Peter Boghossian and Dave Rubin: Critical Thinking, Atheism, and Faith [Full Interview]

44 thoughts on “Peter Boghossian and Dave Rubin: Critical Thinking, Atheism, and Faith [Full Interview]”

  1. I had just watched some videos about similarities in religions and cults. Having been in both in my youth then in the so called liberal spiritual but not religious craze. And now In Nothing because everything ( even so called spiritual comm) is too extreme and arbitrary. Intolerant. This is interview is refreshing.

  2. This guy changed my mind about being agnostic in the first 5 minutes of the conversation lol. Pretty interesting I never thought about it that way but it makes perfect sense.

  3. The only problem I've had with any of Dave's chats is the simple mistake(?) of "far left" being socialism/far right being fascism. Socialism IS fascism when it plays out to the end. Every example in history proves this. And, no, Sweden is NOT socialist. Also, this is a European view of left and right. The American view is different: far left is socialism/far right is ANARCHY. Historically, the American ideal has understood the minimal difference between socialism/communism/marxism/progressivism and that they are all fascistic in there ends and means when applied to humans and real world politics. The American far right as described by Washington, Madison and Franklin is "The lie that anarchy and lawlessness are freedom, are too far to the RIGHT of the reality of politics, where learned men with experience understand that laws governing men, keep the public free from the tyranny of their neighbors." Classic Liberals and Libertarians, which I usually agree with, are, by their very definitions on the right. Fascism is a perfect description of today's Main Stream Media, University System and Social Media platforms. P.S. Love your show, Dave! This is the greatest exchange of open ideas and conversation I've seen in any media platform. You're talks are always intelligent and very interesting.

  4. Watching Boghossian's transformation from New-atheist to a skeptic of new-atheism is indeed quite jarring, and entertaining. And to think, all it took was him coming into direct contact with a secular religion he was totally blindsided by. Truly, fascinating and entertaining.

  5. Both the regressive left, who has substituted dogmatic authoritarian religion with a servile faith in uncritical egalitarianism and the obscurantist, obstructionist right, which puts the Bushs and Trumps of the world into the White House, deny the validity of scientific progress and still maintain the idiotic position that America is somehow under divine guidance, collectively contribute to the downward drag of society. Peter is absolutely right, these are difficult times indeed.

  6. Like we have to intertwine a person living in the realm of this world as incapable of living and Navigating this world as a critical thinker if one believes there is a God.

  7. Ironically Dave uses the biblical phrase, "Fight the good fight" to describe an atheist fighting for what he believes in… haha… very provocative and enjoyable interview… well done… although it did seem that Mr. Boghossian was a bit dismissive to people with faith… why can't atheists and Christians disagree on religion and the question of where morality comes from, yet agree upon political policy or ideas on how we should generally treat each other… Dave is doing a good job of bringing us all together regardless of our backgrounds… would love to see Peter Boghossian have a conversation with Dennis Prager about morality and faith… keep up the good work…

  8. I don't really see as identifying as an agnostic atheism as wiggle room but to use to word to let anyone listening know you're intellectually honest enough to admit you can't know with certainty, basically the same thing he's describing in his book but instead of adding the word agnostic he just redefines atheism. He seems to forget about the subset of atheists who believe with 100% certainty there is no god, the numbers are few but they're out there.

  9. Dave Rubin, interview anyone who escaped the Velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia….they will tell you who are suppressing speech. They lived it and are disheartened they are facing what they fled here in America

  10. 0:00:01 Damn. I Do Love every word of this introduction speech.
    3 years later and it’s only urgently more relevant

  11. great interview but to say that every rep candidate was a disaster is disingenuous at best. John Kasich would have been excellent.

  12. It's humorous to hear Peter Boghossian call someone else "sanctimonious." He is correct about them but needs a mirror.

  13. Peter Boghossian has stances based on a misunderstanding of faith. If his attempt to be open minded is authentic then it is very admirable.
    Connecting anti-dogmatism and free thinking with atheism is not accurate and causes me to question his authenticity. A person can be anti-dogma or pro-dogma and be a theist or a atheist. The correlation between them will shift over time and based on the evidence to which a person has been exposed.

  14. How is it that this guy doesn't actually know what agnostic is??? It is not a term that gives "wiggle room" at all…

    According to wikipedia:

    "Agnosticism is the view that the existence of God, of the divine or the supernatural is unknown or unknowable."

    Where is the wiggle room? I believe that it is not possible to prove or disprove the existence of god. Agnosticism is not a maybe…. it is a definite… it is definitely NOT possible to prove or disprove the existence of god or the divine…

    An atheist agnostic believes that it is not possible to prove or disprove god and as such they lack belief in god. I really don't see why Peter misconstrues this concept.

  15. Dave I’m sorry you think belief is weird, I’m wondering if you have ever even paid attention to some of the higher circles of philosophy or academia, because this is woefully inadequat. This guy is a lightweight, I’m not saying this in a condescending manner, Honestly if you really want some heavy weight speakers on religion check out ‘’ William lane craig from Biola University,’’. Or John Lennox from Harvard University,

  16. boyoboyoboy, this guy is some kind of special self absorbed juddgemental pompous know it all. such a prick

  17. The way I learned the definitions was: "Agnostic" from the Greek "gnosis" (knowledge) with the prefix "a" (without)

    Similarly, "Theist" is a believer in a deity with the prefix "a", again meaning "without".

    So, just from my knowledge of languages and loving them and definitions as I do, this gentleman has his definitions backwards. That doesn't negate his point other than when he says "atheist", he means one thing and, until I think it out, I hear another.

  18. Defining yourself in opposition to something you view as a ideological virus which has infected the vast majority of mankind for all time isn't that irrational, to me at least. Its important to me that I am in that tiny minority of people who seem to be the clearest thinkers in a conversation as old as our species.

    It seems even less irrational when you compare an atheist whose atheism is important to him to a religious person who goes to church every sunday, who prays multiple times a day and believes that there is a being who gave them everything.

  19. Reading books doesn't necessarily make you wise, nor does being in the media spotlight mean your words are worth listening to. I've found a bunch of Rubin's shows interesting, but the display of mutual mental masturbation that occurred in this conversation was not something I could stomach.

  20. PB should read The God Delusion. Agnostic atheist, is wriggle room as he puts it, because it's impossible to say that there definitely is not a creator, even if there is no good evidence to the contrary. He totally misrepresents why someone might use the term. He seems good at some things, but sadly seems ill informed and poor at critical thinking. I know a lecturer who teaches critical thinking, and yet she still holds delusional beliefs (Buddhist beliefs). This led me to realise that people still delude themselves, even if they claim to be critical thinkers. Indeed, the more intelligent you are, the better you often are at constructing ever more complex self-delusions.

  21. Unfortunately rational pragmatism CAN lead to evil Dave, so your intro is false. Example, it's pragmatic and rational to cull the population. We need compassionate pragmatism. The right are pragmatic but not compassionate. The left are compassionate but not pragmatic.

  22. Dave & Peter – you have such a blind spot in your thinking – how is atheism not also faith based? What caused the universe with it's evolution process?

    What caused the painting?
    Atheist faith – the paint.
    Theist faith – the painter.

    How do atheists know whether this universe had an intelligent cause or a mindless cause?
    How is believing the universe had a mindless cause not faith based?

  23. Dave Rubin is a wonderful interviewer, because he always appears to be having a conversation rather than pushing an agenda. This topic may be close to home for him, but as always, he is engaging and as fair as possible. I'm a Christian, and therefore value reason and deeply considered points of view. Though I may differ with Dr. Boghossian's conclusions regarding God, it's refreshing to see the topic of atheism discussed in an adult manner, rather than in the hysterical Jerry Springer style we normally have to endure.

  24. This guy trolled the post modernists academics but then has a sob story about the tragic "well meaning hardcore leftist" ?? I don't get it.

  25. Its pretty insane how much I agree and disagree with him at the same time. He's promoting disproving religion (Christianity) though he seems to be quite aware that the left is using a similarly authoritarian ideology as justification and reasoning. The lack of religion in those with low IQ is the reason they cling to social justice/socialism/authoritarianism. I'm an Athiest, but support Christians where ever I find them. I believe Christianity is false, but having a definitive moral right and wrong is necessary to the continuation of civilization. This comment is late, but Dennis Prager makes a strong case for this in Dave's interview with him later. Peter also seems to be critical of governments being built on religious ideology, and while I would generally agree, the United States is the greatest example of such a government–And until quite recently, has been a societal pinnacle of morality. Even if you disagree with all religions, its ignorant to dismiss Christianity's pivotal role in shaping the West in a positive direction. Sure, I'd love to red-pill everyone and everything work out. But red-pilling the low IQ is where we get this giant landfills of ideologies that are actually dangerous, like the regressive left.

  26. Agnostic atheist as a term is used most likely not "because of wiggle room", but because it's more accurate definition of that position. People who even know that pairing are somewhat deeper in the subject because for average layperson agnostic is something between believing and not believing, when it's actually different position altogether.

    Atheist = person who doesn't believe in god.

    Agnostic = Person who doesn't know if god exists.

    Other points to believe, other points to knowledge. Those are separate things. Because one can believe things s/he does not know for certain.

    So, agnostic atheist = Person who does not believe in god but who does not have that necessary knowledge to make a claim that there sure is no god.

    Because there are atheist who claim that god does not exist. That of course can be true, maybe even likely, but where do they get that confirmation so they can make that claim?

    Because giving a proof would be quite a revelation at this point. And also puts them in position they have to prove their position if they are making positive claim instead of honestly saying I don't know but this is what I believe because there is no evidence for it. But no evidence is not same as not possible or not real.

    Hundreds of years ago people did not know that so called germs and bacteria existed because there was no means to see them with naked eye, but they still did.

  27. Love when "cruelty free meat" label ignores the killing part, but at least makes people feel warm and fuzzy.

  28. Bigot:a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions

    Note (despite other dictionaries): intolerance of OPINIONS is not bigotry. If someone has the opinion that murder in general is good, I will absolutely be intolerant of that position. I will hear them out, but I will find this conclusion disgusting.

  29. Atheists are open minded, just not so open as to expect fairies and leprechauns around the corner. They are simply not superstitious. Science isn't a superstition, it is readily tested and falsifiable.

  30. I sposse from there point of view its hard to see people like us who for them seam rational in every other aspect other then this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *