he if if uh one old got leukemia through through his whole life he suffered and without any need for that what you talking about a baby or an infant now a baby or an infant whatever yeah so a child that's got leukemia again it's through cause and effect if you're living in an area in which there are loads of well I don't want to go into conspiracy theories but certain you know waves or whatnot in certain areas you're more likely to get cancer forget forget leukemia uh tree fall falls down falls down on a kid yeah so if a tree falls down on a kid again I can't second guess God but with the limited understanding that I have the boy will now be a test for the parents how are the parents going to live grieving of the child are they going to lose hope or are they going to appreciate that look God gave us this gift God took it away you know us to bear with patience and those parents that have lost a child like for example without go becoming sentimental certain things that I've gone through if I hadn't gone through uh ru I wouldn't be able to resonate with other people that have gone through it I I I I I get that and and that's why those parents will I think be better equipped to help those people suffering but why does the child a human being has to be an instrument for for from God and suffer through through through throughout his existence just so the parents can learn a lesson or something it doesn't make sense to me because we don't accept this notion of suffering as a principle of morality it's not a principle of morality a it is it is a fact it's called the harm principle the the kid suffer the kid exists the kid suffers and he ends up just being an instrument for for the parents to to learn something let me just complete this point yeah so us utilizing the harm Principle as the be all and end all of morality is not something that we entertain we say ultimately whether something is harmful or nonh harmful for example going to the gym yeah person goes to the gym oh you know my biceps are aching and this and that your trainers you shut your mouth you're coming tomorrow we're doing triceps tomorrow buddy boy I'm speaking like H Hogan because you give me some H Hogan Vibes I get it so in that sort of sense that we when you go to the har principal then a person's juggling like oh it's never hit a woman you can never hit a woman but then that match that took place in the Olympics where one person uh is considered a man because of the chromosomes another was considered a woman and again like if a woman's transition into a man can you now beat her up in a boxing ring if there's a referee there and you get do you see so we we don't say that the harm principle that can be manipulated by circumstances by people is the criteria and the be all and end all I know in certain philosophical and Theological discussions they do bring the harm principle but what we say is that Theology and what God says and what God has revealed which again we can go into the evidences about scripture and the likes we say that is a better criteria than the harm principle which can be manipulated and changed by people and they thinking as as well so as a harm principle we think that the baby's being hurt yes but the overwhelming pleasure that they that the baby will receive there after outweighs the harm for example if we're having an arm wrestle yeah you're harming me but if I beat you if you beat me that bit of harm compared to the overwhelming amount of pleasure that we gave and consent and this and that so many principles we're okay with that sort of stuff but here the only thing is that because of our limited understanding oh that baby seems like he's suffering or that person they're suffering and because we somebody May believe that the world ends there and there then that's it you know we believe that they've been wronged however when they see the pleasures of the Hereafter and they realize that that person is going to get multiple manifolds reward and pleasure and you know what they want thereafter then you're saying okay on balance and probability of everything it's fair enough like it makes sense still I don't see why with with that concept I don't see why there needs to be a a a test world and a paradise World why not there just be a paradise world but Ruby the the question Still Remains there also the default the thread of a question throughout the whole thing just because that issue of yours is there I don't I don't understand and because I don't understand but that doesn't disregard without that doesn't disprove God no it doesn't but doesn't prove it prove it either I didn't use it as an Evidence of God exactly so that's that's that's all I'm saying yeah until that it doesn't disprove God yeah no no no no until the day I see yeah that there is there is a proof in yeah I just remain doubtful okay that's all that's all would you say let me take you through a similar thought experiment it's called the contingency argument yeah this is a philosophical argument existence classified or put in three yeah a dependent existence an independent existence and an impossible existence yes would you say that there are any other existences that I've missed out probably not okay so the a dependent existence philosophically is characterized in three things it cannot cease to exist it uh sorry a dependent existence can cease to exist can be any other way and is composed in Parts yeah and a independent existence cannot cease to exist is not composing of parts and cannot be any other way and the third one is an impossible existence like a squared Circle yeah that we can park for now so bearing these two existences in mind would you say that the universe is dependent or independent and yourself in the universe is dependent or independent I got told I don't know okay yourself let's start with yourself are you dependent or independent I I myself am dependent and let's say you depend on oxygen I depend on a lot of things a lot of things and those things one example is one example is oxygen yes is that dependent or independent oxygen oxygen is dependent everything is dependent okay fantastic now here's the question ruie even the Creator if it exists but here's the thing let's not jump the gun so you depend on that thing that depends on that thing that depends on that and if you go on add infinum that doesn't necessarily make sense because Infinity doesn't exist in the real world as we know it yeah now here's the question you have a starting starter Point yes that's that's your case no my case is that you cannot have an infinite regress of dependent things for us to exist in this world there has to be an end to that chain a necessary existence exactly do you accept that there is an end to that chain yes called necessary existence okay so that necessary existence what do you characterize it as what what characteristics do you think it has it can be nature it can be uh Creator okay I don't know okay let's let's continue would you agree with me that that necessary existence is independent yes has to be has to would you agree with me that that necessary exist has immeasurable power I wouldn't know about power I would I would go about uh let me Chain Reaction let me break it down for you then if we depend on something that thing has more energy than us so the thing that you depend upon has more energy think things can go on on on chin reactions this is this is actually a scientific and a philosophical principle allow me to give you a few examples for example a human being yeah plants animals no matter how big the tree is no matter how big the elephant or the hippopotamus is it relies upon the sun yeah the sun has immense amount of energy and power only on the sun relies on a whole lot of other things yeah nuclear fion we don't get into the kind of quantum mechanics of things it's the same even with battery yeah if battery or fuel your car relies upon fuel so so that fuel needs to have more energy than the car otherwise the car can't function so if you have all of these things depending on the necessary existence all of it for its energy and its survival then surely that necessary existence has to have immeasurable power to keep everything going make sense fantastic now here's the thing that's a bit contentious bear with me the third thing that I would argue that the necessary existence should have is will yeah no but that's why I said bear with me exactly I'm bearing with you because I knew I knew yeah so here's where I would say would have will because we are contingent beings in other words we could have been any other way so our arm could have been you know hair nose could have been hair or you're going to talk me about you're going to tell me about design no just bear with me bear with me so when it comes to will will is indicative of a choice being made yes the M fact that this what we see around us came at one moment and not another moment indicates intentionality for example an analogy a painter who's sitting down who at the moment doesn't know what he's painting when an idea comes to mind he puts his paintbrush to the canvas and that's now the beginning of his painting but more importantly that's an indicative that's indicative or he tipped a paint a paint bucket it fell on it fell on the canvas and produced something I got you I I know where you're going that that that doesn't involve will but just bear with me that involves an accident still bear with me here though yeah the painting is there as well I got you and I like that point and I'll come to it I've heard that point so just bearing with this more simpler example the paintbrush in the hand of an artist when he's about to paint it that indicates a choice being made another example of a choice being made is you could even look at the schemes if for example the tree could have been red could have been pink could have been this that but green has been selected as a choice yeah that indicates a will so both of these two examples if if the tree was red that wouldn't indicate a choice no that would indicate a different Choice the mere fact that or it could be just how it came to be no but just how it came to be then leads us to the concept of chance as a as a Creator which then which then makes you fall under the fallacy of reification which is you're giving concrete properties to something which is abstract because you don't believe that chance creates stuff you believe chance describes things no I do believe chance creat stuff just like I said I uh I I accidentally kicked a bucket and and and paint went went into into into the canvas now it's a it's a beautiful F canvas and I'll sell it for 10 for £10,000 we're doing well we're doing well but just stick with me let's I'm sticking with you because when you kick that you've you've nullified your example because you're the one kicking it it's not chance that did it no it was chance because it was it wasn't done by will I didn't choose was done by you but it was an accident yeah but if if we're observing your action the movement and the motion is coming from you it's coming from me but not by choice not by choice but you not by nor by well we can argue that it depends no I can argue that I didn't I didn't choose I didn't want well that means that you're going with the deterministic school of thought with when it comes to morality but let me give you another example you got two minutes iight to catch I'm conscious I'm conscious okay I'll stick with the two minutes let's stick with chance yeah chance creating stuff falls in the FY of reification like I said because chance when you give it when you give it concrete properties what you're doing is you're giving it a Consciousness you're giving it a mind giving an agency by saying everything was created by chance what you're in essence saying is everything was created by the Rolling of a dice the rolling of a dice doesn't necessarily create something a person rolls the dice or accidentally or closing his eyes and then chance is done as an explanation as a as a description not as a creation yeah chance you can't say that chance itself is now making this thing happen chance is a descriptive force or descriptive concept that we're using to to describe our understanding of what's around us and the descriptive nature of the things around us no what I what I'm what I can tell you is Chance was the F was the the first the the first lighting of the fuse and everything after that is determined by the chain reaction of everything do me one favor I'm conscious you have a flight just Google one thing it's called the fallacy of reification fallacy of reification yeah it's a bit of a mouthful but that summarizes the last point that I mentioned to you I know how crazy it is when a person misses a flight ruy it was a pleasure if pleasure talking to you if you're ever in the neck of the woods again please make sure you drop by we do what can I where can I see this uh there's a few channels um SF is it the same uh there's a few there's a few different channels okay so you just just put in speaker corner corner s out by dates and you and you'll appear smile to Jenna extra that's one channel you can type in it should be up in two days smile sorry smile two you can write this down smile s uh 2 j a n n a h j a n n a h and then extra e ex T R A yeah it's autocorrected it Jenna and then space and then e EXT r a extra yeah yeah okay I'll look for it ruy pleasure absolute pleasure take care brother bye-bye bye guys uh ruy I'll just take the mic yeah yeah you'll be on there the video will be ongoing and a picture yeah go for it let me take one as well uh bro take a picture pleasure take care brother you too