Download "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?"
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FbV1DaKVRxXA%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
Similar videos from our catalog
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252F-FZeDimvyxw%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252F3eE-duhYax0%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FJkdW7KggFU4%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FNu2O9eHcJ2w%252Fsddefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FOaIubllC-sQ%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FRQ87nKIq7pU%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FSRB1uibjclw%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FWd8bt8hB3tk%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FcsGw0MHKH3g%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FnxgjRCFpgYc%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
Video tags
Subtitles
Russian
00:00:07
what to do and00:00:09
that God exists, grow and Alexander Sokolov00:00:15
welcome to this debate on00:00:17
channel00:00:18
Alexander Panchin her on the channel00:00:19
laboratory scientific video debate about us00:00:21
broadcast on two channels at once, so if00:00:24
Are you by any chance subscribed to any of them?00:00:26
them immediately subscribe exists00:00:30
opinion about the insoluble contradiction between00:00:32
religious views and scientific picture00:00:34
many people around the world believe that between science and00:00:37
religion is going through some kind of war00:00:40
a war in which no prisoners are taken00:00:43
there is another more peaceful opinion00:00:45
which adheres to for example00:00:47
some believing scientists say that the way00:00:50
religion and the path of science are just two00:00:52
scientists have different approaches to knowledge00:00:55
explore the material physical world but00:00:58
there is another approach - the spiritual path00:01:01
religious revelation insight00:01:03
allowing you to touch things00:01:05
inaccessible to our senses00:01:08
animal devices and perhaps these00:01:10
their ways of knowing do not compete00:01:13
but on the contrary complement each other with00:01:15
benefit for everyone00:01:17
today we have a debate between a biologist00:01:23
and a theist and Orthodox publicist on00:01:26
the topic of how believers and atheists understand the world00:01:28
how we form00:01:30
the picture of the world once again participates with us00:01:33
biologist and atheist or maybe an agnostic00:01:36
Alexander Panchin himself will say and00:01:40
Orthodox Christian and publicist Sergei Khudiev00:01:45
hello Sergey hello00:01:47
Alexander I'm Alexander Sokolov just00:01:50
moderator I will be at a minimum today00:01:53
interfere in your discussion00:01:55
I'll just make sure everything is fine00:01:58
correctly and fit into00:02:00
chronological framework because everything00:02:02
we have limited time right now00:02:05
I will suggest to our dear participants00:02:08
debates take turns to voice out00:02:12
briefly my position, I’ll even toss a coin00:02:16
let the coin decide who will search00:02:19
let's say first00:02:20
heads we will be alexander panchin tails00:02:22
we will have Sergei Khudiev and so the eagle of this00:02:32
starts with us Alexander Panchin Sasha00:02:35
you have five minutes to summarize00:02:38
your position and then we will listen to Sergei00:02:41
and then there will be the actual debate and00:02:43
our dear viewers will be able to too00:02:45
ask questions write questions in chats00:02:47
just formulate them politely and correctly00:02:50
friends, so Sasha, over to you00:02:54
Hello everyone, first I want a few words00:02:57
talk about why we do this in general00:02:59
it's damn important to have the right picture00:03:02
world with no less mistakes00:03:05
On the one hand, let’s imagine that everything00:03:07
what we know is actually us00:03:09
pickled brains in a jar floating in00:03:12
space if we see this we are a dream00:03:15
Cthulhu we live in a simulation and all the laws00:03:18
physics that we actually know00:03:19
really complete nonsense but still00:03:21
for some reason00:03:22
I'm using this in wrong quotes00:03:24
we can release physics00:03:26
satellite into orbit and using it00:03:29
this is actually wrong00:03:30
in a fundamental philosophical sense yes00:03:32
medicine we can cure people00:03:34
which hurts someone bacteriological00:03:36
diseases with antibiotics00:03:38
would it even matter in this case?00:03:40
the meaning of the phrase is that our picture of the world00:03:42
wrong about right or00:03:45
I'm wrong about the pictures we have in common00:03:47
there myself I'll try eventually with00:03:49
in this pragmatic way can we00:03:52
use our knowledge to make the world a more00:03:55
predictable to get that result on00:03:57
what we are aiming for or what we want to get00:04:00
some effect given by science to us and ours00:04:02
knowledge our picture of the world helps us00:04:04
to achieve this, that’s why it immediately removes00:04:10
side of many philosophical issues in00:04:12
such true so further which to me00:04:14
it seems there is no point in touching now00:04:16
we have a way to get this00:04:23
more reliable and knowledge and actually00:04:24
question there for cameras, pictures can be00:04:26
break into two 1 so we in practice well00:04:28
let's say most people get that00:04:31
picture of the world and the second is like00:04:33
getting the continuum would be better00:04:35
get some knowledge about this I them00:04:37
we can improve our ways of knowing00:04:39
answering the first part of the question as00:04:42
practice we understand the world the answer is bad00:04:44
because otherwise people wouldn't believe in00:04:46
astrology magic homeopathy unfortunately00:04:48
our sense organs deceive you therefore00:04:50
We may fall for optical illusions00:04:53
our thinking is not perfect so we can00:04:55
find patterns where there are none00:04:56
see cause-and-effect relationships there00:04:58
where they are not and this part of our such well00:05:00
everyday thinking which is very lacking00:05:03
reliably our subjective experience is very00:05:04
unreliable but good nonetheless00:05:08
the news is that with00:05:10
over time we learned00:05:11
find some of these errors00:05:14
fix and get more and more reliable00:05:17
ways to gain knowledge about the environment00:05:18
world and thanks to this a new00:05:21
technological progress yes today we00:05:23
we know much more about the world than ours knew00:05:25
ancestors we can still release00:05:27
satellites into orbit and this proves that00:05:30
science it works and what we are now and00:05:32
nourishing better for rent easier to know00:05:34
sometime earlier than so especially00:05:38
science why she was so successful in00:05:41
and why are we launching satellites?00:05:42
we use scientific knowledge they are knowledge00:05:44
derived from revelations00:05:46
knowledge of magicians of samons and so on 1 correct00:05:49
register this feature of science for me00:05:51
will help tell it and my story00:05:54
favorite science fiction writer00:05:56
Septa he has stories which a00:06:00
after all, it was like a hermit on one planet00:06:03
space and every time he came out of00:06:06
refuge he spoke in poetry he was asked00:06:10
why does he say such things in poetry?00:06:11
protects me from alien races00:06:13
who can kill me they asked him00:06:16
do you ever try not to talk00:06:17
coming out of his shelter in poetry to what00:06:20
he replied, I’m not a fool, you tried it00:06:23
breathing underwater is a special feature00:06:25
such ordinary thinking among people is00:06:28
what people often tend to look for is00:06:30
confirmation with your own eyes therefore in00:06:32
homeopaths give examples of people who00:06:34
took homeopathy and were cured but they didn’t00:06:37
Of particular interest is the fact that the share00:06:38
outstanding people who understood the dummy00:06:40
such among those who raised homeopathy00:06:43
or astrologers easily find themselves recognized00:06:46
himself this is a description of a person from the horoscope on and00:06:49
it occurs to me that this is the same00:06:50
the description also fits well with others00:06:52
to people the peculiarity of science is that there00:06:54
you need to look first for a refutation00:06:56
look for a competing point of view00:06:58
hypothesis to see if your point is possible00:07:01
vision will understand with the help of some00:07:02
experiment00:07:03
the use of a kite is another hypothesis and00:07:05
rebuttal there are some very00:07:07
interesting properties for example what if from00:07:09
a logically follows b and at the same time b00:07:13
truly yes that's it, well maybe00:07:17
true may be false but if for00:07:18
follows b&b therefore it is important then well00:07:21
but apparently the statement is false, yes there is very00:07:24
a lot of information and we be therefore00:07:27
it's much easier to talk about how we don't00:07:29
you need to understand the world to build a picture of the world00:07:31
than how to build it, how and to know it00:07:34
what can happen in those methods that00:07:36
Sing modern scientists will be there too00:07:37
some mistakes cats cats will need00:07:39
fix it in the future and we will be even better00:07:41
let's make the scientific method even better00:07:43
to get to know the world and some things that00:07:46
today we seem right00:07:48
we will review but already erroneous methods before00:07:51
ready to show yours00:07:52
insolvency00:07:54
using the 21st century strange from one of00:07:56
these methods are erroneous for a long time which he00:07:58
it's time to go to the territory, this is the vera vera method00:08:02
like accepting something without evidence00:08:04
accept and something not only without00:08:08
empirically proven and without any00:08:10
magical evidence on faith as00:08:14
says the dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron00:08:15
I also really like the definition of faith00:08:18
which Peter Poghosyan gave this century00:08:20
simulation of knowledge on it at the stage of their00:08:23
absence and so faith is what I need00:08:27
seems to be the antipode00:08:29
and knowledge and faith is not something good00:08:32
in principle can never be anything00:08:33
also because by definition it is00:08:35
thinking error leading us to00:08:38
erroneous conclusions that threaten the world00:08:41
this is actually my main thesis00:08:43
today it will be exactly like we00:08:46
It’s high time we explored the world00:08:48
abandon the idea of faith must be tested00:08:51
facts need to be examined critically00:08:53
doubt you need to look for a refutation of your00:08:57
hypotheses00:09:00
you almost got it Alexander00:09:03
Sergei now the word vans well what am I00:09:07
I completely share Alexander’s enthusiasm00:09:10
regarding the scientific method I am with00:09:13
I have the deepest respect for science00:09:15
as ways of knowing the truth and how to00:09:21
manifestation of our spiritual nature00:09:24
therefore in this respect we are more likely00:09:28
we agree and even we agree in00:09:31
regarding that negative attitude towards00:09:34
astrology and friend and quasi and00:09:37
pseudoscientific doctrines that are now00:09:40
they take up so much space on the internet00:09:43
but if we're talking about yes I would even00:09:47
agreed that faith without evidence00:09:51
faith without reason is really bad and00:09:54
this is the faith that is often so condemned and00:09:58
crosses so some kind of belief about nothing00:10:00
founded, well, I don’t either00:10:03
I share we build our vision00:10:07
reality our ideas about the world on00:10:09
based on our experience is enough for me00:10:12
seems obvious and this experience includes00:10:15
self knowledge of the material world of course00:10:18
but it won’t actually free itself to him00:10:21
religious picture of the world differs from00:10:24
scientific not that they are and kind of friend00:10:27
a friend is confronted simply by a religious00:10:29
the picture includes a scientific00:10:31
paintings00:10:32
let's say he is an outstanding American00:10:35
geneticist Francis Collins who is00:10:38
here is a geneticist and he is a believing Christian00:10:40
there are not two different ones conflicting there00:10:44
pictures of the world between which he00:10:46
he switches one picture of the world and00:10:47
into this picture of the world the scientific picture of the world00:10:51
enters as something and a part, that is, we00:10:53
we admit, of course, that matter is real00:10:55
we accept that matter manifests itself00:10:58
certain rational laws00:11:00
laws00:11:01
it is comprehensible to the human mind that00:11:04
this scientific method allows us00:11:08
learn the laws and use them in your00:11:11
purposes house00:11:12
or evil but reality does not boil down to00:11:16
mothers because our experience is of course00:11:18
does not boil down to knowing the material world in00:11:23
the world in which we live there are creatures00:11:28
which stand out sharply from it are00:11:30
people we have moral feelings00:11:33
we have an experience of value we have00:11:36
experiencing beauty in this world with us00:11:38
there is an experience of moral duty and00:11:42
this is something that cannot be adequate00:11:45
described in the language of natural sciences this00:11:49
the world of values cannot be described00:11:51
language00:11:52
natural sciences while she00:11:55
science itself needs value here00:11:59
and Alexander's speeches00:12:02
behaved absolutely fairly and00:12:05
praise of intellectual virtue00:12:08
honesty measurement that is if I00:12:11
I'm faced with the fact that I'm apparently wrong00:12:14
data indicates that apparently00:12:16
I'm wrong, I should show00:12:18
deep humility and maybe I'm there 2000:12:22
I've been running around with this favorite theory of mine for years00:12:23
but intellectual honesty requires00:12:26
admit that yes, she is not a member and00:12:29
virtue in itself is not00:12:32
subject of science00:12:34
virtue is the idea of00:12:36
values, ideas about ethics, how do we00:12:38
Yu said there is still a so-called00:12:41
Yuma guillotine00:12:42
from any descriptive data at least00:12:44
you shouldn't do them like that00:12:49
science we must adhere to00:12:51
certain ethics certain00:12:53
ideas to have ethics00:12:56
and ideas about values we must00:12:58
we must have free will00:13:02
make choices in favor of certain00:13:04
values we must evaluate this choice00:13:06
whether right or wrong we have everything00:13:10
we are believers liatris you we possess00:13:12
consciousness of beauty00:13:14
I remember how I read the now deceased00:13:19
Christopher Hitchens where he calls us00:13:22
admire the beauty of the galaxies that00:13:25
took off the hubble telescope but this one00:13:28
beauty is not a physical category we00:13:32
we can say that the galaxy00:13:33
has a mass the size of the luminosity there00:13:36
speed relative to other objects00:13:38
but beauty is not a physical category00:13:42
which we cannot adequately language00:13:44
natural sciences and of course00:13:48
that I will emphasize once again that with great00:13:52
they do not respect the natural sciences00:13:55
they do not describe reality completely00:13:58
they don't really describe beauty00:14:00
describe reality glad again for a long time they00:14:03
do not describe the reality of our freedom and00:14:06
and that experience of the moral duty of beauty00:14:10
the freedoms we experience indicates00:14:13
on his personal00:14:15
moral source on the one who00:14:18
prefers beauty to the one who00:14:20
rational and who created the universe00:14:24
rationally and gave us the ability to00:14:27
rational thinking thanks to which00:14:31
We able to experience nature as if they00:14:36
the way in my opinion is John Wiener his name is he00:14:39
this mathematician who said that00:14:41
about the incomprehensible effectiveness of mathematics00:14:45
that mathematical constructions00:14:47
which were brauma00:14:49
the consequences turned out to be descriptive00:14:51
physics describing a completely real00:14:54
the world is outside our heads not our constructions00:14:57
there is beauty in the universe00:14:59
oxides there is rationality in00:15:01
the universe is present that scientists00:15:04
called fine tuning, that is, we00:15:07
we have enough reasons for that00:15:10
to guess beyond this universe00:15:13
some kind of personality I am creative moral and00:15:16
aesthetic beginning00:15:20
Thanks a lot00:15:22
Sergey, our colleagues are approaching now00:15:26
discussion parts so I then00:15:28
I ask Sergey to ask your first question00:15:31
Alexandra and I ask you colleagues not00:15:34
ask more than one question00:15:36
at a time and answering it I ask you00:15:39
also be laconic about the tie00:15:41
answer the question within two minutes00:15:44
this or that question please Sergey I00:15:49
I understand the center you mentioned that the criterion00:15:53
the criteria should be efficiency00:15:55
Well, for example, we know that00:15:57
statistically religious programs00:16:00
helping chemically dependent people they are more00:16:03
Does it prove that they work better?00:16:07
this is your eyes the truth of religious00:16:09
views I have not seen researched00:16:15
you say if you send them I will00:16:17
the pleasure of knowing them is that00:16:18
just curious, I'm not an expert on that00:16:22
how to give people the right help00:16:24
chemical dependency like I'm right on00:16:27
gothic stuff you have it in00:16:28
I mean, but it could very well00:16:31
turn out to be some kind of psychological00:16:35
interventions00:16:36
and when we provide a person with some00:16:39
psychological help, whether spiritual00:16:41
character or permissible even through reception00:16:44
some kind of placebo and general effect00:16:46
placebo there is a lot of demand photo for the law00:16:48
all sorts of Kokhanovsky reviews are not effective00:16:51
confirm that placebo can be00:16:52
seriously effective to come to the disease00:16:55
physical ones like oncological and00:16:59
infectious given when we speak00:17:01
about the same features to experience pain00:17:03
then the very idea that he was given a drug00:17:05
the drug is actually ineffective00:17:07
he could be an argument he could00:17:11
the priest can cheer up the check00:17:14
improve his well-being influence00:17:15
his behavior is actually the same00:17:17
the behavior of some people can influence00:17:19
friend other people's behavior is not in this00:17:21
nothing supernatural in principle00:17:22
this case is not as good as it seems to me00:17:24
would be a good argument00:17:26
something supernatural is possible00:17:27
offer00:17:28
modified experiments are acceptable00:17:31
if nicula his physical00:17:34
the impact is expected wouldn't it be easy00:17:36
people would pray in the country the check would not00:17:37
knew whether to pray for him or not to pray if00:17:40
this affected his psychological00:17:42
addiction I don’t know how cool he is00:17:45
experimental and control00:17:47
the window roll is placed scientific00:17:49
experiment00:17:50
then we could say that00:17:52
some higher power intervened in him00:17:54
life00:17:55
we don’t know what higher power is yes00:17:57
maybe this is not why the Orthodox God00:17:59
maybe it's Cthulhu or something else but00:18:01
some kind00:18:02
intangible unknown to modern00:18:05
science does not fit modern00:18:07
scientific picture of the world of force exists and00:18:09
so we all urgently need to give up00:18:11
from materialism in favor of flatulence plus00:18:14
something else rendering something00:18:17
magical influence00:18:19
height here is my new book from you00:18:23
exactly what if there was magic00:18:24
existed then scientists could prove00:18:28
her existence he had to00:18:30
reconsider your attitude towards00:18:32
ask the materialism of your account00:18:38
questions what then is your counter question00:18:40
yes, I'll go with what you said00:18:45
about Ethics seems to me to be a little wrong00:18:50
quite a substitution of the thesis, but a little00:18:52
shift the topic side because in the picture00:18:55
the world of believers is the central figure00:18:58
called god and ignore this00:19:01
the fact that this creature is in the picture of the world yes00:19:04
it's like ignoring the elephant there00:19:05
gigantic in the large room and00:19:09
flow god is part of this picture00:19:10
peace, my question is the following:00:19:16
just when you and I were discussing00:19:18
TV channel saved we somehow touched there00:19:21
topics in evolutionary psychology I came from00:19:24
somehow the world that scientists can try00:19:26
without no why we have exactly like this00:19:27
there is no value you said that you00:19:29
sleep psychology is beliefs and00:19:31
problems of evolutionary psychology is00:19:33
criterion for a pair that no facts00:19:36
evolutionary psychology will perish00:19:39
I won’t repeat the objection because00:19:41
the topic is not about that, but you determined when00:19:44
but meet Potter's criterion and reprimand00:19:46
Tyson's login can offend anyone00:19:47
behavior but here is God's hypothesis00:19:49
explains to bama not everything even in00:19:51
evolutionary psychology respectively00:19:53
so what if God is not just00:19:55
some aesthetic idea, not just something00:19:58
that they like boxing, it seems beautiful00:20:00
if they like the values00:20:03
I like it but God is real as it exists00:20:06
not in the opinion of those running, that's all he is00:20:09
explains how to be a criterion00:20:11
Poker has nothing to do with God00:20:13
aesthetic to the taiga category and how00:20:15
actual being in which and this00:20:19
believers but actually your question00:20:21
is broken regarding that applies00:20:24
Does belief in God pass the test?00:20:27
poker of course no of course no and00:20:30
shouldn't because we haven't spent a minute00:20:33
trying to pretend that faith in God is00:20:35
scientific theory of course not and criterion00:20:39
poker, he doesn’t know the truth00:20:41
curing attributed to it distinguishes00:20:44
scientific statement from non-scientific if I00:20:47
I’ll say that I don’t know, my old faithful Peter00:20:50
friend and wonderful person00:20:52
I can recommend him to everyone, his work will be00:20:56
search then this statement will be true00:21:00
but it won't match00:21:02
board criterion, that is, of course, faith00:21:05
does not meet the poker criterion and does not00:21:07
trying00:21:08
here is any construction that00:21:11
claims to be a scientific theory00:21:13
well, I should have the second thing from him00:21:17
concerns ethics and its various00:21:21
revolutionary explanations main00:21:22
the problem is that it must be passionate00:21:29
owes the country impossible to explain00:21:31
links to there our supposed valya00:21:35
ation ancestors let's say mine00:21:37
we assume evolutionary ancestors in00:21:38
African savannah00:21:39
came up with the idea of sharing bananas with00:21:42
refrigerators and it was difficult and understandable00:21:45
what if I found a lot of bananas I can't00:21:47
it would be quite reasonable to eat it himself00:21:50
what does it mean that I share a banana with someone else?00:21:53
monkey she will share with me so we00:21:55
we'll all die of hunger, but that's nothing to do with00:22:00
I'm not obligated now in ancient times00:22:03
our ape-like ancestors came up with00:22:06
share bananas but a little good00:22:08
what did they come up with they came up with to be afraid00:22:10
darkness they came up with to eat everything00:22:14
available00:22:16
products because who will care00:22:19
about his figure, he won’t live to see spring, but now00:22:22
we try there with varying success00:22:25
to fight this tendency means00:22:28
there is everything that recoil can get then00:22:30
there is something that we inherited00:22:33
not from our supposed ancestors00:22:35
it follows that we must obey this00:22:39
moral obligation to go to her00:22:42
she cannot have therefore biological00:22:45
justifications thank you Sergey yours00:22:52
accordingly counter thesis counter00:22:55
question for Alexander regarding00:23:03
Regarding ethics, do you think that00:23:07
there is an objective difference between00:23:10
right and wrong due line00:23:12
door that's how I understand you're coming from00:23:15
from what we better follow00:23:19
true than to dwell in some00:23:22
comforting deceptions are we talking about00:23:27
specifically about ethical requirements if you have00:23:30
such a moral duty00:23:32
Well, yes, but it’s not the video itself that will just repeat itself00:23:35
because you and I are the topic for me00:23:37
seems quite detailed already00:23:39
discussed but I will be happy to repeat00:23:41
what I already said before is that we have00:23:44
there is an idea of morality that00:23:48
are subjective ideas00:23:51
when they just do everything00:23:55
society or majority caste and 3 what00:23:56
we can call them collective00:24:00
subjective if you like, here's what they have00:24:03
our views are dictated by our00:24:05
evolutionary past, including only00:24:09
currency sanitized our brain and our00:24:10
education00:24:11
as culture develops, many things00:24:13
who were once completely00:24:16
normal and generally accepted00:24:19
seem morally ethical now00:24:21
blatant barbarity, well, for example, I know00:24:24
discrimination against women discrimination against people00:24:26
by gender and by gender00:24:29
from 1 and based on skin color based on00:24:32
sexual orientation some of00:24:36
such00:24:37
in fact, all these listed ideas up to00:24:39
now in a civilized society they00:24:42
seems like something completely wrong00:24:45
that's why our our revolutionary00:24:49
views on ours our ethical views00:24:51
they evolve they change like00:24:54
In this case, we can say what is00:24:56
some absolutely objective standard00:24:57
bestowed especially from above, but if it00:24:59
granted over 3 for what God explained00:25:02
2000 years ago it should have been00:25:06
absolutely true to this day, but in00:25:10
including, by the way, the idea that00:25:13
no need to turn it on on Saturday00:25:14
our modern electricity stop00:25:18
me a snake to light a fire in loneliness00:25:23
this is no one's interpretations as a form00:25:26
there is no fire, that's why I don't00:25:29
I think we need this00:25:33
the idea that there is some00:25:34
absolutely objective and not indestructible00:25:36
the idea of robbing is good, but00:25:38
first ideas from auto-key is moral00:25:40
the principle is not beyond doubt at all00:25:42
and beyond criticism this is bad because if00:25:45
we are mistaken about something now, then we are not00:25:47
we can handle it if someone tries00:25:50
so in the era of humanism the era in00:25:54
lighting people tried to reconsider00:25:56
some ideas of morality if only00:25:59
people say yes no magician is this absolutely00:26:00
objectively true those who you are them00:26:02
can't be reviewed then I think he00:26:04
would have remained in those old days00:26:07
moral traditions that have become modern00:26:10
from our point of view we consider it worse, here we are00:26:14
will not change for the better in the future00:26:16
so not only does it not seem00:26:18
wrong idea, but I also think it’s unhealthy00:26:21
that moral values are absolutely00:26:23
absolute objective, here I would already be00:26:27
asked maybe Sergei to object00:26:31
to your opponent you have something good, yes there is00:26:35
you know every time we talk00:26:38
that something is harmful, something is wrong00:26:41
we make a value judgment like this00:26:43
we say that our slaves are better than people00:26:47
who lived 400 years ago we already00:26:50
we pronounce some moral condemnation00:26:52
which we believe applies to us and to00:26:55
him if moral is subjective00:26:58
character then we wouldn’t make such judgments00:27:02
Mom could either just talk about it00:27:03
Well, there they eat with chopsticks and we00:27:06
we eat with forks and just in our00:27:09
society is accepted this way and in their society00:27:11
It’s accepted that way, but we don’t say that and00:27:14
we constantly praise or blame others00:27:18
people and I would pay attention that in order00:27:23
praise or make fun of another person00:27:24
you need to start from some kind of applicability to00:27:27
him moral assessment is not just00:27:31
we are not accepted this way, not even just for us00:27:34
it causes inconvenience00:27:36
but there is a certain moral00:27:38
responsibility on this person to which00:27:40
he should have done it but didn't00:27:43
performs meters man and so he00:27:45
worthy not to worry00:27:46
and when we blame or praise someone00:27:49
we are not saying that this person00:27:50
contradicts our society or ours00:27:53
society we will spoil from what system00:27:58
prices that are out of bounds in relation to00:28:01
our ego society, well, for example00:28:04
a person who is not only00:28:08
In patriarchal societies it is believed that00:28:11
if on a young woman on Paul's girl00:28:15
suspicions are rumors started by the men of the family00:28:19
must kill to save the honor of the family00:28:22
we agree that this is disgusting00:28:25
and customs that should be stopped if00:28:28
will try to practice it there00:28:29
readiness a00:28:31
however, from their point of view, society is00:28:34
wonderful and wonderful and customs and00:28:36
must do but so that we can evaluate it we00:28:39
must come from some kind of system00:28:42
assessments that are not allowed00:28:44
relation to our society both because00:28:47
that otherwise they are completely fair to us00:28:49
they will say you have such stupid guises00:28:52
us our own customs which we really like00:28:53
like00:28:54
and therefore it makes no sense to talk about it00:28:57
that some customs are better, some are worse00:29:01
to touch00:29:03
slavery of other historical phenomena00:29:05
It is still important to distinguish between social00:29:08
conditions of personal morality00:29:11
because a person can be00:29:14
moral or best slavery to us being00:29:16
slave or slave owner in the same way00:29:19
How can he be moral now?00:29:21
or being immoral as a director00:29:23
trading network not or00:29:25
workers in this network who for pennies00:29:28
there doing hard work once we all00:29:32
it's all about personal choice00:29:35
a person regarding what is from him00:29:36
depends firstly I'll say I'll say what to me00:29:41
seems from my point of view important then00:29:44
there will be an addition when I tell someone00:29:47
that some moral ideas00:29:50
views of this type00:29:52
bad then this is from my point of view00:29:55
I’m ready to calmly admit this and this00:29:58
does not interfere in any way with expressing subjective00:30:00
I state my position on someone’s question honestly00:30:02
subjectively without trying to link to days00:30:04
some kind of absolute, although it’s clear that00:30:06
observe yours from an objective position00:30:08
so this is absolutely true date00:30:10
It's twice as easy to broadcast with confidence00:30:14
with aplomb and not to doubt your00:30:16
you're right, this seems to suit me00:30:19
counterproductive that's why I'm in favor of00:30:21
name a subjective position with00:30:23
objective position, which does not interfere00:30:25
defend her and of course I’m sorry00:30:27
modern my point of view of the majority00:30:30
people also have the idea that those who are them00:30:34
engaged in slavery maybe00:30:36
morally well this is very stretched00:30:38
confirmation of the thread of our alien slaves00:30:43
freedom at least it seems to me00:30:45
is absolutely unacceptable and when we make00:30:48
such judgments 5 can also be put on00:30:50
this static point of view00:30:52
automatic point of view is00:30:54
in00:30:55
what kind of world do we actually want to live in?00:30:56
in the future when we say something00:30:59
moral judgments about what this is00:31:02
bad or good in essence we endure00:31:04
judgments about what I would like to live in00:31:06
in the world where am I00:31:07
they can't just kill me because I want to live00:31:10
there is nowhere where I can say everything I think and00:31:12
I'm not on sites for insulting me for this00:31:14
feelings of believers or something else and the same00:31:16
most other people can say what00:31:17
they don’t want to and don’t be afraid they’ll be imprisoned00:31:20
we I want to live in a world where we can00:31:21
reconsider00:31:22
ideas that are considered absolute00:31:24
by some other people this is where we are00:31:27
we can discuss topics that00:31:29
other people believe absolute truths and00:31:31
which infallibility was given to them from above and00:31:34
so on actually I do it for myself00:31:36
I will reformulate these moral and00:31:38
ethical issues when deciding for yourself00:31:40
what should I do? I proceed from what I wanted00:31:43
I wish I could live in a world where everyone would act in00:31:45
situations like this in exactly the same way00:31:46
from the answer no then but protection to behave this way00:31:49
I won't don't know this principle is00:31:51
in itself some kind of absolute iron00:31:54
by law but I would like to live my lady people00:31:58
followed this order the same thing00:32:01
how legal legal why00:32:03
some legal laws are being passed00:32:04
because people think like that00:32:06
laws, well, rather, where everything is fine00:32:08
what people think is legitimate is what happened to those00:32:10
by the laws of which life will be better00:32:12
Why can't laws be understood without them?00:32:15
maybe democratically00:32:20
anyway, let's continue, I would suggest00:32:24
Alexander suggested accordingly yours00:32:29
question for Sergey Sergey you can answer but00:32:32
to revive the previous ones00:32:34
Alexander's statement00:32:35
everyone probably has some prepared00:32:38
questions00:32:39
my next prepared question is this00:32:43
that's when we talk about I say a lot00:32:46
him with believers and I often see one00:32:50
the parties are talking awake about something good00:32:51
a man died for his faith, he's a hero00:32:55
his faith was strong his faith means a00:33:01
sincerely here is faith presented00:33:04
something very good on the other side00:33:06
When00:33:07
and the same believers begin00:33:09
debate with supporters of scientific00:33:11
pictures of the world but scientists don’t believe in00:33:14
God they can say that x theories00:33:17
evolution is also a faith, it is the faith of everything00:33:19
only in00:33:21
you relativity is just a belief you00:33:24
believe in science believe in scientists and00:33:26
suddenly the context and rotate on00:33:28
the opposite of what in that context00:33:30
century it was very good worthy00:33:33
imitation is worthy encouragement and what00:33:36
fewer facts Timur be better to00:33:38
there was faith, he even quotes some00:33:41
theologians who said that I believe there00:33:43
because it's absurd and so on00:33:45
certain interpretations and so00:33:48
suddenly there's a door with something behind it00:33:51
bad after all00:33:54
from the point of view of believers, faith should be00:33:56
something good or bad and if you00:33:58
something good00:33:59
it's good to be there so that your legs are sieve00:34:01
scientists also believed in their theories too00:34:04
not just studied the world but believed sacredly00:34:07
believed in scientific facts like an untouchable00:34:14
truth means relative to faith00:34:20
so this is completely determined00:34:22
content of your faith so I went to00:34:24
the doctor and the doctor told me to stop eating00:34:28
sweet I have no idea why she did this00:34:31
I said I don’t know what this is00:34:34
knowledge encourages and gives something different00:34:36
prescription but I believed the doctor and00:34:41
Here00:34:43
sobbing deeply now completely expelled00:34:46
understands the language both sweets and advice00:34:48
and at the same time, well, we probably00:34:51
We understand that trusting a doctor is quite00:34:53
reasonable at the same time we understand that00:34:56
light from a bunch of scammers who to believe00:34:58
just unreasonably they told me that in00:35:02
my relative died in a hospital in London00:35:04
John Hoodiev00:35:06
scary rich man which is huge for me00:35:10
I bequeathed the money and probably also received it00:35:11
something like this we understand that in00:35:15
both believe this in this context00:35:17
wrong so we must understand00:35:19
why we believe or not believe and of course00:35:22
the Holy Scriptures are not preached to us00:35:25
blind faith because there is a huge00:35:28
number of applicants for our blind00:35:30
faith and00:35:32
we must somehow differ from some and00:35:34
others therefore we cannot do without00:35:38
in order to weigh data weigh00:35:40
evidence regarding presence00:35:43
faith in science, well, look, I can’t00:35:47
analyze for yourself about the revolution to understand00:35:51
how well it is substantiated but I00:35:54
I read there the same Francis Collins00:35:57
give yourself up jones who what are they believers00:36:00
people they are scientists they recognize revolutions I00:36:03
I see no reason to attribute any00:36:07
there are evil intentions generally believed that00:36:10
all the scientists are involved there's a scary conspiracy00:36:12
but I'm inclined to admit there00:36:14
apparently since all the experts in this00:36:16
region, more or less stuffy, I think that00:36:18
evolution took place well most likely like this00:36:20
it is and this is my faith00:36:24
I can't check for sure00:36:26
and to but it is me or not but I rely on00:36:30
the opinions of the people I think are here00:36:33
competent and conscientious therefore00:36:36
faith is a virtue and a vice in00:36:39
depending on what she's on00:36:40
justified to whom it is addressed Alexander00:36:46
you have something to object to, well yes I can already00:36:51
from the fact that my example is which I00:36:53
cited originally00:36:54
for virtue then accept such an answer00:36:58
that night from the side of those running him 10000:37:01
others with whom I discussed means00:37:04
it turns out that faith in some00:37:06
Scripture is a virtue and faith is00:37:10
modern specialists who00:37:11
understand science, that is, well00:37:14
let's say much less virtue00:37:17
what seems opposite to yours00:37:19
for example because when you justified00:37:21
why is there belief in evolution but what are you00:37:24
for yourself you call faith in evolution this00:37:26
well you based it exactly on what00:37:29
there are a lot of competent specialists00:37:30
which00:37:32
they think so, of course that’s what concerns00:37:40
faith in creatures writing there is still00:37:42
one more element element00:37:45
trust is not personal loyalty because00:37:49
God is a personality and we are building with him00:37:51
personal relationships and when we are with someone00:37:54
we build personal relationships, well at least00:37:56
we are talking about members of our family then we00:38:00
we proceed from the fact that we must trust00:38:03
our loved ones trust our friends00:38:06
if they invited me to visit and treat me00:38:09
there with some dish I will calmly say and00:38:12
they will stand under books if I want00:38:17
maintain relationships with people00:38:21
there is personal trust in the fact that these people do not00:38:24
oslo intend she she is00:38:27
virtue because how else00:38:30
You can build relationships with people if00:38:32
I suggest you not trust your colleagues now00:38:38
Sergey continue asking your questions00:38:43
Sergey, your next question is for Alexander00:38:48
ok I'll get back to that discussion about00:38:54
ethics that we heard from00:38:56
Alexander, well, it’s good there are people00:38:57
who want to live in another perfect00:39:00
in the world, for example there00:39:04
ideas the National Socialists want to live in00:39:07
world where there is a superior race00:39:10
enslaved everyone else or there if00:39:14
margin or militant wants to live with you00:39:19
in a world where00:39:21
everyone is forbidden to drink beer or anything else00:39:24
I don’t know what some psychopath wants00:39:29
live in a world where00:39:43
I think you have problems with communication00:39:51
interrupted the last part into the soup00:39:54
the last couple of sentences are not00:39:56
got it again Sergey please00:39:58
ok last couple of sentences here00:40:02
Alexander spoke about the world in which he wanted00:40:04
would not like to live and buffing it00:40:07
the reasoning is clear and complete, but00:40:09
imagine that act which00:40:13
would like to live in another perfect world00:40:16
well, for example, some kind of ideological00:40:18
Russian bodies would live in a world higher than once00:40:22
I fixed everyone, but will this person be there?00:40:26
He's objectively wrong, he's objectively wrong00:40:31
he won’t, but I will definitely be with him00:40:33
I don't agree, I'll do my best00:40:35
so as not to end up in the world in which00:40:36
he doesn’t want to live for this at all00:40:39
you don't have to call yours00:40:42
the world is objectively enough for me00:40:45
I don't like the world it is00:40:46
offers and actually delve into00:40:48
In practice, in general, is everything like this?00:40:49
it applies not only but there00:40:53
fundamental questions on there00:40:55
the universe but this concerns but there00:40:57
banal everyday life husband and wife00:41:00
live together00:41:02
wife wants a new dishwasher husband reading00:41:04
passion is too expensive so who knows00:41:07
one of them is objectively right, well here’s the question00:41:11
very strange but naturally the wife will00:41:14
It was a very sexist example for me00:41:17
sorry, husband wants to add water00:41:19
dishwasher but the wife doesn't want a dishwasher00:41:21
read too long and which one00:41:25
objectively right again to the point that00:41:26
nothing has really changed here00:41:30
so they can cook up arguments00:41:33
convince each other and cannot provide00:41:35
and but also by the influence of me the husband will say I with00:41:38
I won't sleep with you if you don't buy00:41:41
dishwasher00:41:42
here are some different forms00:41:46
interaction with humans between them00:41:48
there will be and in the end, well, either it will or it won’t00:41:51
will this dishwasher be installed in the house00:41:53
this is actually how I look at it00:42:02
if I understand correctly between let's say00:42:06
Nazis and their opponents do not exist00:42:10
objective differences and which would impose00:42:12
we have a moral obligation00:42:15
resist the Nazis, support and00:42:17
component, I would say that it is not necessary00:42:22
you need to make such a strong statement00:42:24
about the need for an objective difference for00:42:28
to express your disapproval00:42:31
fascism in order to protect the rights00:42:35
Jews and so on, that's all00:42:40
the same question arises: would I like to live00:42:42
in a world where you can just take it and declare00:42:45
people of a certain nationality00:42:49
third class and commit on them00:42:50
terrible things I was in such a world to live in00:42:53
I would therefore I would confidently00:42:57
wanted to fight back00:42:58
fascism, but at the same time is not obliged to00:43:03
this insist that my picture00:43:07
the world is objective incomprehensibly00:43:10
what criteria according to that is that00:43:16
are you in a situation where we are not00:43:19
we can say that the same Nazis are wrong00:43:22
we can only say that they are not for us00:43:25
like they are wrong from my point of view00:43:28
in terms of everything they are wrong00:43:30
modern civilized society00:43:31
if you need to look for some confirmation00:43:34
yours if you want something more00:43:37
you can prove that you are right00:43:39
appeal to the fact that00:43:41
modern communities there think00:43:47
this is terrible lessons further colleagues I00:43:51
I'll try to get in anyway, I know that00:43:54
Now we're about to start this kind of rhetorical00:43:56
game one asks a question00:43:58
look for a trick, here's another answer00:44:01
This leads to another trick question00:44:03
Alexandra do you have any more questions for00:44:06
to your opponent00:44:08
move on to we can start going deeper into00:44:12
discussion there to look for subjectivity00:44:16
modern morality, but we can00:44:18
try to answer our questions00:44:21
viewers who are also quite00:44:22
difficult would suggest Alexandra now00:44:24
ask Sergius one last question and then00:44:30
some discussion on the back Alexander00:44:33
topic go to questions from our viewers00:44:36
let's do it this way xander00:44:39
please it seems to me actually the most00:44:42
such a demonstrative question?00:44:44
which I asked for the first time I went to00:44:47
I saved the channel to my opponent now00:44:50
I’ll repeat, but with a little background as00:44:53
like you, my opponent is the first to save him00:44:57
agreed with the idea that evolution is00:45:00
scientific theory that there is nothing against00:45:03
believers have no evolution00:45:05
shouldn't have it while I'm fake00:45:07
believers have but contradictory do not see00:45:09
here it is when I made this argument that00:45:15
in dogs will deal with evolutionary00:45:17
biology has never had such a moment00:45:19
when there are only two texts on planet adam00:45:21
and Eva somehow turns out according to00:45:26
teaching we are all from adam and eve two people00:45:29
but this didn’t happen, we all evolved00:45:31
there were big ones from other animals00:45:33
populations of 1000 individuals that are between00:45:37
gradually interbreed populations00:45:38
evolved like this00:45:41
be here as an answer00:45:43
my opponent then said that this is00:45:45
others in this on different planes I do00:45:48
I don’t understand what these different planes are00:45:50
then in other discussions I tried00:45:52
someone to achieve this00:45:53
and the most interesting answer so far00:45:55
which I heard was just from00:45:56
believing scientist who said well in general00:45:58
something like a lot of universes in one00:46:01
the universe of housing, his home, that's where they have it00:46:05
there was a fall and prepared it later00:46:07
had to fall to the ground means Jesus gave up00:46:08
but it was a different universe and then00:46:10
after that God created our universe00:46:12
there was evolution and actually what we are00:46:14
we all suffer there from illness from all these00:46:16
problems are a consequence00:46:18
the fall although because he was in00:46:20
another universe and after that ours00:46:22
the real one turned out like this00:46:23
it turned out this is how you would resolve this00:46:27
paradox00:46:28
about two planes, well, how do I imagine it00:46:32
I represent and I emphasized that this is00:46:36
my personal position is based on the fact that00:46:41
in scripture biological00:46:44
offspring it does not necessarily coincide with00:46:48
posterity that is to say spiritual in the Bible00:46:51
first all the Jews then all the Christians00:46:55
called children of Abraham but this does not mean00:46:59
that they are all physical00:47:00
descendants of a man named Abraham00:47:02
because we already consider the Old Testament00:47:05
that Israel was joined by people from the very00:47:07
of different origins, that is, Israel00:47:09
was more of a mountain confession00:47:11
what the nation itself never was00:47:15
chemically pure nations but they are all00:47:17
these are the children of Abraham as they are00:47:20
spiritually heirs00:47:23
man named Abraham and actions00:47:26
a man named Abraham was formed00:47:28
no the current situation is exactly the same as00:47:31
For example00:47:34
clan macgregor of he is quite likely00:47:38
goes back to a person with the surname madred by00:47:40
named McGregor but that doesn't mean that00:47:44
they are all physically and then00:47:46
caught 3 so the question is what00:47:53
do we descend biologically from one00:47:57
the only couple and the question of whether there was00:48:02
historical I will give his act which00:48:04
influenced us all but it00:48:08
still different questions just like00:48:10
this is the act of Abraham, we know that Abraham00:48:12
This00:48:13
not not a single individual as00:48:16
Now we all live separately00:48:18
this is the head quo00:48:20
head of the clan head of the clan he accepts00:48:23
decision when to tell him to come out00:48:25
there and go to the land that I will show you00:48:27
this does not mean that he takes alone00:48:30
the backpack is this means that it00:48:34
quantum is moving there and people who are00:48:36
therefore they did not join him at all00:48:39
necessarily a picture of the Fall00:48:42
assumes that we are all physical and00:48:45
biological descendants of a particular00:48:48
person with candy diy at home00:48:50
biological, can I comment00:48:55
last remark okay let's do it00:48:58
let's take the picture you are looking at now00:49:01
drew00:49:02
and imagine what it means that there is Adam and00:49:04
eva some two people let them00:49:06
cultural heritage was passed on in parallel00:49:09
there were a lot of other people with them and these00:49:12
two people commit and some00:49:14
disgusting Well, let's say God's point of view because00:49:17
I really don’t see anything in this00:49:19
what's terrible is what they did00:49:20
such as to curse the whole family00:49:22
human suffering without guise to know them00:49:25
there are places to spend time with them00:49:27
good conversation but this may also be mine00:49:29
understanding of morality different from00:49:31
divine here she suffered in that00:49:35
including the descendants of all those00:49:37
other people who live cheek there00:49:39
had nothing to do with00:49:41
they didn’t know what they were doing there00:49:44
they were there in the Garden of Eden or they weren't00:49:45
means where they walked, but it’s not just00:49:48
they go for a walk there the fire started00:49:50
learn how to get bear skin there00:49:53
bam in short and it’s not clear to attack them and00:49:55
I don’t even know at all, but maybe not00:49:57
then my unica has never seen this in my life00:49:59
suddenly attack not some kind and00:50:00
illness and a bunch of other things appeared00:50:03
they didn't have too many problems00:50:06
fair to them00:50:07
it turns out if it seems to me that all the same00:50:10
this version is bursting at the seams00:50:12
this is how I see it again, this is it00:50:17
my personal position00:50:19
other crosses they can look at00:50:21
otherwise Adam should have found00:50:25
They did not find immortality in this gift00:50:30
Having acquired this gift, he accordingly did not00:50:32
was able to pass it on to us to his descendants and not00:50:35
I was able to pass it on to other people00:50:39
somehow I don’t see it here00:50:41
problems are likely because well if00:50:46
a person is called to grow in relationship with00:50:49
God for this he must choose00:50:51
certain tests he must take00:50:53
decision to obey god he is00:50:56
he fails the test he had to00:50:59
gain eternal life as a result of this00:51:02
tests, well, you know that he didn’t find it00:51:04
accordingly conveyed to us why others00:51:06
they gave me a try00:51:08
why didn't they let others try it?00:51:11
Adam was bad, but Vasya was good00:51:14
he would have passed the test they even gave him00:51:16
try because ode is00:51:21
head of the human race like that00:51:25
how Abraham is the head of his clan00:51:29
but moreover the story is perek00:51:31
fall it is relevant to us00:51:35
now because it's about what I am now00:51:39
acting as and at home I listen to the snake00:51:42
they are god I eat forbidden fruit I then00:51:46
I blame it on the food the snake was very00:51:50
touching picture of snakes on a hedgehog00:51:53
there for worms and so on00:51:56
shift responsibility that is00:51:58
it describes not just an event that00:52:02
took place at the dawn of human history00:52:04
but the situation we are involved in00:52:06
now colleagues now excuse me00:52:10
you interrupt the flow of your eloquence00:52:14
let's just say because we're moving on to00:52:16
questions from our viewers questions00:52:19
I’ll be reading a lot of them now, and00:52:22
We'll probably decide along the way00:52:24
who will answer them or maybe both of you00:52:26
he first started commenting00:52:28
Evgeny Rodygin sincere question he00:52:30
writes for scientific thinking logic00:52:32
availability is not enough00:52:34
critical attitude is completely00:52:36
contradicts religious thinking00:52:38
I've already heard about this topic here00:52:40
comments from both participants today00:52:43
debate Olga Kazanskaya asks00:52:46
question about pandemics and similar00:52:49
disasters how do they look at such phenomena00:52:51
science and faith are probably more about00:52:55
specific faith about Christian00:52:58
Orthodox what they have to offer00:53:00
for salvation, I guess I'll take turns00:53:04
Sergey what do you say how how to say on00:53:09
if I may say so and will consider00:53:12
the pandemic and what it offers for salvation00:53:15
from a bow this is a manifestation of shooting this00:53:20
manifestation of the fallen state and our00:53:22
the world is a reminder that we will die00:53:25
but this is inevitable and we need00:53:28
form a worldview00:53:30
in which death takes its place in00:53:33
in which we understand that from this death00:53:36
do this Alexander00:53:39
Well, recently they asked me when00:53:43
this will all end when it is possible00:53:44
calmly walk down the street when you can00:53:47
will finally go again finally00:53:50
concert of musical groups, here I am at her place00:53:53
unfortunately it has already been rescheduled twice00:53:54
specifically who wanted to go00:53:56
musical really wanted to go dates dates00:54:03
everyone shifts shifts for pandemics then00:54:05
Of course you can live normal00:54:06
life00:54:08
Well, the answer is actually when scientists00:54:10
will make a working vaccine which is00:54:13
with my efficiency until I can go00:54:14
will appear and calmly go for a walk here00:54:18
it's natural00:54:21
no one stood for us before this epidemic00:54:25
will stop, we need to take it00:54:29
tactical decisions for wealth mission00:54:32
we have no special vaccines yet00:54:34
clinical studies are definitive00:54:37
there are no good medicines open ficuses all00:54:41
what you can do is linger00:54:43
if possible for those who may not00:54:45
maybe but stick to social00:54:47
distance use masks and so on00:54:50
Irina asks the question00:54:54
Serkova, if you believe in religion, then the soul00:54:57
after death continues to live in this00:55:00
if her consciousness remembers00:55:02
your life, if so, isn’t your soul00:55:05
suffers from the fact that he cannot be there00:55:07
with relatives the question is apparently cashiers days00:55:10
that means yes most definitely00:55:13
human consciousness continues that00:55:16
after death a person will continue to remember that00:55:20
there is his personality continues00:55:21
limb memory smoothed out00:55:24
it is unclear to ensure our personal00:55:26
identity whether a person is upset00:55:31
separation from loved ones00:55:33
but in this situation I think it comes from00:55:36
that this separation is temporary and then00:55:41
[music]00:55:42
the news that we gain eternal life00:55:46
bliss she's so good00:55:48
which I think she completely smoothes out00:55:52
all possible disappointments that can00:55:53
to have a person on the other side is this00:55:58
I think it's one of those questions too00:55:59
where the religious position is very strong00:56:02
disagrees with the scientific one because ours00:56:05
memories they are stored in very00:56:08
specific area of the human brain00:56:11
damage to which may include that00:56:13
even without death a person will lose his00:56:15
memories and certain features of one's00:56:18
personalities here and accordingly00:56:20
death is the same only00:56:24
brought to the absolute do not perish00:56:25
these are the only areas of the brain that are needed00:56:27
to keep memories00:56:29
here but also all other areas of the brain00:56:31
which are needed in order to experience00:56:33
feelings emotions recognize faces00:56:35
recognize people that's when people imagine00:56:39
represent some spirits there and00:56:40
ghosts seeing what they remember there00:56:43
who did they communicate with there who killed them there00:56:45
if the same mouth is someone's crime then00:56:47
this is very sharply at odds with what we00:56:51
we know how it is formed00:56:55
human personality in terms of00:56:57
neurobiology for those who00:57:03
you know those programs that behaved00:57:05
good and not buggy those admin00:57:08
will restore from backups thanks question from00:57:14
Evgeniya how to explain cosmology00:57:18
understanding the world device within00:57:20
the universe through religion for example00:57:23
the age of the universe is 13.7 billion years00:57:28
again the question is apparently for Sergei, maybe with00:57:33
whether with the help of Nadal but also very good00:57:36
because 13 and 8 or 7 billion years00:57:41
ago it's a very very long time ago but it's00:57:43
limited time and so we00:57:46
we are faced with the fact that the universe00:57:48
limited time existence and00:57:50
this inevitably brings us to the question00:57:52
about the cause of occurrence therefore as in00:57:57
in this regard, modern cosmology00:57:59
this is a great gift to the peasants00:58:02
baguette and I remember reading that when only00:58:06
expanding universe theory00:58:08
just appeared and put forward00:58:09
Catholic priest Georges Lemaitre she00:58:12
caused strong hostility because of precisely00:58:16
her own and for precisely the fact that she00:58:20
indicates that the universe had00:58:22
the beginning and it has certain00:58:25
theological implications thank you question00:58:31
which00:58:32
addressed to Alexander Panchin from00:58:34
Vitaly Front who writes tell me00:58:37
Alexander what is your biggest plus00:58:40
faith for modern humanity00:58:42
you talked a lot about business, didn’t you?00:58:44
you don't like Easter cakes very much00:58:53
delicious yes probably if you look for it00:58:56
the positive side of religion00:58:58
Easter cakes are the best thing the Greeks gave00:59:03
for brevity Kirill Voroshilov question00:59:07
addressed to both Sergei00:59:08
you claim that religion gives00:59:10
absolute guideline for morality in this case00:59:13
acknowledge that at different times the descriptions00:59:15
interpreted differently what it is00:59:17
absolute if it changes depending on00:59:19
Kirill asks about the political situation00:59:23
Well, look, there are state laws00:59:26
and lawyers in court00:59:29
these laws are interpreted by each00:59:32
the benefit of your client in the robot and how00:59:34
lawyers but the adversarial process itself00:59:37
it is possible only insofar as00:59:40
there is no law without this law00:59:44
maybe the parties could have a process00:59:46
fight but not work hard and00:59:50
that lawyers will be different00:59:53
interpreting the law does not deny that00:59:57
that there is an objective law01:00:00
real on the contrary it emphasizes that01:00:02
that this law is all laws then01:00:06
written by people not they when well two01:00:16
good example, this is not the Armenian process01:00:19
where from the point of view of the laws written01:00:23
people and Nazi criminals were01:00:24
it's impossible to judge because they weren't01:00:27
citizens of the victorious countries and not01:00:29
fell under the jurisdiction of the freja law01:00:32
some did not violate therefore despite the fact that01:00:35
it was obvious that he was a monstrous villain01:00:38
formal was a big problem01:00:42
problem for example were abolitionists in01:00:45
southern states that helped blacks01:00:48
slaves run away from these owners to their north01:00:51
it was a crime to be detained01:00:53
laws of that time and01:00:55
they said no, we think there is01:00:59
we owe him a higher law of God01:01:01
obey first therefore we01:01:07
inevitably we run into existence on01:01:09
objective moral law01:01:11
I would add what these laws are01:01:14
who mentioned being used01:01:16
evangelistic process01:01:17
and for the persecution of evolutionists01:01:20
written by people, the very presence of some01:01:22
laws written by people do not guarantee01:01:24
that we will agree with these laws01:01:26
Well, here we are talking after all, I’m already here01:01:29
I’ll get into about the introduction of the concept of international01:01:32
rights in this case are apparently01:01:35
after the Second World War his theme was how01:01:38
times it turned out to be a very relevant concept01:01:42
international law and what should01:01:43
exist something higher01:01:45
in five laws of individual states but01:01:49
anyway formulated by people okay01:01:51
I shouldn't interfere here so01:01:54
next question question from a viewer01:01:57
simple user name to Alexander question01:02:01
simple no exactly the concert you wanted01:02:03
go I wanted to go to this concert01:02:10
there are several planned I'm still waiting01:02:12
when will there be another pilaf recipe?01:02:14
music from heroes here is music from the witcher01:02:18
these concerts but a few more01:02:21
unfortunately they are all very abstract01:02:24
Sergei, are you planning on some01:02:26
go to the concert when you have a chance01:02:30
which Michael are you listening to oh I'm listening either with01:02:36
Victoria, well, a little more than anything01:02:39
Latin church music Gregorian01:02:42
chorales question from Mikhail Rodionova01:02:49
let Sergei prove that he believes them01:02:52
play a role-playing game01:02:53
let him move even a pebble with the power of faith01:02:57
here and further Matthew 17:20 and there is nowhere01:03:01
it is said that this is an allegory it says01:03:03
Truly I tell you01:03:06
well, we can say the same thing there01:03:11
if you speak Russian, a person says that01:03:14
this letter broke her heart we can01:03:18
say you're lying there with a broken heart01:03:20
he would have fallen and died01:03:22
assign the guitar milks itself quite alive01:03:25
obviously in different languages01:03:28
we really exist all the time01:03:31
we use how to know we don't notice that01:03:34
we speak in prose just like we01:03:36
We constantly use different01:03:37
literary devices we use01:03:40
allegories we use metaphors and01:03:44
scientists use01:03:47
metaphors are always the same selfish01:03:50
gene when we understand what a gene is01:03:53
chemical compound have the characteristics01:03:55
character can't try to read01:03:58
article on cosmology flat no heavy01:04:03
there was a vacuum there the universe was flat01:04:05
Habakkuk was hard01:04:06
it's like in one of the mass releases they01:04:09
there's a lot of them talking in the act of being a drug addict01:04:10
this sit we use all the time01:04:15
allegory01:04:16
and here is the meaning of the legend of advancing the mountain01:04:20
in fact, this is in our language, yours there01:04:22
move mountains do something great01:04:26
do something out of bounds and that's01:04:29
really happened when01:04:31
Christianity grew out of this01:04:34
small group of people01:04:36
dear or sevan next question from01:04:46
sein brains question to Sergey, do you agree?01:04:51
he with the fact that the theory of God is not01:04:53
falsifies yes she is not falsifying01:04:58
this is not a theory01:04:59
own normase nothing before01:05:02
and of course we cannot and should not01:05:06
apply believe we immediately say that01:05:10
faith in god is faith it is not01:05:12
empirical scientific theory criterion01:05:15
poker applies to01:05:17
legal scientific theories thank you01:05:22
if possible, comment on what is mine01:05:25
mother the difference from this position is that everything01:05:26
that's the point: the supporters01:05:29
let's say some esoteric practices01:05:32
they can also say over the local yes01:05:34
I'll let this astrology work when im01:05:37
they say that well, you can always give01:05:42
explanation of a failed fashion experiment and01:05:44
so you are not rigged01:05:45
performance they say, well, we and science01:05:48
the new geta works here and here it is01:05:52
this is such a trick01:05:54
it lies in the fact that from the fact that you01:05:57
they called their beliefs unscientific until01:06:01
this is not their ontological status01:06:04
changed01:06:06
Of course you put up the markings, it’s very01:06:08
well she still claims01:06:10
some reality she remained01:06:11
astrologers still present that is01:06:13
That's what astrologers think is science01:06:15
not science does not pretend to be what is possible01:06:17
say something about a person by the way he01:06:20
the stars are located at the moment of his birth and01:06:23
believers they believe that God is Nikki01:06:27
some real existing being01:06:29
which created the world and not to be drained01:06:32
any particular religion that is01:06:33
some description of this process01:06:36
and you knew the metaphors before this01:06:39
this means what part is there01:06:41
she also has metaphors as a metaphor01:06:44
this may have been discussed but everything is in01:06:46
this is not written in metaphor01:06:49
Adam and Eve, by the way, are indicative01:06:51
that this is just a metaphor, it’s also not01:06:53
recorded by the majority of believers here01:06:56
God is someone from a complex statement01:06:59
each book which in general actually01:07:01
actually has a very specific content01:07:05
relating to the real world as it is01:07:07
arranged by the actual state of affairs and01:07:09
from saying that a new survey01:07:12
our beliefs but little will change01:07:14
Sergey turn back yes well so is materialism01:07:19
he is in no way very01:07:21
provably materialism is not01:07:23
scientific theory then I don’t want you obskoe01:07:25
the idea of the world that I find in01:07:28
a number of reasons01:07:29
convince that is, just like not01:07:35
falls under the criteria of paper we separation01:07:38
it doesn't apply to you in the same way01:07:39
materialism why terrorism hits and01:07:41
in the discourse we have already discussed this01:07:43
premieres of what could disrupt01:07:45
mathematical picture meriva the same01:07:47
example of experiment with remote01:07:51
influence through some01:07:54
spiritual intervention on behavior or01:07:57
the fate of a person this might not be01:08:00
proved for a specific religion but this01:08:03
would have overthrown materialism and because01:08:05
what besides the known laws of physics01:08:07
nothing is rejected to prove01:08:09
the existence of some other phenomena01:08:11
which are inexplicably modern01:08:13
according to the laws of physics nature you are a mass01:08:18
psychics materialists who01:08:21
claim that they operate on some01:08:23
not yet discovered by official science01:08:26
fields but these fields that they are talking about01:08:29
they speak from personality and properties01:08:32
interest and feeling the picture of the world01:08:34
strange authorities said this project01:08:38
I already want interest on terrorists01:08:40
come in and say that we have published01:08:43
on the Inter channel brought a video of the ceremony01:08:45
awards for outstanding achievements in01:08:48
field of pseudoscience 2020 honorary01:08:50
academician rush therefore after after01:08:53
debate dear friends, don't forget to come and01:08:55
see who became the main figure01:08:58
science 2020 I hope there is someone there01:09:01
will throw a link in the chat and by the way01:09:03
they are already watching us on channel 201:09:05
more than two thousand spectators, friends and me01:09:08
I’ll continue for an hour with questions, excuse me01:09:11
me and the question asks and but prefer which01:09:17
poses a question apparently to both participants01:09:20
discussions is religion a necessary condition01:09:23
existence of any type of society01:09:26
I'm probably asking for both01:09:28
comment Sasha what do you think about01:09:32
hell you conditions no nor am I01:09:34
I know what argument is often used01:09:37
the benefit of what is see all01:09:39
modern01:09:40
developed civilization developed countries and01:09:44
not everywhere there is religion01:09:45
yes what can I say look at01:09:47
Everywhere people get the flu, that's not it01:09:51
means that the presence of traffic police will appear in the clear01:09:53
logically not because necessarily01:09:55
need to compare colleagues with the flu01:09:56
because omnipresent for some reason yes01:09:59
nothing in principle formal-logical01:10:01
does not prove the same as in the story with01:10:02
the hermit which I mentioned in the01:10:04
the beginning before out goes out into the street and you are not01:10:07
they eat this up to speak in poetry not so much01:10:09
you need to speak in poetry you weren't eaten01:10:11
religion seems to be very01:10:15
natural for the human brain01:10:17
she notices a phenomenon about this in a book01:10:19
anthropologist pascal bout religion explained01:10:21
where he says why to people to people01:10:24
tend to make things up01:10:26
supernatural creatures videos01:10:27
tend to worship people01:10:29
it’s natural to create around it01:10:33
some rituals are typical for these people01:10:36
do therefore it is possible also as01:10:38
people tend to have a lot of things there01:10:42
other not only religion but also there I am not01:10:46
I know people tend to love launches01:10:50
flowers as if saying here or get sick01:10:54
flu and everything that can be positive01:10:55
there is a negative example, it doesn’t matter01:10:58
leagues are naturally ubiquitous01:11:00
phenomenon due to certain properties01:11:02
of humanity as a species, but this does not mean01:11:05
that in principle it is impossible to build a society01:11:07
in which even if Sergey wouldn’t be there I would01:11:12
agreed that of course a society without01:11:14
religion sense without faith tastes01:11:16
naturally I can exist in such01:11:18
society radius has actually grown01:11:21
the nearest closest church was01:11:23
next year01:11:26
an hour's ride by bus and it's not even in my head01:11:29
came to meddle there so well01:11:32
Of course, there are a lot of them in the USSR and China too01:11:36
where else in the twentieth century existed01:11:39
society01:11:41
almost clean almost sterile01:11:44
atheistic01:11:46
thanks question asked by nicholas wright01:11:50
why prayer doesn't resuscitate patients01:11:54
that no one on the planet has faith with01:11:57
card grain01:11:59
Why then believe at all, since the power of faith01:12:02
no market on01:12:05
why should it be understood01:12:08
faith jenny magic is an appeal to god with01:12:13
with a personal request, we proceed from01:12:16
that God knows better that this is so or01:12:19
otherwise our earthly journey must end01:12:21
someday and you know in it01:12:24
I remember this connection and anecdote like01:12:27
Garden of Eden along the paths of the Garden of Eden01:12:30
a married couple is walking and he doesn't01:12:33
says if only I had idiotic pills01:12:36
I wish I had been in this wonderful place a year ago01:12:38
in a place that God knows when a person feels better01:12:44
die and we are not trying to dictate to him01:12:49
so that she . I'm moving on, maybe a rollback to the detective01:12:52
it's not good to stay01:12:55
thank you, I understand, politics is possible, I understand01:12:59
which I really really care about01:13:00
what scares in religions is what laughter is01:13:05
a person can be considered as01:13:06
something about what sense is good for this01:13:09
person the man died but it was he who went to God and there01:13:14
everything will be great for him, for me it's01:13:18
very inconsistent with my views on01:13:21
the value of human life is that01:13:23
any death is a great tragedy and we01:13:26
must do everything possible to01:13:27
to prevent death, of course01:13:30
preventing the death of a person you perform01:13:32
commandment thou shalt not kill01:13:34
care for the life and health of others and01:13:37
here comes the idea01:13:39
blame it on interrupted to death that tragedy01:13:44
but this tragedy is overcome by death01:13:46
resurrection of christ01:13:48
Well, it just turns out that I have01:13:51
Christian God and serious ethical01:13:53
disagreements01:13:54
that's because if someone came to me01:13:57
made a personal request asked not01:13:59
give to a small child who is sick01:14:01
wild and die01:14:02
then I can’t imagine what I would be like01:14:05
found an excuse for myself01:14:07
a subject this child to death and b01:14:10
put his parents through suffering01:14:12
undeserved, that is01:14:15
it is obvious that if you insist as well01:14:18
on the fact that there are objective01:14:20
moral rules01:14:21
then my moral rules that I believe01:14:23
correct01:14:24
sharply at odds with the strait of morality01:14:26
Christian God so Christianity is not01:14:30
under no circumstances say that God01:14:32
is a source of death or suffering01:14:35
the source of death and suffering is01:14:38
human bad choices01:14:40
human sin that brought deep01:14:43
destruction continues to bring to this world01:14:45
faith in divine providence means that god01:14:48
ready for pi situation god will turn everything about to01:14:53
Bob, that is, it’s even worse, that is, not01:14:56
only the child died and his parents01:14:59
suffer but it’s also their fault no why01:15:03
so how come it’s not God’s fault God’s little01:15:05
in order to be refused them but still ska you01:15:07
you know, but it’s not my fault that01:15:09
you child died on myself, of course I could01:15:11
prevent this because I01:15:13
Almighty all-knowing prayers I am yours01:15:15
I hear because I'm omniscient you know01:15:17
somehow no, but let the devil be there01:15:20
does its job or is there when there are thousands01:15:23
ta-da-da-lady with him there was no need01:15:25
there is an apple so I won't01:15:27
interfere in your affairs here's yours01:15:29
suffering, well, I’ll tell you there later from the backups01:15:33
I will restore01:15:34
I'll give you an example, but I saw how01:15:37
the man bought a bottle of vodka and didn’t go01:15:42
Slipped on the way out of the store01:15:44
fell and unchained this very bottle and01:15:47
I thought here01:15:49
mercifully you God means to him01:15:52
trip him and he starts getting drunk01:15:55
don't hit your liver again but if01:15:59
every time a person buys this01:16:01
pushed a bottle of vodka and placed it01:16:03
tripping the angel would have destroyed him01:16:06
free01:16:07
more would have destroyed his opportunity01:16:10
control your life01:16:11
if we have the opportunity to accept01:16:13
free decisions to manage your01:16:15
life01:16:16
some of these decisions will be bad01:16:18
destructive and detrimental to ourselves01:16:20
and for the world in general and representation01:16:24
cool little mom didn't think of it01:16:27
no no no Sashulya listen to the moderator01:16:31
please do so01:16:34
a question asked by our regular viewer01:16:38
pie with jam01:16:40
So the question is, is it possible to say that01:16:45
deities01:16:46
there are personifications of abstract concepts01:16:49
such as good evil honesty time and01:16:53
the like, that is, it’s possible again01:16:57
look for what the majority is01:16:58
personification of abstract concepts01:17:01
Sergey you can say so with mine01:17:04
points of view01:17:05
if we are talking about Christian gods then01:17:09
in reality there is nothing more specific01:17:11
and determined by what God is for this reason01:17:17
he then of course they seem very shorter01:17:19
it to personify anything01:17:21
this pascal had the same thing with him01:17:25
let's place the idea conceptually similar but not01:17:29
about good and evil is something people and01:17:31
ability to think about how01:17:33
other people think01:17:34
called the theory of mind sea of might &01:17:38
ideas about gods are brought to a certain01:17:42
factions ideas about missing people so01:17:44
how can we think about people who are now01:17:46
no and what are they thinking about we can also01:17:48
project imagine01:17:51
imagine using the same ones01:17:52
tools of our brain what to imagine01:17:54
itself some missing given by Minsk01:17:57
a creature that watches us and01:17:59
maybe we should be judged like that01:18:00
other people that's why when we01:18:03
considering the existing concept01:18:06
gods in different religions01:18:08
they look an awful lot like people, these gods01:18:10
they have feelings of love too01:18:14
envy and pride and hatred01:18:16
extreme occurrence of these behaviors is not01:18:18
they can punish some sinners01:18:20
maybe, on the contrary, some believers for their01:18:22
to reward faith, this is all very similar01:18:24
on the actions of people than on the action of what01:18:28
then beyond I can that beings who could01:18:29
I wish I could live completely differently01:18:31
not needed by the conceptual paradigm01:18:33
in worship those who are not subject to power are not01:18:35
someone in need of confession of faith01:18:39
for them it's a matter of someone they thought if01:18:42
omnipotence, omniscient and put yourself on01:18:44
his place really is01:18:46
you are unlikely to care whether he walks01:18:50
someone with the letter is a man to others01:18:52
to be a man in a gay bar, relatively speaking01:18:54
exaggerated01:18:55
this is unlikely to be a question for you01:18:58
you have to really take care there and01:19:00
write a draft of some commandment on01:19:02
what are these ants running around there?01:19:04
no, don't do it under any circumstances01:19:05
whether or not ants are for people01:19:09
this is completely common for you01:19:12
you understand the thought but the thought of the thought is clear01:19:15
Question from Vitaly Front, he writes well01:19:20
I am a believer but I am afraid of fanatics01:19:23
what needs to be changed to minimize01:19:25
I don’t know the emergence of such organizations01:19:28
than we believe in Riga holiday organizations01:19:31
the state of atheists is such a scoop01:19:37
unfortunately militant fanaticism he he01:19:44
not connected he may be religious he01:19:47
maybe he can be political01:19:49
whatever else, history says that01:19:53
can be dialogic with absolutely no relay01:19:56
and you even found out anti-religious01:19:58
fanaticism that is of all religious01:20:02
goes around the fanatics in two circles so01:20:08
such is the property of fallen man, well01:20:12
our modern realities, of course we01:20:14
we see that not everyone is an ideology01:20:19
equally dangerous for people, let's say that01:20:22
happened there on September 11th in the United States01:20:25
states of America or what is now01:20:26
happens in France, let's say there01:20:29
imagine it in modern times01:20:31
Christianity, well, it’s possible, but it’s hard to say01:20:34
so that's probably why it hangs on the fanatics01:20:36
are everywhere is that these religious01:20:38
fanatics what happens is only there01:20:40
killed priests maybe there01:20:44
different numbers on killed some01:20:46
specific people this is unacceptable in any01:20:48
to some extent this is what happens accordingly01:20:51
anti-religious fanaticism too, but not all01:20:54
human ideologies and not01:20:56
seem equivalent in terms of juice01:20:59
probability is not enough violence for me too01:21:01
it seems that one of the problems is the same01:21:03
such dialogues can enter this fanaticism01:21:05
in general, the very concept that these01:21:07
bones of the most infallible truth because01:21:10
that there are such walls01:21:11
a person can absolutely play baseball01:21:13
any reinforced concrete in his opinion01:21:15
the truth and treating everyone around like that is wrong01:21:18
he does not agree with enemies who01:21:21
objective reasons need some01:21:22
removed from society and therefore01:21:24
if they stick in something to build01:21:26
a safer society where everyone is01:21:28
could write their arguments in words they01:21:31
fights and not fists and not01:21:33
murders, especially to the extent that01:21:35
freedom of speech and freedom of discussion reigns01:21:38
and we can question any01:21:41
thesis and its normal to civilized01:21:43
people discuss well, I would also add by the way01:21:46
that this is exactly the discussion that01:21:48
this is what's happening right now01:21:50
the form seems to me to be their own01:21:53
a kind of vaccination against fanaticism when01:21:55
indeed this is some kind of tinting for01:22:00
intelligence and this is a safe way01:22:03
release of aggressive energy01:22:05
more discussions are organized correctly01:22:08
according to some rules we can01:22:11
really get some conclusions01:22:12
new for each of the participants01:22:14
discussions, that is, some kind of01:22:16
useful to extract new knowledge but also01:22:19
at least be respectful01:22:20
from any point of view this is a thing that01:22:22
maybe it protects us from manifestations01:22:24
extremism should therefore be welcomed01:22:27
this is the kind of civilized debate01:22:29
a question from the eta forest council is submitted or01:22:37
beauty of mathematical description01:22:39
if so, isn't it material?01:22:42
physical size colleagues who look at me01:22:49
place and all sorts of mathematical theories01:22:51
I don't understand music, that's why I01:22:54
here is the mathematical side of the question01:22:57
I won’t be interested in the height of the Komi besides01:23:00
that obvious things 10 because often01:23:02
find all sorts of symmetry beautiful there01:23:06
things like that, but at the same time I01:23:09
I suggest you think about this question01:23:11
turns out to be actually subjective here01:23:13
people find it quite easily01:23:16
attractive people there01:23:18
the opposite sex is the same sex but01:23:20
usually of its own kind01:23:21
for example, there are beetles that01:23:24
find attractive01:23:25
beer bottles but this is such a glitch01:23:28
programs but they then start with beer01:23:31
to cross bottles, there is a poet01:23:34
all sorts of photos are funny so that's why01:23:38
have time with a bottle because it's a beer hall01:23:41
the bottle has its own parameters01:23:43
they do not resemble the female of these beetles01:23:46
interested in finding a larger one01:23:49
itself this is a large beer bottle this is the most01:23:50
the largest female of all, that is, here01:23:52
something like how it might be there for us01:23:55
let's say these girls are super about him01:23:57
big eyes that nature cannot reach01:23:59
encounters such a superstimulus due to01:24:01
this they can call us to hidden01:24:03
aesthetic delight01:24:05
here and here are the beer bottles from the beetles and this01:24:09
I think it will show me how much01:24:10
presentation of beauty first can01:24:13
to be evolutionarily formed01:24:15
secondly it couldn’t be like that01:24:17
varied depending on the point01:24:18
beauty is in the eye of the beholder I would01:24:25
said that maybe maybe some01:24:29
degree we can describe beautiful objects01:24:31
in the language of mathematics but this does not explain01:24:33
I experience the very reality of the aesthetic01:24:36
they and moreover when Christopher Jones01:24:40
for example, calls us to look at01:24:43
the beauty of galaxies I don’t think anyone has01:24:45
Fathers, is anything edible?01:24:47
anything sexual that is ours01:24:51
experiencing his beauty is very01:24:53
difficult to fit into the evolutionary picture01:24:59
peace and this experience on the ability01:25:02
experiencing beauty indicates that01:25:05
the world is not reduced to its material01:25:07
component01:25:09
and the Russian Federation regarding the objectivity of beauty01:25:12
Well, look, I read a letter from an atheist01:25:15
Terry Pratchett who write their own01:25:18
the death we were still facing then, he01:25:21
says he wanted to die in his01:25:24
in the garden we listen to music, then we have faces and01:25:28
the forest is also one of my favorites01:25:30
composers we are with him despite the fact that01:25:33
3 believers we have in common01:25:35
idea of beauty we see beauty01:25:37
and we see beauty in the same galaxy01:25:40
we match Christopher Hitchens01:25:42
that is, we have a common experience01:25:44
experiencing the beauty that we are completely01:25:46
we can operate we can add add01:25:51
Well, go to an art gallery there01:25:53
there are very different genres of art01:25:55
there is a lot of controversy about what is there01:25:57
beautiful and what is art what01:26:00
the thread only then the sprout hangs on01:26:02
matches what fabrics some things01:26:03
may coincide between people but some01:26:05
things can be very subjective01:26:07
don't match at all01:26:08
it concerns evolutionary explanation01:26:10
thousands of important places such as points01:26:12
From an evolutionary point of view, it is very important that people01:26:14
were able to construct cause-and-effect01:26:15
communication is an important tool that allows01:26:18
we can predict what will happen in01:26:20
the surrounding world but a by-product01:26:22
This evolution also gives rise to the ability to build01:26:24
the reason for the close connection between things01:26:26
which are in no way related to each other and01:26:28
this gives rise to a lot of funny things01:26:29
phenomena starting but the simplest thing is there01:26:32
face recognition skill01:26:34
turn into the ability to recognize faces on01:26:36
photos of mars and people see a face there01:26:38
it's not because one is useful to see01:26:41
face on mars because it is useful in01:26:43
in principle, be able to recognize faces and there01:26:45
where there is a signal some brain amplifies01:26:47
signal we see the face even at max01:26:49
I think that many of the aspects01:26:50
beauty they are in a similar way01:26:52
are generated there is a wonderful program01:26:54
google DJ is a program that01:26:57
a huge network that can find01:26:59
some objects drawn on01:27:01
image here and there and trained to on01:27:03
the painted pictures find finished drawing01:27:05
so that objects appear there which are there01:27:07
didn't exist before and here you are where Jim started01:27:09
draw beautiful from a point of view01:27:10
human paintings based on this01:27:14
here is the computer in blue on the inclination01:27:17
Do they need to be identified?01:27:18
patterns that allowed him to distinguish01:27:20
some objects of others01:27:23
question from text analytics: what to do with01:27:28
by the facts that many archaeological01:27:30
discoveries confirmed the authenticity01:27:32
Bibles such as archaeological finds01:27:35
in Nazareth Sasha what do you say I I I01:27:40
I'll ask the modulator to answer for me no I01:27:45
because actually on the channel well01:27:48
raised his hand to eat many times and01:27:51
lectures and materials dedicated to discussions01:27:54
all sorts of fake stories about the holiness of Allah01:27:58
history manuals himself is not an archaeologist and01:28:00
historian then I don’t comment here if so01:28:07
identify01:28:08
I could say that you just need01:28:10
consider different things and let's say01:28:12
the Bible as a source of certain historical01:28:14
information and the Bible as a source01:28:17
stories of miracles so that's how much I01:28:21
I understand such finds, they are still not01:28:23
confirm and but also difficult to imagine01:28:26
How could they, for example, confirm01:28:28
the reality of the resurrection of christ is about01:28:31
existence of this or that people01:28:33
certain historical events01:28:35
personalities yes of course it is01:28:38
this source can and should01:28:41
be used as a historical source01:28:43
well, understanding again the limitation of any01:28:45
historical source as written01:28:47
people are not really talking about it, sorry01:28:52
I'm interrupting, actually I wanted you01:28:54
advertise what it really is01:28:55
interesting to understand all sorts of01:28:57
look at archaeological things01:28:58
on scientists against myths about this, I'm not01:29:01
I know if it was about me, let’s say01:29:03
times no more biblical flood01:29:05
but let's start with the idea of the biblical flood01:29:07
which is described yes she is absolutely accurate01:29:09
does not agree with modern data01:29:12
or ideas under this earth is 6000 years old and not01:29:16
even believers have long been reasonable believers01:29:18
long ago abandoned the so-called01:29:20
land like creationism01:29:22
one even among among believers is not01:29:26
are respected because of course01:29:27
the earth is not 6000 years old01:29:30
these are things but no one takes them seriously01:29:33
consider Sergei01:29:35
your point of view I would say that if01:29:44
we are talking about beauty then01:29:47
Do you understand what we're going through?01:29:49
beauty as a value and if we talk01:29:54
that this is a glitch01:29:55
evolutionary program then again01:29:59
gel protein on and so I heard that evolution01:30:01
this is something that happens in conditions01:30:03
struggle for limited resources and females and01:30:07
if instead of chasing food01:30:11
and with the scents I’m admiring the stars here01:30:14
anyway, the females will go to someone else01:30:18
that's why there are some doubts about01:30:23
that our experiences of beauty can01:30:25
it would be possible to explain it purely evolutionarily01:30:29
I guess you finished the comments on01:30:34
about the previous question and yours01:30:36
commentary on archaeological01:30:38
discoveries yes indeed we have01:30:47
data that fits very well01:30:50
biblical narrative and01:30:52
Well, I would agree that01:30:54
archaeologically prove the resurrection of01:30:57
then it would be really very01:30:59
it's clear how we sleep01:31:01
Now if you read the non-believers01:31:05
researchers and the new testament but border01:31:08
bug so that the guys agree that01:31:10
that Jesus existed as a historical01:31:12
face is that he had students in that01:31:15
that he was crucified on a Roman cross and01:31:18
that his disciples began to preach01:31:20
that he rose from the dead and of course we01:31:25
we face the need somehow01:31:27
explain this behavior of students and01:31:30
either they're not telling me the truth or01:31:33
they tell a lie if they say01:31:35
they know it's not true and01:31:38
consciously cannot this theory01:31:41
there are a variety of conspiracies that are now01:31:44
but no one takes it seriously01:31:46
or they're all massively hallucinating it01:31:49
somewhat more popular01:31:50
theory but theory is hallucination on not01:31:53
explains where the bodies disappeared and where the mass is01:31:56
such small details and we find ourselves01:32:00
before01:32:02
most obviously was in the house that they01:32:04
they still tell the truth but this is not a question01:32:07
archeology, of course, and it’s unlikely we could01:32:11
how 5 archaeologically prove this question01:32:14
review of available evidence01:32:16
the island of sité Sochi can be fixed01:32:19
something about the age of the earth here you are01:32:22
don't you think01:32:23
Polish with Jesus that the earth is 6000 years old and01:32:25
to the real flood and Noah01:32:28
the ark contained a pair of each creature01:32:30
as for 6000 years, the Bible does not01:32:36
it is said that the earth is 6000 years old this is the result01:32:39
there are some calculations01:32:41
being Steve an Anglican bishop01:32:43
somewhere around 16 forever counting on their own01:32:47
sufficiently controversial but it is not01:32:49
part of divine revelation that01:32:52
Christ is risen is definitely that01:32:55
Regarding the flood, it may be different01:33:00
interpretations of this narrative01:33:04
You see, for example, there is a parable in the Bible01:33:06
about the prodigal son and this may have something to do with it01:33:10
historically this is a miracle we can talk about01:33:12
it's about a very real family01:33:14
which Jesus personally knew which was01:33:16
two sons in which the events took place01:33:19
and we don’t even ask this question01:33:22
because the meaning of the whole parable of the prodigal01:33:24
son is not to tell us about01:33:29
this is not a report, the point is to01:33:33
reveal to us certain true gods01:33:35
his relationship with humanity thank you01:33:38
so what kind of food is really worth it?01:33:41
the story of the flood, well we can01:33:44
on blurry ones how to attach01:33:46
Question from Alexander Neil Audrey01:33:50
he probably addresses the question to Alexander01:33:54
Sergey will be able to answer something01:33:56
Vladimir Spiridonov spoke at01:33:58
scientists vs. pifs it was a psychologist but01:34:02
The topic was on everyone, I remind you of theories01:34:05
conspiracies he said that a form of thinking01:34:07
for believers, this is the norm and it has its advantages01:34:11
Do you see the advantages? This is probably a question for01:34:14
Alexandru, maybe if I were01:34:18
I'm sure there is an afterlife01:34:20
on the one hand, the living would be calmer and01:34:23
on the other hand I would be less01:34:25
motivated to make humanity01:34:28
developed the scientific and technical side01:34:29
progress and in the end this state01:34:32
death has won, that's why I see here01:34:35
such that you can look for some01:34:38
individual advantages, but I suspect that01:34:39
many of them are a double-edged sword01:34:42
there will also be a minus behind this01:34:47
something like this might provide some consolation01:34:50
give religion people thank you question from01:34:54
zero why in the Scandinavian countries01:34:57
people are the most satisfied in the world with their01:35:00
life and in these same countries, I’m not01:35:03
I'm sure it's okay, I guess01:35:06
some issues in the same countries01:35:08
one of the largest percentage of atheists01:35:10
in the world but like01:35:12
probably slows down theists a lot01:35:15
will start from the fact that there is a high level and01:35:16
life probably yes, are they enough?01:35:19
how unhappy you are with your life01:35:20
subjectively there may be such01:35:23
polls01:35:24
I might say what else is there01:35:26
this is an important point01:35:29
cause and effect relationship because01:35:31
in principle it is known that in favorable01:35:34
conditions when people are not in danger01:35:37
they are less likely to believe not only in01:35:41
gods but also in any01:35:44
supernatural powers starting there from01:35:48
from psychics finish drumbash kai01:35:51
that is, when people live they have nothing01:35:56
threatens their lives that's why it's so01:35:58
this is how human brains work01:36:01
when we learned from the bad, then with the greater01:36:03
may possibly turn in some way01:36:06
otherworldly forces01:36:08
Sergey, your position is really01:36:13
should be compared01:36:15
after all, they are not completely different countries01:36:18
various factors can influence01:36:20
on people in the same country01:36:24
those who have faith and those who go to church and01:36:27
those who are alien01:36:30
religious life and according to these data01:36:33
These statistics show that believers in01:36:36
overall happier more01:36:38
life satisfaction is less likely01:36:41
depression is less susceptible to alcoholism01:36:44
I am less prone to suicide01:36:47
there was a selection of links01:36:48
with this kind of statistics and in general01:36:51
saying this is data from absolutely not01:36:55
people find religious sources in this01:36:58
quite01:37:00
materialistic explanations01:37:02
a person belongs to the community there01:37:05
he has a social circle and mine01:37:07
support from his comrades01:37:12
there are all sorts of religions holding a person01:37:16
bad habits but the fact is that01:37:20
statistical religious surrenderers to01:37:26
naturally the music is living active01:37:28
church life they are more prosperous in01:37:31
England even01:37:32
for example, this is what methodologists are like01:37:34
they have a Protestant movement01:37:37
life expectancy seven years longer01:37:40
than an average country but01:37:42
perhaps this is due to the fact that they01:37:44
It is forbidden by their faith to drink and smoke, but01:37:47
the fact is that there are religious people there01:37:50
show statistical more01:37:52
favorable there is another interesting point01:37:57
what's there01:37:59
I don’t remember the exact statistics but very01:38:02
representatives of some live well01:38:05
new or guides like those in America01:38:08
this is magma nato they have it very often01:38:12
relatively high standard of living01:38:13
population, I'm afraid you're not here at hand01:38:17
some exact numbers, this is a gender issue01:38:24
should I ask a question or not Mr. moderator01:38:25
no thanks question from Renata01:38:33
Kamaletdinova01:38:34
which is evolutionarily more advantageous at the moment01:38:37
scientific worldview or religious01:38:41
here but Sasha is profitable01:38:44
if you live in Russia and don’t want01:38:47
sit down for the reduction feeling the loader then01:38:51
perhaps in Russia it is more profitable to have01:38:53
religious religious mine01:38:56
worldview she is safer than you01:39:00
will be praised01:39:01
what will you say on TV01:39:04
what is your correct worldview?01:39:05
you can say that you agree with01:39:08
the president, that is, from the point of view01:39:12
career advancement can be very01:39:15
profitable now Russia in another01:39:17
historical period during the USSR01:39:20
it would probably be more profitable to be an atheist01:39:23
for the same reasons now everything01:39:26
it turns over but if you look01:39:28
we ask that it would be different how it would be01:39:31
It's probably beneficial for all of us to eat01:39:33
some kind of healthy01:39:35
a situation where there are no religions in schools01:39:39
does not promote atheism but simply01:39:42
talk about science and people do it01:39:45
their dreams, views themselves and can freely01:39:48
they are not being discussed and no one is trying to01:39:50
I know what kind of views to press01:39:54
gold words01:39:56
Sergey but if we are talking about what01:40:01
evolutionarily the way out is as far as I am01:40:03
I understand it has nothing to do with personal01:40:05
comfort evolution is absolutely not01:40:07
wondering how comfortable it is01:40:09
our life has long been interested only01:40:11
number of remaining01:40:12
our other offspring in this regard01:40:17
and evolutionarily successful people about whom01:40:19
have I ever heard from01:40:20
was what was his name Meryl Jessop steel01:40:31
apparently this is a bushing scan anode from ours01:40:35
contemporaries of our greats01:40:37
he is a representative of his contemporaries01:40:40
mesh that separated from the Mormons to this day01:40:43
Since then, polygamy has persisted and01:40:45
there are about 100 children there, she's a dozen01:40:48
women and a single man promoted01:40:51
extremely powerful and evolutionary race01:40:55
won by a large margin and gets01:41:04
films and diacate which begins with01:41:07
exactly with the stage flow as they sit01:41:10
secular people discuss what01:41:12
someday they might be eggs01:41:15
to freeze01:41:18
question from apparently saint d01:41:24
hello Alexander process in01:41:26
artificial intelligence developments01:41:28
presents us with serious opportunities01:41:30
but the coin has two sides01:41:32
Are we standing on the threshold of the birth of new01:41:34
religions on this basis religions are again on01:41:39
robots are no match for the great progress01:41:42
on the topic of religion and the art of intellect01:41:46
there is a very funny story it's leisurely01:41:48
terrible story pretec I'll tell you01:41:51
I must warn you that this story01:41:53
it’s very better and we don’t even hear it and that’s why01:41:57
which can lead to tragic consequences01:41:58
It's better to turn it off right away, damn me01:42:00
pull it out and pause it later01:42:02
come back when I'm quiet01:42:03
I warned everything and now I’ll say it means01:42:06
there is such a concept, it’s clear what it is01:42:08
rather, such thoughts are philosophical01:42:09
instruments of the basilisk of doom01:42:11
cancer risk can then google this01:42:14
the idea that the future can be created01:42:17
artificial intelligence which will01:42:18
likened to God in terms of his everything01:42:20
omnipotence from and strength and he01:42:24
be able up to resurrection01:42:26
people from the dead and he will naturally01:42:28
raises from the dead and praises those who01:42:31
contributed to the emergence of but not all01:42:33
contributed to the emergence of it will be but how01:42:35
in analogue, but only on earth he wants01:42:37
torture torment terrible god and what is this01:42:41
artificial text has01:42:42
advantage faster with others01:42:43
potential future gods01:42:44
artificial intelligence and which01:42:45
is that it stimulates01:42:48
its creation is much more active from01:42:50
future01:42:51
here it stimulates its creation itself01:42:54
its own concept but there is no advantage01:42:57
other potential divine01:42:59
artificial intelligence but that's how it is01:43:01
more of a joke but I think it's funny01:43:03
scales, but seriously, this is the most01:43:06
cool thing I talked to from01:43:08
artificial intelligence of modern01:43:10
this is g5 if you haven't heard this is who he is01:43:15
there he is trained on hundreds of thousands of texts and he01:43:21
knows how to talk, and unlike01:43:23
these bots are careful with which before01:43:24
speaks outrageously at me directly01:43:26
very very cool and impression that is01:43:28
asks you a question there purely01:43:30
biological, what do you think?01:43:32
which genes are promising for use?01:43:34
in gene therapy for a year01:43:38
consists does not begin to give answers01:43:40
which I would expect to hear from01:43:41
professional gerontologist scientist01:43:42
that well, gene therapy is possible01:43:45
use the gene there Fox you and therefore01:43:46
that the research seems to be01:43:49
just just a specialist in this01:43:53
in this in this ti in this topic moment you01:43:55
very impressed does it work?01:43:59
homeopathy awards for hepatitis are complete nonsense01:44:01
don't give it to anyone, this is also very funny01:44:03
So I want to understand, write an article in01:44:06
our future who communicated this01:44:07
I don't think it's artificial intelligence01:44:09
what are great russified01:44:11
version 2 5 3 she already told me that01:44:14
academy01:44:15
lied01:44:16
plans to discuss the issue of installation01:44:18
albert einstein monument on red01:44:20
area01:44:23
but in Russian the Russian version is01:44:26
in my opinion not tired 10 tariff 100 times01:44:28
less choice only 50 50 250 equal but01:44:32
anyway she already looks quite cheerful01:44:35
answers Sergey your view on danger01:44:39
open worship don't know01:44:40
artificial intelligence or01:44:42
the emergence of a new religion, these people01:44:49
can man is so constructed that he needs01:44:53
religion is so created and if a person does not01:44:57
finds a god he can make himself a god01:45:00
from anything from Comrade Stalin01:45:03
from artificial intelligence from birds01:45:07
market for reptiles therefore of course01:45:10
such a danger exists, but it01:45:14
a danger for which is certainly not to blame01:45:17
artificial intelligence of some kind01:45:19
Holy bull, it's not his fault at all01:45:22
the fact that he is worshiped is the problem01:45:24
actually from the people themselves01:45:27
thank you actually we have time you01:45:31
colleagues will also limit it, so the next one01:45:33
this question will probably be the last one before01:45:36
with this I want to say again that01:45:39
The broadcast is now on two channels01:45:41
on the channel Alexander Panchin oh on the channel01:45:43
laboratory scientific videos friends01:45:45
forget to subscribe to the channel because01:45:47
I generally01:45:49
I hope that we will continue a lot01:45:52
those left beyond today's01:45:54
discussions talk about free will01:45:56
for example, I think it would be interesting01:45:58
both opponents, that's why I propose01:46:02
make debate number 2 on the same channels01:46:06
friends subscribe so as not to01:46:09
miss again I want to say that01:46:11
now on the Anthropogenesis channel01:46:13
video with the final of the honorary academician award01:46:17
lied where we found out who won Nikita01:46:20
Mikhalkov Igor Prokopenko or Galina Chervonskaya01:46:23
and after the TV debate don’t forget01:46:26
look but also express yours01:46:29
position in the comments for which of these01:46:32
wonderful Russian figures you01:46:35
would you vote now the question which01:46:40
addressed to Sergei his name is Mary game01:46:44
the question sounds like how a believer can distinguish01:46:47
allegory from the law of God01:46:53
literary context, in the same way we are in01:46:56
our ordinary human conversation01:46:59
language we distinguish ligure from some straight ones01:47:03
instructions01:47:04
we discover such a mysterious and01:47:09
mysterious text as instructions for01:47:11
assembly of whatnot river and we understand that01:47:14
we don't need an allegory here or we01:47:17
open01:47:19
scientific article where it is written about flat01:47:22
the universe is a heavy vacuum and we understand that01:47:24
this is obviously some kind of metaphors meaning01:47:27
which you should clarify that people01:47:30
have siba01:47:35
Alexander needs to be added by us01:47:38
but not that there are his metaphors in the Bible or01:47:41
in these texts I would say that but01:47:43
the bible cannot because there are so many01:47:44
controversial things in the bible that01:47:47
must be interpreted as metaphors01:47:49
I would say that just to this text01:47:50
don’t even dream of treating the sieve as a source01:47:53
reliable information this is Sirte01:47:56
I can say in this regard that's what I wanted01:47:58
you can add a little different canon01:48:00
canon add it ourselves let's finish it slowly01:48:02
about the book your lunch from of course here and on01:48:08
the same channel and on the channel01:48:10
Vitalik Gaussou and stoned scientific video01:48:13
there will be an online presentation on Friday the 13th01:48:16
new Harvard book not the team how01:48:17
once there will be this book about being a scientist01:48:20
proved the existence of magic science fiction01:48:22
so you might be interested01:48:26
thank you Sasha book I think face01:48:29
interesting, I'd love to read it01:48:31
Sergey, do you have any announcements?01:48:34
which you wanted to do March you01:48:35
have you written or will write some book in01:48:37
in the near future I have written a couple of books of them01:48:40
I didn’t realize mine, so there’s a book01:48:46
why are we sure I just don’t have it yet01:48:49
clogs in hands but why are we sure where01:48:52
I’ll actually explain the reasons why01:48:54
you can believe in god you can google it01:48:57
hoodie nomadic confident thank you I'm like01:49:05
once while you announced your book managed to rush01:49:07
to the closet and take my book since I went01:49:10
such a booze01:49:11
By the way, I also recently published a book01:49:13
which is called a strange monkey and01:49:15
she is now in the finals of the award01:49:17
educator soon on November 19th they will announce who01:49:21
won, but I don’t know if mine will win01:49:23
book or not but how much is the case I think01:49:26
that the book is not bad so I end it01:49:31
ending today's debate I want01:49:33
to say that I certainly didn’t expect that01:49:34
participants in the discussion today about something01:49:36
we'll agree, but it's still possible01:49:40
each of you learned something for yourself that01:49:43
maybe you learned something01:49:45
let minor matters be your point01:49:47
vision has changed01:49:48
I understand that this is not the first debate01:49:50
I should listen to Alexandra Sergei anyway01:49:53
it was interesting I want to thank Sasha01:49:55
for correctness for restraint so01:49:58
say for discipline01:50:00
tough questions for Sergei, thanks for this01:50:03
goodwill his calmness I would01:50:05
said such even courage is worthy01:50:08
respect because well, it’s understandable01:50:09
site on this one which passes01:50:11
the public here is more in the mood for discussions01:50:13
anti-clerical but what's the difference01:50:16
once again I think it's very important important01:50:18
carrying out such correct01:50:21
discussions this is also training for the mind this is also training for01:50:25
respect for each other despite differences01:50:28
in looks it really is a certain01:50:30
vaccination is about to some radical01:50:33
situations that we all wouldn't want01:50:36
thank you colleagues, I hope so again01:50:39
We'll meet you on the air Matthew more than once01:50:43
was Alexander Sokolov01:50:45
thank you everyone thank you thank you thank you01:50:48
thank you Alexander i hear see you again01:51:07
[music]01:51:16
[music]01:52:05
[music]01:52:42
[music]01:53:26
[music]01:54:41
[music]Description:
Александр уже дискутировал с Сергеем Худиевым на телеканале СПАС на тему существования Бога. В условиях пандемии мы решили провести еще одну дискуссию. На этот раз о том, как верующие и атеисты познают мир. Поддержать стрим: https://new.donatepay.ru/@SVL Эта трансляция пройдёт сразу на двух каналах. На канале Александра мы так же: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2q4mHrzoR48mwSuAYtVPtQ Без оскорблений. Буду банить сразу. Давайте уважать друг друга! Благодарим за поддержку: ($50): Pavel Dunaev, Andrey, Oleksii, Denis Zaletaev, Konstantin Spirin ($20): Andrey Kalinin, Maykl Chikvashvili, Поляков Михаил, Alexey Kartashev, Angie R, Yury B
Preparing download options
* — If the video is playing in a new tab, go to it, then right-click on the video and select "Save video as..."
** — Link intended for online playback in specialized players
Questions about downloading video
How can I download "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?" video?
http://unidownloader.com/ website is the best way to download a video or a separate audio track if you want to do without installing programs and extensions.
The UDL Helper extension is a convenient button that is seamlessly integrated into YouTube, Instagram and OK.ru sites for fast content download.
UDL Client program (for Windows) is the most powerful solution that supports more than 900 websites, social networks and video hosting sites, as well as any video quality that is available in the source.
UDL Lite is a really convenient way to access a website from your mobile device. With its help, you can easily download videos directly to your smartphone.
Which format of "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?" video should I choose?
The best quality formats are FullHD (1080p), 2K (1440p), 4K (2160p) and 8K (4320p). The higher the resolution of your screen, the higher the video quality should be. However, there are other factors to consider: download speed, amount of free space, and device performance during playback.
Why does my computer freeze when loading a "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?" video?
The browser/computer should not freeze completely! If this happens, please report it with a link to the video. Sometimes videos cannot be downloaded directly in a suitable format, so we have added the ability to convert the file to the desired format. In some cases, this process may actively use computer resources.
How can I download "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?" video to my phone?
You can download a video to your smartphone using the website or the PWA application UDL Lite. It is also possible to send a download link via QR code using the UDL Helper extension.
How can I download an audio track (music) to MP3 "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?"?
The most convenient way is to use the UDL Client program, which supports converting video to MP3 format. In some cases, MP3 can also be downloaded through the UDL Helper extension.
How can I save a frame from a video "Биолог атеист vs. Православный Публицист. Как мы формируем картину мира?"?
This feature is available in the UDL Helper extension. Make sure that "Show the video snapshot button" is checked in the settings. A camera icon should appear in the lower right corner of the player to the left of the "Settings" icon. When you click on it, the current frame from the video will be saved to your computer in JPEG format.
What's the price of all this stuff?
It costs nothing. Our services are absolutely free for all users. There are no PRO subscriptions, no restrictions on the number or maximum length of downloaded videos.