Dave Smith Gets Mad And Resorts To Insults After Getting Stumped In Libertarian Debate
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 сер 2024
- Andrew Wilson vs Dave Smith: Is Libertarianism better than Christian Populism?
►ua-cam.com/users/liveYqIaiQ-a...
Date: 16 Jun, 2024
▼Follow Destiny▼
►STREAM - www.destiny.gg/bigscreen
►TWITTER - / theomniliberal
►DISCORD - discordapp.com/invite/destiny
►REDDIT - / destiny
►INSTAGRAM - / destiny
►MERCH - shop.destiny.gg/
Check Out My Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/destiny
Buy My Merch: shop.destiny.gg/
00:00:00 Teasers / Intro
00:00:32 Dave Smith libertarian debate (SKIP INTRO)
00:17:20 Dave Smith uses dictionary definition to debate philosophy
00:25:56 This is just semantics!
00:36:46 non aggression principle
00:56:12 That hypothetical sucks
01:27:37 Dave Smith accidentally argues other side's point
01:44:11 asking Dave Smith the incest question
02:11:03 Dave Smith explains why he ducked Destiny in a debate
#destiny
#politics
#debate
Confronting PhD Leftist For Spreading Insane Lie In Impromptu Debate | AE #10
►ua-cam.com/video/eo_NGCzPpOI/v-deo.html
Destiny, it is "master debater" rofl 🤣
I have a suggestion for you. You should create a debate pervetry bingo card. So people could play along with you reviewing the debates.
I will accept money transfer as payment for this idea. 😏
Thumbs up. As a Theravada Buddhist from Thailand, this might be one of the most exciting and interesting episodes.
Destiny if you want to have some good arguments about arriving at moral truth, Sam Harris book the Moral Landscape is actually a great read about deriving moral principles through harm minimization
1:46:35 DAVID GOLDSMITH HAS DEEP UNDERGROUND CONNECTIONS
As a libertarian, Dave sure knows a lot about being owned.
Daaamn!
POV: Average destiny viewer posts a less funny version of the joke they just read in another comment three times before.
@@droptableaccount1820 That's every UA-cam video ever.
@droptableaccount1820 and I'll do it again, and again.. you know I'll do it again.
@@droptableaccount1820lol
Dave Smith has clearly demonstrated how he owns himself throughout the debate.
damn
Indeed, he owns himself every time he opens his mouth.
Buncha jelly in here!
Gottem
@@Nubenhoofer
🧢
Andrew talked Dave into not realizing he's not a Libertarian. What a dumpster fire.
How many people would really do better though, this type of convo takes a specific skillset that probably isnt actually worth getting because its meaningless to almost all people
@@DCzero50 its only meaningless because they dont want to get into the unexistence foundations of their beliefs : if u dont know why X thing is bad then why should i engage with you on other stuff ?
@@DCzero50i agree most people wouldn’t do much better, but I feel like this conversation is a perfect example of why you should have fundamental underpinnings to your morals, especially if you are a public debater. Because Dave doesn’t have any moral foundations, by the middle of this video he has completely conceded everything to Andrew and people who see this may potentially be swayed toward divine control as a concept, if they too have no moral foundations
Dave isn't a libertarian, he's a paleo (socially conservative) which is why he has to accept almost everything Andrew is saying lol. No idea why he agreed to that debate.
@@ayoubmarah4063secular morality allows for intuition to tell us that something is bad we don’t need a direct reason why something like incest is bad beyond the general icky feeling diving into that deeper is weird
It's so much better watching Destiny when he is engaged with what he is listening to rather than playing a game in the background
Vyvanse baaaby
FALSE, I hope he goes back to the rift!!
That's his true destiny.
Or having him be forced through hosting a podcast with someone he definitely doesn't hate and is definitely not completely uninterested in talking to
I agree. I'm glad he got that ADHD medication. There were some real "empty chair" tier videos being put out before where he just played a game with some long video in the background and maybe chimed in two times per hour with "TRUE hahaha based" or some other vapid shit.
This debate is Smiths best comedic outing in decades
Outside of politics and stuff, I love legion of skanks and Dave is painfully unfunny. Like it’s cringeworthy a lot of times
The only reason he has any standing in comedy is that he’s Rogans news source
Dave is the reason the dunning kruger effect exists
😂
Dave is a comedian after all :D
@@brucehoffman2811yeah ok! You must like big jay type humor “I love black penis” “tits and boobs man” 😂
Well actually Andrew, that isn’t “to own,” if you just go south of the border, there it is “avere”
W call back
What's to own water then?
Father we have suffered in your absence
oh god
On some warhammer 40k shit 😂😂
Here take my like and by the way it's the 69th like under your comment, do I have ownership over that like? Or do you gain it by me offering it? Or is it all just a social construct? Or social media construct? Whatever it is and whoever it owns, it indeed exists, the 69th like under your comment.
hahahahaha
@@viderevero1338The Heretics can not know of our existence, the Inquisition demands your censure!
Andrew 100% realizes how far behind Dave is. Dave I bet honestly thinks that Andrew is a total idiot and is asking stupid questions and making nonsensical arguments. Dave is literally too clueless to understand he's getting demolished here.
On his next podcast he WILL claim he won an straight up lie to Robbie's blank faced stare as he vapes heavily.
@@Name-zd2nb I say all that despite finding Andrew a complete idiot with an insane worldview. I wonder if Dave knows what a Libertarian is... does he just think Libertarianism is when you disagree with the Government and you don't want to pay taxes?
Yeah, when he asks "how would you show that", (that being the argument he just ade) he disqualifies himself.. s
I disagree with Andrew, but he has clearly thought about his ideas at the fundamental level, not just adopted an aesthetic like Dave has. But what’s worse for Dave is, even when it’s being explained he doesn’t get it. He literally had to be told why Andrew was removing the chance of a child from a sibling relationship. He’s so clueless, but also a dumbass as he couldn’t catch up at all with what was happening.
@@monkeybudge Yup! In this conversation Dave looked like someone talking to a Mathematician and laughing at them and thinking they're an idiot because they're doing Math without any numbers, just symbols and letters. He is so naive about the topic that he can't see that he's completely clueless.
i dont even like this andrew guy, but i guarantee you that dave didnt learn shit from this. he just thinks andrew is stupid and keeps getting into semantics by asking dumb, abstract questions. pretty ironic.
I’ll give Andrew credit for being able to debate, but Dave is easy pickings. I personally believe Andrew’s foundation is hogwash, the Christian / theistic nonsense is so irrelevant in the 21st century that even hearing someone speak about this makes me want to vomit. But man, Dave got gored in this discussion. I firmly believe morality is innate to human beings and we don’t need a primitive, agricultural based cult to guide us into the future.
@@domenicgalata1470It’s not irrelevant
He can debate a lot better than Destiny
@@domenicgalata1470 i firmly believe something that I can't actually prove outside of my feelings. ur so smart bro
debating semantics is dumb
@@domenicgalata1470 morality is not innate
Wow, Andrew was more willing to concede that the Christian God might not be the source of Divine Command than Dave was willing to agree on a definition of the NAP! AMAZING!
Andrew conceded just for the sake of argument. He wouldn’t do so if the debate prompt was whether or not God exists. He even briefly mentioned his justification for beliefs through the transcendental argumentation but knew Dave was so far behind he couldn’t keep up so he kept it surface level.
@@brendanmassie9586no, you clearly don’t understand religion or religious people, most of them do struggle with that question and have questioned their beliefs many times in there lives.
@@fernandocalles1726 ah yes I clearly don’t understand Christianity. Tell me, could you please summarize the transcendental argument that Andrew is referring to? Let’s see who doesn’t know religion.
Imagine trying to have a conversation about physics, but the person you are discussing with doesn’t know what simple algebra is. And then he gets mad and wonders why you are bringing up algebra when “we are having a discussion/argument on physics”
Nice, I've kept comparing Dave as being akin to a Christian 'debating' with an Atheist but agreeing that Jesus never existed and that God isn't real.
@@JRuni0rSo Dawkins
@@off6848 That makes no sense considering what I wrote.
@@JRuni0r Dawkins has recently come out as a cultural Christian but does not believe in Jesus as God
@@off6848 It really doesn't satisfy the comparison I was making. I'm not sure if you understand that or if you're just hung up on this surface level coincidence.
“Families cannot survive in the wild on their own“…… someones never seen the fast and furious
FAMILY
Our girl Tiny is back, so is the timestamps. August needs a raise!
August doesn't need anymore money lol
I think he was overpaid to begin with. Man's got the deal of the century. Good for him 😂.
August's raise is generating more views.
I think he proved pretty resoundingly that he knows how to own himself
Touché
Great comment, highly underrated by our degenerate society
You're just repeating what Destiny says. Come up with your own opinions.
@@AmyZonkerslet the statists cope. This was an insanely bad faith debate, which is why destiny covered it.
@@Fabric_Haterbad faith how please explain.
That's why Andrew focused on that question, it showed that Dave had no foundation for his beliefs.
Dave just gave up the NAP as soon as it resulted in something he just didn't personally like.
Didn’t Rothbard or one of the other libertarians already make a stance something like you own your self if you have more than 80% control of your self
That way a doctor probing your brain to make you twitch wouldn’t technically have half ownership of yourself
I know one of them definitely tried to grapple with it but most lolberts just take most stuff for granted with no thought
As soon as you try to argue that you’re a libertarian but certain things that don’t violate the NAP should be disallowed by the government because God says they’re wrong and you say they’re icky, you’re completely lost at sea. That argument is unrecoverable.
It’s kind of the same with free speech. There is no person on earth who is a true free speech absolutist. Everybody is fine with free speech until they hear something. They don’t like then they’re perfectly OK with banning it. Talk to conservatives in Florida and Idaho and you’ll quickly find out that they don’t want that gay shit being talked about which is why they’re basically getting rid of books from school libraries.
@@jordanwhite8718I mean you can make the libertarian case that they just don't want the government using school to push a certain type of speech, but these people would also happily see drag shows in private business locations banned.
@@jordanwhite8718but difference between the two things you’re talking about bud. Nobody cares if you’re gay in 2024, including “the far right conservatives in Florida who don’t like that gay shit” and forcing a sexualized agenda on kids in schools via the school library, is disgusting and isn’t the same type of thing as not liking the gays. I’ve never met a conservative in real life that “hate that gay shit” openly. Just face it, gays aren’t interesting or under any form of oppression. That’s why we’re forced to celebrate them for a month and 2 kids are facing 10 years for driving over a pride pained road on a scooter in an “aggressive” way
Dave was more lost at sea than the Spanish at the Battle of Santiago de Cuba.
I feel like you liberals can't deal with any moral quandary without resorting to circular logic, "oh he got no idea what libertarianism is" because libertarians don't make sense, but see the main argument that you can't have objectivity or authority in a libertarian society is just as stupid and unrealistic as the liberal assertions that anything is fine as long as its not hurting anyone.
I can't tell if Dave realizes that he got bodied or if he thinks he did well
I think he's at the nadir of the Dunning Kruger curve and he fully believes he cleaned up here and that Andrew was just wasting time with silly arguments
@@krombopulos_michael No, he admitted he did poorly in this. Once they got past the NAP section Dave basically took over scoring the points but he definitely didn't do himself any favors in the first part.
W Dave
You know, I've only ever seen morons online bring up the "dunning kruger" effect, I'm starting to think maybe there is some introspection to be had...
It was just bad faith and dave wasnt realizing people could be that bd faith.
damn it seems Andrew wasn't joking when he said he usually spend the day reading books
The void called to me "it's so over", and I into that bottomless pit and whispered in reply "we're so back"
We need a debate pervertry term for when someone complains about being interrupted while interrupting their opponent just as much or more.
What I hate about Dave is that he is completely abandoning basic libertarian values and all he is left with is “govment bad!”. Libertarians at least have core principles but these anti establishment bottom feeders are too one dimensional for even that. This is the “America bad” of the right wing.
I mean right, the establishment hacks are totally where it's at!!! I mean amiright, amiright!?!?!?!
@@Cameron72737ah yes saying he’s an anti establishment shill means you gotta shill for establishment. No wonder you guys are lost.
He's a paleoconservative populist. It's been clear for years. That's why he flounders anytime he gets pushback, he has no critically thought out principles.
Oh god, seriously - the America Bad-right wingers along with woke Christians are THE fucking worst.
@@Cameron72737 me when i false dichotomy:
Dave doesn’t understand that most logic comes from taking the argument to the most extreme place.
the logic doesn't come from there, the underlying reasoning should just be most exposed at the extremes
This is exactly why bubbles exist.JRogan depends on Smith as his go-to Guy, and here we see exactly why he shouldn’t be anyone’s, Especially when he’s one of the better ones for Joe
Andrew Wilson shouldn't be anyones go to either lol
@@ronniekregar3482 yeah, when Destiny knocked philosophy in the beginning, just going into the weeds gives me a headache
Neither should Andrew lol
@@ronniekregar3482it's not an endorsement of Andrew Wilson's general world view, just that he was able to clearly expose Dave Smith as a moron who has no idea what he's talking about. Even if Dave Smith is absolutely right, he has no idea why he's right. He doesn't have the intellectual curiousity to think out his positions beyond the most surface arguments.
@@krombopulos_michael I agree, but I don't like Destiny busting out the bucket of popcorn and start rooting for Andrew Wilson of all people, just because Dave Smith is ducking him lol.
Dave Smith: not funny enough to be a good comedian, not smart enough to be a smart pundit, so he decided to be mediocre at both.
You got that from a bad faith debate?
Show me on the doll where the opinion you don’t like touched you.
@@droptableaccount1820I agree with the original comment….however that was hilarious. You should be Dave’s writer!
Seems like a nice guy to me.
Dave needs a map bc he's clearly lost the plot, his position and this entire argument.
Nice meaningless comment. Maybe one sentence saying why would help? But what would I expect from someone who pays for a UA-cam channel.
@@droptableaccount1820he said yes to contradicting ideologies with divine command theory and libertarianism
@@droptableaccount1820 do you routinely navigate comment sections like a whiny little bitch complaining people didn't connect dots enough for you? 😂😂😂
@droptableaccount1820 I got you bro. If you're Dave and there to defend libritarianism, know what you're talking about. Libritarianism essentially is rugged individualism and seeks as little state intervention as possible. Asking for state intervention for suicide or even in incest, while reasonable violates a Libritarians agreement with the state in which unless I'm harming another person, the state has no business with me. If he wants to caviot that position, sure and I don't think it's unreasonable to do so but if you fly a Libritarian banner, defend it or at least understand it vs using it ad an aesthetic. Andrew had to teach Dave Dave's position hence Dave lost the plot, argument and direction on where he was gong bc he had no clue. If you watched, you'd see Andrew beat dave down with what should have been Dave's own talking points. Highschoolers have deeper ethical understandings than Dave. BTW, I pay for yt bc I enjoy it and I also understand Dave's position better than him. How about that?
@droptableaccount1820 actually I read some of your other comments. Plz get help for your cte bc I think your brain damage is severe and requires medical intervention. I gave u a like bc I believe you can recover.
I’m not sure Andrew is actually being aggressive. I think he’s really just insisting Dave answer the question that was asked and not moving forward until he does. I’m just not sure if Dave is purposely doing this or genuinely thinks all of Andrew’s points are semantical. Also, Dave seems to be upset about the usage of “weird/extreme” examples like incest. Does he not understand that “weird/extreme” examples tend to be great tools to flush out ideas and establish foundational boundaries? I’m thinking Dave hasn’t thought out this libertarian thing very well, that’s why these examples are hard for him to grapple with.
There's alot of things like that tho. For example
Attraction is not a choice.
Well known accepted concept. If we hold this as true.
Being gay isn't a choice. They don't choose to be attracted to the same sex. They just are. For some this is easy to understand and accept, others not so much. But if we also accept this
Pedophilia is not a choice. They're just attracted to kids. The only difference with their Attraction is that acting on it is illegal.
Almost no one accepts this last one as a fact because the hatred and disgust that's held for it (and should be held for it). But we can't get away from the fact they don't actually choose to be that way, because Attraction isn't a choice
Now if we want to have a debate on the topic of Attraction and choice if I were to harp on the pedo example you might ne weirded out and not want to accept that it applies to them aswell when it does
It'd an extreme example, but you can understand why Dave may have reacted the way he did with the incest example and having it attached to a belief he holds
@@ronnickyjroy3 sure but there’s a vast difference between attraction and action. I do understand you can’t control attraction. But my point is, Dave supposedly holds a libertarian position, which would allow a very wide range of freedoms. With that range being so wide, it’s probably necessary to use extreme examples to establish an idea of one’s limits on those freedoms. Dave basically conceded however that he’s less of a libertarian than he claims to be. While personally I’m not in favor of incest, I’m also not claiming to be libertarian. So if someone were to ask me about incest, I’m not bound to the amounts of freedoms a libertarian would be. I honestly believe Dave reacted the way he did because Andrew held his feet to the fire
I love the fact that he just keeps saying, "Yes I could prove this." and then proceeds not to do it. Cracked me up, not gonna lie.
I’m no fan of Andrew but GODDAYUMM he absolutely wrecked Dave Smith in this lmao
Which part?
@@Cameron72737the entire thing 😂
@@Cameron72737the part where he has to explain basic NAP to him A SELF PROCLAIMED LIBERTARIAN. How can you call yourself libertarian and not know the first thing about it? Does he thinks being a libertarian just means you hate taxes and government bad? And all the moral foundation under doesn’t exist?
@@datvo3076 he's only stated about a thousand times it's based on property rights and the non aggression principle
@@datvo3076 circling everything back to God is not the NAP little buddy
"this is semantics" would fall under the "lazy gardener" AKA "let's not get into the weeds"
When it is just cope for "I cant follow at all and dotn even understand the words your using"
Andrew didn't even go full force on him. Those are softball questions, Dave should have encountered at some point of his life ?! I never imagined he's this shallow.
I don’t get why semantics are considered a debate faux pas by some.
50:40 When you find out Dave Smith is a Conservative cosplaying as a Libertarian. 😂
This is a well known fact. The Mises Caucus is a MAGA takeover of the libertarian party.
LINO patient zero, Libertarian in name only.
He’s actually a socialist tankie cosplaying as a Conservative cosplaying as a Libertarian
@@MarkG-nl4oq 🤣
I personally like Dave, but Destiny is 100% correct. He was not prepared.
For a debate format, and someone that is more clever, Andrew Wilson should've had a debate formally with Michael Malice.
Not saying which one is right or not, but it would be more proper.
I’ve been a fan of Dave and LoS for years, this was a bad showing I think because Dave is not well versed in philosophy… The comments all seem to think he’s retarded which I couldn’t disagree more… he was spot on throughout Covid and he usually has good takes but philosophy is not within his wheelhouse.
Andrew and M.Malice would probably be a great discussion/debate.
@@machtnichtsseimann I like andrew usually but sometimes I wish he could calm it down a little rather than aiming to demolish people he could find common ground with. But I understand why he debates in this way.
@@SFUPodcast You clearly don't understand that community. You can find common ground with anyone, it means nothing.
@@lurifaks92 I don’t understand how my statement was incorrect but sure let’s say I was wrong… wouldn’t finding common ground inside of divisive topics then explaining the process in which you came to hold said belief be a good way to go about certain topics? I don’t think that arguing blindly on the broadest possible subject will make a single person evaluate their opinion. But I don’t understand the “community” so let’s just throw logical fallacies around and hope nobody catches on.
1:11:45
Andrew would actually agree with you here Destiny. He uses the exact same argument himself against Christians who believe in Sola Scriptura.
He is Orthodox, Sola Scriptura isn't part of his worldview.
Would be interesting to see destiny engage with the Ortho bros. I think he would struggle to justify his epistemology. Destiny seems to be aware of that tho and even mentioned that Andrew knows more philosophy. After all if you study philosophy you’ll probably become either a nihilist or religious.
Andrew Wilson has been on a TEAR recently
Hes definitely strong at what he does and deserves the recognition, in my opinion. Definitely a thinking man and a reading man and fairly charitable and polite all in all.
Based LesTwins
@@alfiereeves6877 Just to be clear, I don’t agree with him and i’m not the real Les Twins lol
@@UnofficialLesTwins L
@@alfiereeves6877 ur mom
The only reason I even know who Dave Smith is is because of Joe Rogan. Which leads me to ask this question. Is Joe Rogan the male version of Oprah Winfrey? I feel like both of them have introduced us to people who were actively terrible people.
Daves not funny or smart but that doesn’t mean he’s a terrible person
Oh Rogan is very much the male/comedian version of Oprah. That’s a good analogy
Dave smith is a terrible person but destiny is a beacon of moral superiority?
@@IbnRushd-mv3fpno one has ever claimed that about Destiny including himself. Good comment😂
Joe Rogan being the male Oprah is actually genius
Saw this live on The Crucible. What a massacre it was.
"Can you justify that?"
"Yes. I don't like it."
While the other side says: "I think my god doesnt like it"
I don't think I've never seen a worse performance in a debate. I hope for Dave Smith's sake, his brain correctly identified the total mind and body violation happening, and decided to put him in PTSD auto-pilot mode so he can quickly quarantine, then forget such a violation ever took place.
This debate literally gave me 2nd hand embarrassment. Holy Shit.
Watch an episode of the atheist experience, most callers there are worse. But they are laymen defending delusion so they
Dave failed so many nap arguments, you know he took a nap as soon as this debate was over.
22:10
"I don't even know any actual theories of truth...cringe nerd shit."
- _Destiny 2024_
40 mins in and you realize this is the most worthless debate/conversation to be had
I wish i could like this comment twice
It pretty clearly demonstrated that Dave Smith is a hack that doesn't understand his own belief system. I'd say that's worth something.
It was insanely bad faith. But statists gotta grasp at anything to help them cope.
@@nolan13075you get that from.bad faith actors?
@@Fabric_Hater no, I got that from Dave Smith saying he's cool with the state barging into private homes to arrest people for having sex with another consenting adult.
Vegan Gains just destroying our Gusan al-Gaib out of nowhere was unexpected, but welcome.
Yeah but he asked the stupidest question that destiny has been on record about multiple times, when he asked why wouldn't you eat a cat? Destiny would eat a cat and has said so, because he doesn't recognize the moral difference between a cat and a pig.
@@thomaswalmsley8959 My comment was sarcastic. I was merely pointing out a situation I thought was humorous lol
@@cogitoergosum9069 nvm. I'm the asshat
When push comes to shove -LITERALLY, the NAP goes out the window for most libertarians. Dave is no exception. Weak moral foundations makes you a weak debater my friend.
Couldn't dave have won this debate by simply pointing out that liking Jesus is gay?
It’s incel not gay
owned
Despite disagreeing with Andrew on almost all of his beliefs, I think this was incredibly impressive and entertaining 😂
Andrew's moral system is gross, but he's a solid debater and a fairly logical thinker and (seems) to have a solid understanding of philosophy.
@@thomaswalmsley8959Not sure how Christianity is "Gross". I guess love your enemies is gross. 😂
@@Emmanuel_EEE 1) Wilson isn't a normal Christian, he's a subset of Christians, not all Christians are gross, but some definitely can be (because of their beliefs not as an ancillary thing).
2) Wilson doesn't love his enemies, nor does he advocate for it. He's not the lovely dovey hippy Christian. Let's not pretend Wilson is something he isn't.
You could actually make an argument that wouldn't be flatly dishonest about Wilson, which could go something lole" is it gross now to be against degeneracy?" As an example, where I would have to contend with his actual position, but you can't even be bothered to do that, and are just crying about some strawman critism about the whole of Christianity.
@@thomaswalmsley8959
1. What the hell is a "normal" Christian? Christianity has different denominations, they generally all have the same foundation beliefs. Love thy neighbor as yourself, the Trinity, and some sacraments.
2. Can you give me an example where Andrew didn't love his enemies? He may be aggressive when debating, but I haven't heard him tell people to off themselves because of what they believe.
3. Degeneracy is bad for society because it mess with the order and designed of humans. Humans have a higher moral standing then animals do. So to engage with degeneracy is to be just like animals.
4. No one's crying, you made a claim that Andrew's moral system is gross which directly means that Christianity is gross.
Something something destiny is a girl’s name
trueeee
😂😂😂 all these whiny babies. Dave is the man. Little girls hate men.
amazing
Dave Smith is just the typical garden variety libertarian where his core beliefs are rooted in bumper sticker statements. He will answer the question and then proceed to dismiss the question at the same time. The power of the dismissive.
Shout out to Andrew, who, while he was a bit agressive, understood the assignment and material.
Dave Smith is a comedian and typically, comedians are intelligent and insightful. What happened is Dave Smith was basically right about the COVID issues and JRogan platformed him and people mistakenly thought he would be intelligent and well read about a host of other issues. The problem is, Dave Smith is also arrogant af. So he accepted a debate that had the title of his supposed worldview in it and thought he could bullshit his way through the debate. The problem is Andrew literally describes his method of debate as gladiator debating or whatever. Basically he believes in taking your soul in a debate. That’s what he did. As for Destiny saying Andrew should have sucked Dave off for his career, the guy needed an ego check. If Dave can’t respect the skill and intellect and is going to be a dick because he didn’t get the softball treatment remember what he did to Cuomo. Did he grant him any grace or did he obliterate him and say it over and over? Don’t bring surface level views to a meta fight.
Dave Smith is NOT grifting about the god stuff. If he was, I’d kind of respect him more. He alluded to it, but he literally just had a kid and changed his mind. Before that, he was a pretty firm atheist. It’s really indicative of his thought processes that his most firm beliefs are really based on not much more than a feeling.
Kind of a weird thing though.... what if the kid grows up to be an a hole? Will he become an atheist again?
Why would you respect him more if he was a grifter?
also having a child will make you question everything you value. Logically if you don’t you are prob a incapable robot. Many people would actually find your opinion meaningless as you’ve never had a child, so you can’t possibly fully understand the world. I agree
@@dieselbaby no, they’re not at all unless you’re using a super pedantic meaning of feeling. You can come to conclusions in a logical way, even if feelings influence your conclusion.
@@Re-Todd_Howard because then at least he knows his argument is dumb but argues it anyway cause money. Like Peterson defending Christianity. It’s like playing devils advocate but for money.
The duality of libertarians: hey fuck those laws…except the ones I agree with
Andrew had Dave so confused and flustered I think Dave literally couldn’t keep track of what he was saying out of his own mouth.
Dave Smith finally exposed
28:57
In philosophy and logic, semantics are INCREDIBLY important. They literally translate to "meaning". You are assigning meaning to your syntax.
Only on laymen conversations did semantics become a bad thing
Dave Smith has built up a large ego as a debater
This Dave Smith guy is just so incredibly stupid on almost every take
dave has been around louis so long he's convinced he's super smart rather than louis is super dumb, big jay is a more successful comedian, louis owns it all and dave is the smart political guy, please dont take that away from him
Most philosopher’s agree you can’t have objective morality without a religious belief. Alex O’Connor does a good job discussing all the reasons for this.
But muh “philosophers have written about it” 😂
You clearly haven't seen Alex's discussion with Joe Schmid then
Yeah, not at all true. There’s an entire branch of philosophy called “Moral Philosophy” or “Ethics” that derives morality from other first principles.
@@joge2468 u mean like what kant tried to do but failed? And kant actually believed in God, he was just trying to make a system that could pin point morality with just logics and he failed, his categorical imperative just devolves into circularity.
@@pamelapamper Don’t go bashing Kant now. Yes, he believed in G-d. It doesn’t follow that the categorical imperative fails. Like Rawls’s fairness principle, it’s a perfectly legitimate form of morality to arise from humans using reason to derive a system upon which they could all agree. It’s amazing what a state of blindness can do.
Wow Dane Cook really fell off
Anyone who’s an old school Destiny fan probably remembers the incest debates. Good times and a genuine introduction for having to lay out your thought process and morals without just arguing things are “icky”.
This is somehow an even worse performance than the Vaush unprepared debate.
Since we're referencing 'Critique of Pure Reason' less than 2 minutes in, here's your official warning: do not try to read this book unless you have a strong constitution for turgid writing.
I have something turgid for you pal.
Had to read parts of it at uni, still traumatized. I think I read the first page of critique of beauty about 10 times and I still barely understand what the f he was talking about. That is when I found the upper limit of my intelligence.
Lmao the libertarian world thing sounds a lot like cyberpunk 😂
Dave Smith just feels he's intelligent because he hangs out with people that are either dumber than him or that agree with him. This was the funniest piece of comedy Dave Smith has ever done
How does he perscribe to libertarianism, and hold the belief that two consenting adults (when related) should be forced by the state not to engage sexual action and that people should be forced by the state (or anyone in his case) to not cause harm to oneself.
As someone who finds interest in liberatarian views and hold views that often align, it would seem to me that a liberatarian would argue (or should argue) that a person should be allowed to do either of these things. Otherwise I must have completely misunderstood the basics of libertarianism.
Exactly. That's why Andrew focused on the question, because it showed that Dave had no foundation for his beliefs.
He just gave up the NAP as soon as it resulted in something he just didn't like.
In the same way the n8zi party said they were socialists.
I'm not even mad about the dictionary. I've definitely been in debates where people have made up definitions to a word to suit a bias, even when it has nothing to do with the word . Like he's a Nazi or fascist, when people using it as a term for a person they dont agree with.
Well, Nazism and Fascism are very specific ideologies. Something like "ownership of yourself" can be taken in many ways. Owning myself in the eyes of God? Yes. Christians will say they have free will. However, they also belong to God. Do I have ownership of my brain? Yes. Well, what about the limbic system? What controls the brain? Neurons? Do you have control of your neurons?
I agree that definitions matter, but when you get into the nitty gritty of, especially philosophically, ideas and concepts, the Webster dictionary doesn't really suffice.
I can't believe I used to listen to Dave Smith and value his perspectives on things when it's grounded in nothing
This is the first time I heard of Dave Smith. I didn't even know there were libertarians that advocated for banning things! I had to stop watching Destiny's video because I wanted to actually hear the discussion and it did not disappoint. My favorite part was at around 20 minutes in where Dave was flustered because he thought his questions weren't being answered. It's even more funny to me that people in his audience will side with him or think that he won somehow. What a way to start my day.
Me thinks Destiny is recovering from the amount of ass kicking over Gaza/Israel debates.. such a child!
Libertarians are so hilarious lmao. The family guy speech is top notch
we’re so back
Seeing Destiny and his fans give Andrew praise is peak irony 😂
You do realize you can disagree with Andrew's philosophy and also see that he clearly showed Dave to be a fool?
What’s ironic about it? It was a debate. One guy won. You don’t have to like the guy to understand that he clearly won the argument.
lol I’ve used that “how do you pronounce your name again?” And they are like…” Dave “ 😂
Destiny is so methed out; needs to lay off the meds.
Dave brought a nail clipper to a sword fight
I fucking hate Andrew but this was actually a super satisfying performance from him. He had me questioning atheism there for a minute and ready to come over to Christian dominionism
How did he have you questioning atheism?
I was an athiest until i started to listen to andrew wilson
Come to the dark side
@@vesuvius2444 it was a joke. Lol.
@@biglennys1fan441 W
I feel like Dave didn't understand exactly what he was walking into because it was said they didn't even decide to debate until right before they started talking.
This has been one of the most entertaining things to watch on UA-cam in weeks holy shit lmao
Would be nice to see a debate between Andrew and Alex O'Connor
Funniest part is how scared of Andrew you are.
It's crazy how having children can brake some people's brain so bad.
Bro, you might be on to something 😂
Smoking pot at your house when you don’t plan to drive or work and are over 21 in Florida is illegal but not immoral.
What's crazy is the comments on that video. Everyone hating Andrew. They might not have understood what Andrew was arguing, either, though.
Nah, we pretty know he's a debate perv. "Do you own yourself" is probably the most pedantic question possible after "how do you know you exist".
@@justwannabehappy6735 but the question is to gauge Dave's fundamental beliefs. I didn't necessarily think Andrew is looking for a concrete answer, but rather, Dave's thought process to the question. Which he didn't have any.
I guess being a debate perv is okay because asking "how do you know you own yourself" is a valid question if dave doesn't believe that which was demonstrated during the incest part.
@@cointomato9768 how do you know you exist.
@@justwannabehappy6735 debate demon
I believe in Jesus, I loathe how people are using Christ's name in this current age, American conservatives like Candace, acting like she's so pious. Firstly, Christ is King of Kings, and secondly, he said 'You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.' So enough obsessing over trans and onlyfans girls to try and make you appear better, Jesus died for your sins too Candace...
Destiny you have gained a couple points in my book. Its refreshing to see someone with different views not hinder your view on a debate.
The main issue with Dave is that he isn't a Libertarian and has no actual principles.
The other reason Dave will come out of this not looking as bad even after totally shitting the bed, is bc in a month after everyone forgot what actually happened, he’ll go on Rogan, being this up and they’ll talk about how crazy this other dude is and how he argued about incest and this other crazy shit and they’ll make jokes and make fun of the whole thing.
cool, I found this right in my feed!
great work!
:-)
56:29 massive L for Destiny not choosing “The Picky Eater” that is objectively hilarious due to how abstract it is
Imagine giving up your entire moral framework because you cant bite the bullet on a hypothetical
Is it just me or is the editing up a notch
Ahhh destiny. My favorite. I have to take breaks because youre so fucking addictive to listen to.
Honestly, this is the type of Destiny content that I enjoy; I feel like he really hasn't done this in a long time. His foreign policy debates are not nearly as interesting since they largely come down to the question of which source to believe.
My imaginary friend told me X is not the philosophical own Destiny thinks it is.
I can't stand Dave. He's got this arrogance that hasn't been earned.
Andrew Wilson's question about owning oneself demonstrates a rather childish understanding of ownership. The way we can objectively state that one owns oneself is that ownership is a negative right, not affirmative. One does not actively acquire or gain the right to be; the mere act of existing denies all other beings the ability to exist in your existence.
The act of being or existing is not defining ownership though. Yes you're existence can't be affirmed or negated by negative or positive rights but that was not the question.
@@PuddingXXL You're misunderstanding my point. I'm not speaking about affirming or negating someone's existence, all people and beings are presumed to exist. I'm saying that the fundamental concept of ownership isn't a societal construct because the core experience a being has is uniquely experienced by them by virtue of them existing as the being they are. Even in the times of slavery, a slave still owned his/herself because the slave was experiencing the labors and life of being enslaved.
That whole section of the debate seemed pointless to me. Essentially, they were trying to argue the practical difference between the concepts of self ownership (Dave) and free will (Andrew) which could be an interesting discussion but these two just talked past each other during that section.
@@TheWinterfox10 prove the slave owned themselves because they clearly did not
@@mariomario1462 Of course the slaves owned themselves, proving that is easy. Did the slave do the work, or did the master? Did the slave get beat, or did the master? Did the slave eat? What about sleep? Everything that slave experienced, the slave experienced for themselves and they didn't experience it on someone else's behalf. Whether the slave had freedom to choose for themselves isn't relevant, because ownership isn't about freedom. It's about the ability to be a being that no other being can be. If that makes sense.
You know that you own your house because no one else has the ability to live in YOUR house.
As a person who hates Andrew's ideals, this was like a cat playing with a half dead mouse
I love how Destiny breaks down the debate. I hope people learn from him and Dave’s bad example.
Yep he’s crazy talented at it, the fact that he does it off the cuff is incredibly impressive.
You do own yourself regardless of slavery you can choose to be subjugated or rebel. If you rebel you would probably been killed or you could have escaped. Ultimately the decision is up to you.
This is the argument I think I would go down. If your choices and decisions come down to you, then you must own yourself. Nobody else can make you do anything. They can apply pressure and you can give up and allow it but there is always the option of disobeying and allowing death. But then you get into torture and methods of psychologically breaking someone and manipulation. It’s a hard one.
100% and I don't understand why Dave didn't take that route. But what makes it even dumber is that Andrew believes in free will which is essentially the same concept. They were just too debate brained and talking past each other in this segment for the more interesting discussion about the differences between those two concepts to take place... also probably need someone more philosophically based than Dave Smith who is more a 'how it should work' than a 'why it should work this way' type of debater.
Dave avoided this because it undoes libertarianism. If self-ownership is not a social construct and you really do own yourself, then he cannot answer any interventionist question (eg. the brother/sister section) without violating the non-aggression principle. I mean, he still didn't answer that without reverting to god, but I'm sure he'll have a good think about it.
So ownership is about control. Then how can you claim stealing is wrong, what gives you a claim to ownership over something you don’t control anymore?
It's refreshing to hear destiny recognize that Andrew is above him on the food chain.
I've seen destiny own Andrew so...
@@robertbarth5816 Cope harder
@@_AlmightyZoe14 Okie dokie
I've seen Andrew not preform great maybe 1 time out of alllllll the rest. What's your point?
Then I don’t think you watched this video lol.
As a philosophy student, Merriam-webster is the answer key to all philosophical questions.
the problem with the government isn't that they make professional licenses, it's the coercion. Anarchist society would have an equivalent if every important government institution, but you get to opt out.