14:00: Mystical experiences from psychedelic substances.
14:40: Jordan saying "it's kinda like evidence", from wanting to have everything defined to such fuzzy reasoning...
19:50: Matt's definition of "supernatural", followed by his experience with "Holy Spirit" as a Southern Baptist.
23:00: Jordan putting forth two different groups of hypotheses for the usefulness of religion.
26:00: Matt's explanation of the tendency of attributing psychedelic experiences to the supernatural.
29:00: But Matt quickly gets sidetracked into a discussion about the problem of explaining consciousness.
30:50: Jordan asking Matt about consciousness, and here we go: getting further away from the initial discussion...
32:25: Now getting into determinism.
35:25: Matt getting back on track: "Is there a good reason to believe in God or believe in the belief in God?".
36:00: "What is it that you fear we would lose if people stopped believing that there is a God?"
38:15: Jordan explaining what he means by the "metaphorical substrate".
39:52: Matt trying to get some clarity in Jordan's explanation.
40:50: Propositional reasoning, and Jordan just dismissing it. Oh, and here we get into Jordan-land logic. And the smugness behind it is appalling.
44:15: Matt trying to get back to a rational foundation. But alas Jordan is far too flustered to let Matt keep things grounded.
49:20: Jordan finally let's Matt speak fully on the issue of well-being. Well, sort of letting him.
53:43: Matt starting the chess analogy of a moral life.
55:00: The update to the bible.
55:55: Jordan addressing the chess analogy (which is an astoundingly superficial misinterpretation of what the AI scientist meant).
1:00:00: Alphazero and how it still works with fundamental rules. Omg, and Jordan's smug gesticulating reiteration of his faulty argument...
1:03:25: Questions!
1:04:50: Actual start of the Q&A session. "If humanity seized to exist, does God still exist?" (for Jordan).
1:06:30: Jordan saying he does not believe that the material world exists as it is without consciousness. Seems like he gets more and more flustered by the fact that he has so little foundation to base anything on.
1:08:00: Q2: Questioning the idea of people turning to religion out of lassitude.
1:11:40: Same guy following it up with "In this world we already have this foundation." (from religion).
1:12:30: Jordan interjecting with complete babble.
1:14:30: Matt attempting a response to the babble. And Jordan insisting in ill-informed idiocy.
1:16:10: Q3: Does the questioner want to redefine God as something like that or is he commenting on Jordan's vague definition that's like that? Anyways... Jordan reconfirms that he does define God as something vague like that.
1:18:40: Matt pointing out the flaw with a vague definition like that.
1:19:55: Q4: The pros-and-cons of the language of Secular Humanism over religious thinking.
1:25:40: "The instinct for meaning", to hear the culmination of his nonsense, where he says that there's NOTHING but religion that can set someone in a foxhole straight, essentially. But what about his 12 rules book? isn't that secular? Man, the mind on religion!
1:27:48: Q5: Wanting a clarification on Jordan's point that there are no real atheists. And I'm laughing my ass off at his instantaneous answer! I like his explination for why he'd say something as outrageous as that -- as that seems to be his modus operandi -- where "oh, it's all too complex, let's just go for the simplest and dumbest answers instead!".
1:32:25: Matt's thought on it.
1:37:00: Last question. Evolved morality explanation vs "transcendent morality". Haha! Jordan spazzing out and saying his catch-phrase "it's more complicated than that.", twice!
1:41:36: Superstrawberry!
www.daystar.com
Ei tuossa pelissä taida oikein pystyä voittamaan.. 
/img-s3.ilcdn.fi/7d2d979b14d9ba63008b8c74a2b9aac6e837d10cf523c2c10231075341156dbf.jpg)
