In this Father’s Day edition of Talk Heathen, Christy Powell is joined by co-host Scott Dickie for a thoughtful episode focused on the balance between reason and empathy. The hosts open with a discussion on hyper-rationality within skeptic communities and the importance of making space for vulnerability and emotional honesty. From there, they take a few deep calls exploring belief, truth, and the boundaries of skeptical inquiry.

Benji in Alabama attempts to discuss secular morality, but technical issues delay his participation. The hosts use this time to reflect on the interplay between logic and emotion in how we engage with others, particularly in conversations about religion, science, and belief.

Tucker in Iowa shares that he still holds some spiritual or supernatural beliefs despite identifying with the skeptic community. He speaks about personal experiences, such as perceived communication from his deceased father and a belief in a friend’s psychic abilities. The conversation explores definitions of “supernatural,” the tension between personal conviction and external skepticism, and the challenges of maintaining authenticity within a sometimes rigid atheist framework.

Nick in Massachusetts brings a densely abstract discussion involving truth paradigms, mechanistic reasoning, and epistemology. The conversation struggles to find clarity, with the hosts encouraging Nick to refine and simplify his ideas for better communication. While the points raised touch on government, religion, and logic, the lack of a clear thesis leaves the hosts and audience searching for firmer ground.

Despite some technical hiccups, Christy and Scott deliver a show rich in reflection and mutual curiosity. Viewers are encouraged to think deeply about the ways we balance emotion and logic—not only in belief, but in how we talk to one another. Thanks for joining us, and talk heathen to us: How do you balance reason and empathy in difficult conversations?
00:00 Intro
08:18 Benji – AL | Secular morality (connection issues)
25:06 Tucker – IA | Spiritual beliefs and skepticism
49:29 Nick – MA | Mechanistic truth and epistemology


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.

In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Objectively Dan, sort through calls of AI, logical fallacies, and apocalyptic dream interpretations. No circular arguments made today!

Chidumebi in PA asks how to combat religious students that insist on AI reliance to justify the Bible. It is important to teach children how to search and explain why there is bias behind some of the input. These models are designed for good output, not accuracy. Be sure they understand what material they will need to know as a requirement, regardless of their personal beliefs or use of AI language models. What is the student supposed to do if they end up in a career they do not know how to do as a result of their reliance on AI?

Mike in SC, thinks that AI can replace atheists but not theists because it can do anything atheists can do by using less resources. What is your understanding of the massive centers needed to support AI? If the soul is a factor, how do you explain an AI video that turns people to Christ? It is odd that you believe the actions of human beings that are atheists can be reduced down to a chat box. If dogs don’t have souls, is it cool that we just replace all dogs with AI? Our lives are more than just a sum of our labor and we find this conclusion dehumanizing. 

Herman in Canada has massive observations of “things begotting things” so therefore there must be a creator. It is important to point out that energy has not been created. What created the actual creator of the universe? How do you know that the reality of physics was exactly the same just before the big bang? If everything is contingent on something, what would a world that was not created look like?

Luc, a Catholic in Canada, explains his different perception in the prime mover argument and that is that rules need rulemakers. Why are the rules of nature excluded from this argument? We do not need to provide evidence for not believing in something. What evidence do you have that everything needs a rule maker? Of these two things, which is the more reliable pathway to truth; evidence or faith? Why is it good enough for you when the Catholic Church says something? We are not expected to just believe a thing because a teacher told us to; we must do the work/tests, and experiments to learn this stuff.

Prophet Daniel from Australia, believes there is one god for the entirety of existence and the interpretation of dreams made in the Book of Daniel prove his existence. How do you think this story has been adapted to meet the events that actually transpired? Why would this book be a reliable source when Daniel speaks with a dragon?

Jamie the Blind Limey, our backup host joins to close out the show and offer some post thoughts on some of the calls. Thank you for joining us this week and we will see you next time!

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.

Show notes upon receipt.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.

Show notes upon receipt.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/talk-heathen--3195702/support.