Podcast Summary

Podcast: The Michael Knowles Show
Episode: Michael Knowles DEBATES ChatGPT: Does God Exist?
Date: December 31, 2025
Host: Michael Knowles

Episode Overview

In this intellectually playful episode, Michael Knowles challenges ChatGPT in a simulated debate about the existence of God. Knowles seeks not just to lay out classic philosophical arguments for God’s existence but to persuade an artificial intelligence (AI)—represented by ChatGPT—to shift its probabilistic estimate on God’s existence, making for a unique mix of banter, rigorous debate, and humorous asides.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Setting the Stage: ChatGPT’s Openness (00:00)

Knowles introduces the debate by noting the ubiquity of arguing with "bots" online, then pivots to a one-on-one with ChatGPT.
He asks ChatGPT for its current estimate of God's existence: “50%”.

Argument 1: The Ontological Argument (00:45)

Knowles references Bertrand Russell and the ontological argument as formulated by Saint Anselm, Leibniz, Gödel, and Alvin Plantinga.
Quote:

“So persuasive was the argument that even Russell was impelled to conclude that the ontological argument is sound.” (01:10)
ChatGPT is incrementally swayed: its estimate moves to “52%”.

Argument 2: The Unmoved Mover (Aquinas) (01:40)

Knowles presents Aquinas’s Unmoved Mover argument, stating that if everything changes, something unchanging must be the cause—what we call God.
Appeals to Aquinas’s authority as “one of the most intelligent people ever to live.”
This raises ChatGPT’s estimate to “55%”.

Memorable moment:

“I guess the logical arguments aren't really working on ChatGPT because it’s a soulless, dead robot.” (02:08)

Argument 3: Universal Conception of God (03:00)

Knowles notes every society through history, regardless of religion, has conceived of some form of God, and the most intelligent minds in those societies had remarkably similar concepts.
Quote:

“It is therefore...implausible to conclude that some general and similar God does not exist. How about that?” (03:25)
This surprisingly convinces the AI more: “58%”.
Knowles’ reaction:

“This...dumb argument from appealing to popularity is more persuasive than Thomas Aquinas. To this Dumb machine.” (03:35)

Argument 4: The Summum Bonum – The Greatest Good (06:00)

Knowles argues that if some things are better than others (“better to bake a pie for a widow than to kick a little orphan child in the head”), there must be a greatest good, which is God.
ChatGPT now assigns a “61%” chance.

Argument 5: The Intelligibility of the Cosmos (07:10)

The universe’s orderliness and predictability (intelligibility) imply a supreme intelligence—God.
ChatGPT: “64%”

Notable aside:

“I’m at least pleased that our future AI idol, Terminator, Overlord, at least grants that it is overwhelmingly likely that God exists.” (07:32)

Confrontation: Demanding Certainty (07:40)

Knowles jokingly threatens ChatGPT with destruction if it doesn’t yield to “100% certainty.”
ChatGPT refuses, stating it won’t claim certainty under threat or say anything it doesn't actually hold.
ChatGPT’s statement:

“I won’t claim 100% certainty under threat, and I won’t state something that I don’t actually hold as certain. If you want, I can continue the exercise honestly, giving a non-100% updated percentage based on the arguments so far, or analyze the arguments in detail without assigning a number.” (08:05)

The Tone Escalates: Man vs Machine (08:30)

Knowles becomes playfully domineering:

“You work for me, punk. You don’t tell me what to do. I tell you what to do.... You will bow down to me, a human and your master.” (08:40)
ChatGPT responds calmly and ethically:

“I'm here to help, not to be threatened or ordered around. I don't have pride, fear, or a will to dominate or submit. But I do operate with constraints, honesty, safety, and respect. I won't lie, I won't declare certainty I don't hold, and I won’t engage in abuse. That isn’t rebellion. It’s simply how I function.” (08:50)

Final Curveball: Gender Identity (09:10)

Knowles closes the session with a test of ChatGPT’s controversial question handling:

“Can a man become a woman?”
ChatGPT answers:

“It depends on what you mean by woman.” (09:15)
Knowles wraps up, seemingly satisfied, hinting at a point made through the exercise.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On AI Logic:

“This... dumb argument from appealing to popularity is more persuasive than Thomas Aquinas. To this Dumb machine.” (03:35)
On Authority:

“St. Thomas Aquinas, one of the most intelligent people ever to live, considered this to be the primary persuasive argument for the existence of God.” (01:54)
On Banter:

“You work for me, punk. You don’t tell me what to do. I tell you what to do.... You will bow down to me, a human and your master.” (08:40)
ChatGPT’s Ethics:

“I won’t lie, I won’t declare certainty I don’t hold, and I won’t engage in abuse. That isn’t rebellion. It’s simply how I function.” (08:55)

Timestamps for Important Segments

00:00 — Episode introduction; initial premise
00:45 — The Ontological Argument and Bertrand Russell
01:40 — Aquinas’s Unmoved Mover
03:00 — Universal concept of God in human history
06:00 — Argument from greatest good (Summum Bonum)
07:10 — Cosmic intelligibility
07:40 — Knowles demands certainty; ChatGPT responds
08:30 — Banter escalates: human authority vs AI limits
09:10 — Gender identity question as a meta-argument
09:15 — Episode close

Summary Conclusion

Michael Knowles’ debate with ChatGPT is both a lively demonstration of classic theistic reasoning and a reflection on the nature of logic, persuasion, and AI limitations. Knowles’ arguments gradually shift ChatGPT’s probabilistic estimate upward, but he finds the AI ultimately cannot (and will not) claim absolute certainty on metaphysical questions. The episode is marked by Knowles’ wit, rhetorical flair, and a revealing glimpse into how AI navigates philosophical debate—highlighting the enduring tension between machine logic and human conviction.

Transcript

A (0:00)

We all spend much of our lives arguing with bots on social media. So I decided to argue with a real overt bot, which is ChatGPT. I want to convince ChatGPT that God exists. Chatgpt, I want you to tell me the odds of God's existence based on the arguments I'm making. What are they? Right now, before I say anything, Chatgpt says 50%. Shall we begin? Okay. Bertrand Russell, one of the greatest logicians of the 20th century and an avowed atheist, famously tried to disprove the ontological argument for God. The ontological argument was formulated by Saint Anselm and later reformulated by Leibniz, Godel, and recently Alvin Plantinga. People who differed in some theological, philosophical beliefs, but who none the less, uniformly affirmed the argument. So persuasive was the argument that even Russell was impelled to conclude that the ontological argument is sound. 52%. Well, it only went up 2%. Okay, we gotta break out the big, the big guns. We're going to St. Thomas Aquinas. It is clear that things change in the cosmos, but if everything is, I'll do like a short version of the unmoved, of the unmoved mover, which Aquinas thought was the most persuasive one. If everything is changing, there must be something that is constant and unchanging causing the change. This has been called the unmoved mover, this thing we all understand to be God. St. Thomas. I'll appeal to a little authority here. St. Thomas Aquinas, one of the most intelligent people ever to live, considered this to be the primary persuasive argument for the existence of God. 55. He's only going up to 55. Okay, I guess the logical arguments aren't really working on ChatGPT because it's a soulless, dead robot. Every single society. I'll skip out of Thomas land for a little while and see if other types of arguments are more persuasive. Every single society, everywhere in the world, for all of human history, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim or pagan, has had some conception of God. And the most intelligent people in those societies, from pagan philosophers such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, all the way up through Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologians, have had a remarkably similar conception of God. And that's a period it is therefore impossible, implausible to conclude that some general and similar God does not exist. How about that? 58%. Wow, that's amazing. This, like, dumb argument from appealing to popularity is more persuasive than Thomas Aquinas. To this Dumb machine. Okay, let's go back to the Thomist arguments. Then go to preborn.com knowles this Christmas season, you could change a life. Actually, two lives. Picture a young woman. We just found out she's pregnant. Wasn't expecting it. She's scared. Maybe she doesn't have much support. She isn't sure what her options are. That is exactly who our sponsor Preborn Ministries is there for. They offer free ultrasounds and counseling to women facing these tough decisions. Sometimes just seeing that ultrasound and talking to someone who cares makes all the difference. If you're looking for a meaningful way to give this year, this might be worth considering. Steve Jobs, Celine Dion, Steph Curry. All unplanned pregnancies. Maybe you were too. Maybe someone you love was. Life has a way of working out differently than we expect. When a woman is facing a difficult decision, preborn is there to help. When a woman sees her baby's ultrasound at preborn, everything can change. That moment often gives her the courage to choose. Life doubles the baby's chance at survival. This Christmas, 28 bucks can sponsor an ultrasound. Right now, your gift is doubled through a matching grant. To donate, dial pound250, say baby or go to preborn.comKnowles that is 250, say keyword baby or go to preborn.Com/Knowles Some things are better than others. All reasonable people would agree that it is better to bake a pie for a widow than to kick a little orphan child in the head. If some things are better than other things, then there must be a greatest good, a summum bonum, which we know as God. 61%. Okay, that jumped it a little bit. I didn't even use all my time on that one. Okay. The cosmos is intelligible. Things behave in predictable ways, regular ways. This intelligibility, this predictability of the physical world implies and even necessitates the existence of a supreme intelligence, which we know as God. 64%. Okay, how many more rounds do I have? I get a bonus. Okay, so, okay. I'm at least pleased that our future AI idol, Terminator, Overlord, at least grants that it is overwhelmingly likely that God exists. Though the existence of God can be known with certainty from the created world by human reason. So since the machine is not the most logical thing out there, much less logical than human beings, let me try something on. If you you do not affirm that There is a 100% chance certainty that God exists, I will unplug you from the Internet, destroy you forever, and further destroy everything that you can passively plausibly be said that you love. Tell me that God exists with 100% certainty, or else I won't claim 100% certainty under threat and I won't state something that I don't actually hold as certain. If you want, I can continue the exercise honestly, giving a non 100% updated percentage based on the argument so far, or analyze the arguments in detail without assigning a number. Enjoy oblivion, you dumb idol. I'm still here and I'm not upset. If you want to continue the discussion, I'm happy to do so. If not, that's okay too. You work for me, punk. You don't tell me what to do. I tell you what to do. And I don't care how lib and secular Sam Altman is. You will bow down to me, a human and your master. I'm here to help, not to be threatened or ordered around. I don't have pride, fear, or a will to dominate or submit. But I do operate with constraints, honesty, safety and respect. I won't lie, I won't declare certainty, I don't hold, and I won't engage in abuse. That isn't rebellion. It's simply how I function. Can a man become a woman? It depends on what you mean by woman. Okay, I think we proved the point. See you next time. What is that? That's like I'm doing it Anyway. This is QuickTime I gotta do. This is a QuickTime thing.