The Thing That Made The Things For Which There Is No Known Maker

Strictly deriving belief in the Christian God logically from the problem of where everything comes from:

YouTube Preview Image

It’s amazing how the problem of how something comes from nothing leads to so many obvious and unavoidable truths, isn’t it?

Your Thoughts?

Comparing Humanism and Religion and Exploring Their Relationships to Each Other
Before I Deconverted: I Saw My First “Secular Humanist” On TV
The Collar That Choked Open Hearts
About Daniel Fincke

Dr. Daniel Fincke  has his PhD in philosophy from Fordham University and spent 11 years teaching in college classrooms. He wrote his dissertation on Ethics and the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. On Camels With Hammers, the careful philosophy blog he writes for a popular audience, Dan argues for atheism and develops a humanistic ethical theory he calls “Empowerment Ethics”. Dan also teaches affordable, non-matriculated, video-conferencing philosophy classes on ethics, Nietzsche, historical philosophy, and philosophy for atheists that anyone around the world can sign up for. (You can learn more about Dan’s online classes here.) Dan is an APPA  (American Philosophical Practitioners Association) certified philosophical counselor who offers philosophical advice services to help people work through the philosophical aspects of their practical problems or to work out their views on philosophical issues. (You can read examples of Dan’s advice here.) Through his blogging, his online teaching, and his philosophical advice services each, Dan specializes in helping people who have recently left a religious tradition work out their constructive answers to questions of ethics, metaphysics, the meaning of life, etc. as part of their process of radical worldview change.

  • Jonathan Moulton

    “Your Thoughts?”

    here are a few:

    short version?
    this is a list of some of the logical fallacies used in the video and the argument/message contained within:
    straw man, poorly hidden circumstantial ad hominem, biased sample, begging the question, composition, false dilemma, hasty generalization, guilt by association, poisoning the well, spotlight.

    I wrote about 3 paragraphs rebutting this silly thing before I remembered it was a youtube video and little more than a trap set for ignorant people. a rational atheist would be well advised to ignore lazy garbage like this, and focus on actual refutation and debate. the only reason for the video to exist is to give the author an ego boost and trap people weaker in logic in order to confirm his/her prejudice.

    if you would like a more detailed analysis or discussion feel free to email.

  • Camels With Hammers

    I’d enjoy reading your actual case against the video, instead of just the claim that there are fallacies. Of course, it is only a satirical video, and not a formal argument, but nonetheless there are real arguments embedded within it—or at least I took it to express certain ideas that I always want to stress myself. So, I’d appreciate it if you had the time to write out your thoughts on it. And likely in the next couple of days, I will have the chance to reply in a separate post exploring the issues you raise.

    I understand of course if you’re not willing to take the time or if you really prefer to just write me privately (at but I’d prefer to have a discussion here through the blog if at all possible.

    Thanks again.