|SolRo - 2009-04-01 |
It's too good to be true, I require proof of this callers existance.
|simon666 - 2009-04-01 |
There is a "Thomas Aquinas he is not" tag?! Oh how I love you poetv.
What about the Danger
And thus I march onward into history, proud of my past accomplishments.
I hope to see the "Thomas Aquinas he is not" tag used in as many videos as possible.
|Scrotum H. Vainglorious - 2009-04-01 |
Holy fuck turn down your speakers towards the end.
|Frank Rizzo - 2009-04-01 |
this is amazing.
|StanleyPain - 2009-04-01 |
DROPPIN DA LOGIC BOMB.
|ProfessorChaos - 2009-04-01 |
I think I've seen this before, but it's worth another 5 stars, if it's a dupe.
It's similar to another clip from the same show, which was also declared the "best" caller. The clip was basically someone calling in and claiming proof of God's existence was, basically, because stuff exists and came from somewhere.
|Doctor Arcane - 2009-04-01 |
Watch your speakers at the end.
|Screwtape - 2009-04-01 |
Did he really say "can you explain to the 12 kids here..."
That'd better be a bible study group or something. Jesus.
|glendower - 2009-04-01 |
+5 for the 'Thomas Aquinas he is not' tag. I hope there are some more videos with that wonderful distinction.
Hopefully some day someone (a non-idiot) will call this show asking them about Anselm's ontological argument of God's existence. It's pretty interesting: http://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc/phi203/ontological.html
i almost pissed myself when i heard that one in philosophy class in high-school. anyway they mentioned it in one of the podcasts ,i think, to much work to go fish it out, the archive is huge.
The best (and easiest) way to collapse Anslem's argument is this: 'All of what you claim to be proof of the existence of God is held in the eyes of an infant viewing it's mother'. To that infant, there is no greater being in the universe, however while in the mindset of the infant the mother is God, the truth is that the concept of perfection and universality are merely human traits of subjective experience, and thus not axiomatic proofs.
4 stars for awesome clip. -1 for bad sound.
Also since when is "a thing that is unsurpassable" any reasonable definition of God? That seems to be the basis of his proof.
|kingarthur - 2009-04-01 |
|chumbucket - 2009-04-01 |
Since I can't prove that I am not a douche means I must therefore be a douche thereby making this the best call ever
|Mike Tyson?! - 2009-04-01 |
Man I remember you guys hating on this show earlier.
i feel kinda guilty for calling em chubby after i started watching their shows and stuff and finding out how good they are...
|Tstyle - 2009-04-01 |
I miss the jester hat
|charmlessman - 2009-04-01 |
5 stars always for these guys.
I wish I lived in an area that broadcasts them.
|kingofthenothing - 2009-07-03 |
I was hoping he had some more questions.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|