You're listening to, atheistically speaking. Oh, Hello and welcome to episode 144 of atheistically speaking with your host Thomas Smith.

Today we are continuing the discussion with Elijah T.

A lot of debate on Twitter.

Some of it productive, some of it not. I don't, there's a little bit of

hostility, I'm not really sure why, but hopefully part two will, well I don't know if it will clear that up.

But it's more interesting content, so maybe it'll make for more interesting debate.

But without further ado, here we go with part two that rhymed The next one is sort of along the similar lines is when it comes to like an

an understanding of evidence and it is that you know it's otherwise known as the

scientism or verificationism or something where it says we can only but we should

only believe things that which are scientifically proven, which is of course

not itself scientifically proven.

So it's a self-defeating epistemology.

And I have only ever had one conversation

with somebody who actually changed his mind on this, where he said

that the only thing that we should believe is things that are scientifically proven.

And I asked, is that idea itself scientifically proven and he said no good point

Where do we go from here?

And so then I was like,

all right, let's just talk epistemology.

So it's because you can't have something that is self-referentially incoherent

as the foundation for an epistemology.

Right, okay. Yeah, yeah, I do, but I don't know that any system like that is, that props itself up, like there's no logical way you can prove that you should respect good

...