DO YOU KNOW HOW YOU KNOW? D'Souza vs Dillahunty
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 вер 2024
- #god #atheist #mattdillahunty #dineshdsouza #debate #bible #jesus #christianity #samharris #jordanpeterson #jordanpetersondaily #atheism #atheistviews #knowledge #philosophy #science
Full discussion here: • Does God Exist? What I...
Welcome to the Pangburn Universe, governed by the laws of good faith & helpfulness.
If you enjoyed this clip, please drop a like on the video and consider subscribing. Alex O'Connor (cosmic skeptic) vs Dinesh D'Souza GOES DOWN on the Pangburn stage on June 1st in NYC! Tickets available at Pang-burn.com .
Prayers for all❤ to experience pute evil energy.then u will know Mabel there good out there
We are waves on a vast deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
Do you delete all comments that challenge you?
@@raya.p.l5919Prove that prayer works! So far the evidence is irrefutably that those who pray have exactly equal chances of the very same outcome without prayer, being religious... Also, It's always strange that when the prayer comes true (it didn't) then the christian praises god some more, but when it doesn't, they have the most silly and absurd excuses! That's cognitive bias at its worse, and called "Counting the hits, and dismissing the misses, and there are far fewer hits than misses!
Good is people doing good, no god needed!
Oh man, Alex is going to mop the floor with Dinesh
Just two weeks ago this man and all of the people representing the 2000 mules movie were in a court and telling a judge that they had zero evidence
This is funny. D'Souza keeps saying the same thing, gets shut down, and says it again in a different way. I thought he was going to be formidable.
@@joanmary90he was absolutely able to finish his points. They were just bad.
He's a felon who was convicted of fraud. Why would you expect him to be formidable?
@@joanmary90I see you were watching something else other than the discussion. D'Souza certainly was able to finish his points but when clarification is required so apologists don't spin off on things that aren't related or quantifiable to the narrative, there's going to be moments where an interruption is required and Matt behaved himself. D'Souza did, however, strawman Matt a few times... Can't say I respect that.
D’Souza is so desperate to give credence to his position, he’s constantly dancing around, moving goalposts & straw-manning. Every time Matt shows the fault in D’Souza’s reasoning he changes to a new (terrible) analogy. Truly I tell you, this fool has no evidence 😂
I think you just summed this up very well. The guy tries angle after worn-out, dead-end angle, hoping that something, anything, can be made to stick.
Jupp
Still waiting for D'Souza to get to some kind of point. Sounds very Jordan Petersonish.
@@clipperwing We are waves on a vast deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
True. Dnesh has the most contrived analogies
There is no one on the planet more intellectually dishonest than Dinesh D'Souza.
Where is he intellectually dishonest in this video?
@@ZeeAmyAre you unfamiliar with D'Souza? He's a horrible liar.
@@ChuckPike Worse than Richard Dawkins and A.C. Grayling?
@@TBOTSS Richard Dawkins is one of the most intellectually honest people around, you've made yourself look like a fool.
@@SeanSeg Richard Dawkins
"I do not know who William Lane Craig is... Craig is a creationist who supports genocide" Same article.
"None of the Oxford Philosophy professors I asked know who he is. " When asked he cannot remember who he asked and when presented with a list of philosophers who has interacted with Craig he sulks.
I could go on.
Gay marriage is the perfect example of something that is persecuted and legislated against by a large portion of the religious for exclusively religious reasons. There are literally zero non-religious reasons to legislate against it, and all people who want to legislate against it justify their position through their religion. He asked for one supreme judge as an example: Clarence Thomas. He had openly expressed his desire to eliminate people’s right to same sex marriage. He is openly in support of the idea that theocracy is an acceptable way to govern. That’s a man with immense power making decisions that affect everyone in America, and doing so with a very strong religious motivation.
Marriage is a religious concept. Why do atheists want to be married?
Marriage in general shouldn't be any concern of any governing body human or divine
@@kelly648 So when it comes to child support or other arrangements when marriages fail, who would be the arbitors or such dissolutions and to what set of "rules" if you like would you refer to? Someone has to be the arbitor, who would you suggest? The parties just make it up as they go along?
@richo2501 when the mother of my daughter left me, we decided to divide the costs for our daughter in two. It are mostly the lawyers who push for the alimony so they can get their part.
It's because marriage itself was a religious ceremony. Two becoming one, in the eyes of God. Hence, infidelity is a sin. Believing that makes a huge difference in divorce rates. Then by default the amount of single parents. Which in turn affects the number of emotionally healthy children. Which affects the whole population. This is one side of why the "sins" are what they are. It's not all about control as most want to believe. It's because they affect either the world around you(macrocosm) or you on a subconscious level(microcosm). Usually it affects both. The problem with religion is, they take things that scriptures may say, and call it sin. When it's not. With gay marriage, even if they interpret what the Bible says, as it's an abomination. That doesn't make it a sin. Because(as far as the Bible) a sin is breaking the 10 commandments. That is not one. Because, it doesn't affect the individual, or those around them. The whole debate, wouldn't even be happening, if religion was taught as what it is. More importantly include the "hows" and "whys." Instead, they have been manipulated to focus on the "who" and "what." Which is mostly, irrelevant information.
The guy in the sparkly jacket did remarkably well against the convicted felon.
I love how you described Matt😂.
as a felon I think I can safely say some felons are dishonest
Pfft. You apparently don't know nor care of the sheer corruption behind his "conviction".
@@machtnichtsseimann elaborate.
@@machtnichtsseimann12 jurors found him guilty. That is the fairest system in the world, my friend. Corruption would be one "leader" declaring someone guilty without trial, without evidence, and without the bother of "justice".
“Never play chess with a pigeon.
The pigeon simply knocks all the pieces over.
Then shits all over the board.
Then struts around like it won.”
dinesh is a conman dishonest and avoider, not a good theologist
The problem is tho.. good theologists use the exact same tired arguments all the way up to Dr William Lane Craig. Like insisting atheists have faith & not realizing they're admitting it's irrational
Matt thinks men can be women.
@@williamrosario8534 i dont.
@@santiagoabliterature Good for you. You are more intelligent than Dillahunty.
@@pRODIGAL_sKEPTIC I don't consider Craig a good theologian and just as dishonest.
One of Americas leading apologists and his big gotcha answer when asked for proof of god, AFTER dancing around the question for over 6 minutes is "Faith."
*golf clap*
Again, religious intellectuals collapsing when they aren't up against college students in a Q&A session.
Even in the best schools, the average college student is Often overworked and overstressed; being involved in 5 different difficult unrelated classes, 2-3 “character-building” student clubs, and often holding 1-2 jobs to try to make ends meet that the loan sharks don’t cover.
I know, I lived through it.@@letsomethingshine
Dillahunty claiming to simultaneously be the brilliant authority and the brainless oaf
You have seen and heard Charlie Kirk and quick talking Ben Shapiro in action
@@fishinghuntingfool- Sure, cuz Ben never takes on hard subjects with his peers and older. Don't tell me, Wikipedia is your god.
Dinesh: "Give me one example of someone using their religious beliefs trying to control what other people can do."
Also Dinesh: "On the abortion issue, let's set the legality component aside..."
WHY is Dinesh D'souza still a thing?
Three most important questions:
1) How can we live sustainably
2) How can we increase the quality of life for everyone
3) What’s for dinner
God, after death and the origin of the universe are not on my list.
But the people who claim to "know" the latter, also "know" that the stories of the latter dictate the rules to which you are supposed to have no choice in the matter of the first 3.
Their knowledge of the unknowable means that they get to dictate your entire life to you.
Convenient isn't it?
Funny how they like dictatorships, monarchies, and theocracy... No?
Conservatives hear a few phrases from a freshman philosophy class and think they are hearing profound revelations. They are such easy marks for grifters like D’Souza.
I was thinking the same thing. Explains perfectly the predicament this country is in today.
Because true adults want a dialectic and an entertainment based society wants the pageantry of debates
This must have happened before the Alabama IVF ruling which was filled with theocratic references. There are plenty of judges using religious doctrines over the law.
The law and the constitution is based on the bible
@@user-tl7zl9ln7p Wrong. While most of the nation’s founders generally believed in a creator, they were skeptics about the Bible’s potential influence on secular government. Many were deists who believed in a God who created free thought, and did not interfere in the affairs of men and women. American law is based on common law from the United Kingdom. And The aphorism that 'Christianity is part of the common law of England' is mere rhetoric; at least since the decision of the House of Lords in Bowman v Secular Society Limited [1917] AC 406 it has been impossible to contend that it is law. Like the fraud and felon D'Souza you make assertions without evidence.
@@mikertist347 why are you citing a decision that was made in 1917 in another country when the US Constitution was written in 1776?
To clarify, I’m genuinely curious to your line of reasoning, I agree with what you said about the constitution being based on common law, I don’t understand why you were citing a decision made by the UK government when the United States was no longer a part of such government for nearly 140 years at that point.
@@brokeneyes6615They're saying what Americanaw was based on. Just because we weren't a colony anymore doesn't mean those English influences stopped. The so called Founding Fathers were educated within the British system.
@@user-tl7zl9ln7p That is objectively wrong. Go read what our founding fathers wrote. Or the book The Founding Myth.
Dinesh is a total bad faith actor. Surprised Matt took him on.
Dsouza is one of the most disingenuous people I've seen. And he's intellectually smart enough to know what he is... disgusting
He KNOWS he’s lying!! That’s what makes him truly despicable. His little movie was all lies too, and now his ridiculously far right son is running for political office!
Exactly
That is what makes him so loathsome, he knows he’s lying
The way he misconstrues Hitchens response post mortem is quite frankly fucking disgusting. 👍😳👍
Yep, 2000 Mules was straight up propaganda. To be generous he may actually believe the bollox he presented but when a court demanded evidence he didn't have any. He's either disingenuous or extremely credulous.
D'Souza wearing goalposts on his back and running away very fast.
There was 1 debate where Dillahunty escaped before interpellations (against a certain andrew)😅... quit like a coward. Saw himself in the mirror i think.
Matt thinks men can be women.
@williamrosario8534 Non-sequiteur: your facts are uncoordinated.
@@SuStel Not my facts. THE fact is Matt said men can be women.
@williamrosario8534 Don't know you're Star Trek references, eh? Ask right, let me put it to you another way: Who asked you?
Why on earth do serious people waste their time with a cocky high school debater like D’Souza?
Because he is platformed by national-level conservative orgs, is involved with Trump campaign activities, and is regularly given space in liberal mainstream media as well.
I find him stupid
Why did Christopher Hitchens waste his time with D'Souza who Hitch complimented as a formidable debater.
@@machtnichtsseimannum, why should I care what Hitchens thinks?
Sadly the entire maga movement believe the same.
The irony of he identifies as an intellectual and expects to be treated as such while presenting red herrings and straw men to defend religious based hate in legislation [anti woke maga fascism .. utterly failing to see he will be come for eventually if they take power]
Wow. This guy is not suited for this level of debate.
since we dont know what we will discover we must believe in things before we discover them/ dinesh dsouza
Which is an ironic fun-house mirror of actual knowledge, if you know anything about how we've developed scientific models that were often decades away from being testable.
I was staring at the table of elements the other day in awe, remembering how many of the spaces had historically been blank ...but we had deduced the existence of elements with those qualities... and eventually they got filled. Because science.
@@christophergreen6595 models come from data. Regarding not discovered elements, they knew previous element has 5 protons next 7 protons theres no reason to believe a 6 proton element doesnt exist, but it couldve not existed. you know how many predictions didnt get it right, a thousand times more than the ones who got it right. So if models have to be tested they are not actual knowledge
7:20 D'Souza really thought he did something there LOL
Ya you know when he said" Here we are flung into the world" he was going to go with an offshoot of "what else could it be" . An argument from incredulity.
That unicorn point is easily refuted by Matt
All "points" Souza made could have easily been refuted by a reasonably intelligent toddler.
And he just moves along...
They could have summed it all up in a few sentences
@@ADUAquascaping I guess our brains really crave hearing something being said in 10 different ways
and that D'souza will use the unicorn point again without even thinking about it.
The beginning of this conversation is even more absurd in light of the recent Alabama Supreme Court ruling on embryos being made in the image of god
so for dinesh " May be there's something more to life than what science says" = " God absoulutely exists and he does'nt want you to be gay"
And he's also his son, and his father and his spirit, but they're all him (not her, for some reason), and he's outside of time and space so there's no way you can prove he exists, but he wants you to come to him and believe that he died for your sins that you inherited through your ancestors who ate a fruit 6000 years ago, and if you don't believe that he's gonna torture you for eternity if you don't believe and love him.😊
@@exaucemayunga22 They Don't want god to be some puny ass Woman 🤣. Also in Hinduism The Sun is a Male God. He also has a son.🤣 You can't get more patriachal than that.
A debate between a secure intellectual and an insecure anti-intellectual is always interesting and entertaining.
D'Souza put his own foot in his mouth,here,several times,and I was a bit disappointed that Dillahunty did not jump on it and point it out to him. D'Souza used the analogies of "7 stars" and about a "dog in China" etc. Saying that believing there are other dogs on Earth or more than 7 stars just because you have seen those 7 stars or seen dogs in your life is no different than having faith in a God. But there is a very big difference. In his analogies you are inferring belief based on actual evidence that supports the idea that there are more dogs on Earth other than the dogs which you have personally seen. BUT a person's belief in God is not based on them having seen other gods first hand. No one has ever seen a God. No one has any evidence of any God. Most people have seen dogs. There is undeniable proof that dogs exist. Most people have seen stars. No one has seen a god.
Matt could be talking to a Bigfoot-ist and it would be the same conversation. Depressing...
I’ll never be able to understand why anyone takes dsouza seriously
D'Souza's opinions are unprovable and comical, it is fun to watch those types.
The “heart of the matter” is always some huge intellectual leap for the theist.
“If you can only see seven stars…” You know dogs exist, it’s not a leap to believe there are more stars. Same w/ dogs. They discover new sea life all the time. It’s not hard to believe that because we have past demonstration of discovering new sea life as well as current sea life.
What we don’t have a demonstration of is an afterlife, a god, or reincarnation. Yet, believers want people to act as if we do.
ua-cam.com/users/LoveCoveredLifePodcastvideos
Demonstratable evidence.
@@Ben-Jembai You just demonstrated that you can send a link to some UA-cam page. Congrats for accomplishing nothing.
@@Ben-Jembai HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
“Demonstrable Evidence”.
Case closed! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Yup, exactly! The case for the supernatural doesn’t even get off the ground at all. Comparing it with the stars or dogs scenario is just plain wrong. With the latter, you’re making a quantity inference. I have direct perceptual knowledge that X quantity of thing A exists, and based on evidence / reasons, I can be reasonably confident that there are more than X such things.
With supernatural, there is no initial direct perceptual evidence. So the argument just never gets off the ground, except without making a huge initial assumption, an assumption which also is the claim itself
Unforunately Dillahunty is not forceful enough on the 3 questions that Dinesh claims that science doesn't have an answer to.
1. Origin of the universe
2. Meaning of life
3. What happens after death.
1. Moving the goalpost. 400 years ago, Dinesh would had claimed that Earth was the center of the universe, 6000 years old, and humans were evicted from the Garden of Eden. Because of science we now know about evolution, the formation of the solar system, galaxies, the evolution of the universe, the origins of matter and the fundamental forces. The religious claim is now; Science cant tell us what happened prior to the Big Bang, ergo "God must have done it" - Without offering any explanation or specifics. What is the mechanic of such a divine intervention? Where did this god come from? Who is the creator of the creator? No explanation. It is simply just a throwaway line that offers no real explanation. Dinesh is attempting to answer something that is currently unknown with a supernatural intervention that raises 1000 new questions that are vastly MORE mysterious than the origin of the Universe.
2. Meaning and purpose are terms that are constructs of the human mind. These terms do not exist externally of the human mind. If Planet Earth was blown up tomorrow and humanity seized to exist, noone would be left to weep for us. The universe doesn't know about purpose or meaning. It is not conscious and aware of our existence. The only answer that can satisfy dinesh' question is that there must be an external entity that has brought us into existence to serve a "higher purpose" independent of the human mind. There is no evidence such an entity exists or has ever existed. And yet humans seem able to live perfectly happy lives and create meaning on their own.
3. Nothing. Your consciousness seizes to exist when your neurons stop firing in your brain. This is well descriped by medical science.
And you wont be around to complain about it after the fact. 100+ billion people have died throughout the existence of humanity. They arent around to bother us anymore. And you didnt know or care about 99.99999999999999999999% of them. And they didnt know or care about you. They figured out how to die, I am sure that you will get there too, eventually.
We are living in a historic time. Never in the history of humanity have theists needed to work so hard to back up they're dishonesty. Couple hundred more years, rational thinking will have prominence over religious thinking.
People been saying that same thing for a long time and yet the Truth will not go away.
@@Ben-Jembai What truth are you referring to?
@@Hogstrictors The Truth.
We are waves on a vast deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
@@Hogstrictors Something to do with a magic sky man, I'm sure.
@@miskatonic_alumni hahahaha i agree
It is claimed, Jordon Peterson's agent has informed Peterson not to do anymore discussions with Dillahunty. Basically Petersons argued like an individual who believes the supernatural is exists yet he can't justify his beliefs with any reliable process which is doable. This requires one to be good at the confidence game. Those who have a significant amount of followers are excellent in the practice of linguistic smoke and mirrors.
That was a preamble.
Dinesh is not much better than Peterson at this.
Peterson has made a career out of obfuscation to the extreme. And people lap it up as intellectually noteworthy.
So.. little more than a grifter. But it’s made him very known, and wealthy.
I agree with him in his position on free speech, the initial argument against bill C16, and his rallying against the degradation of universities as a whole, mainly in NA, but since then, particularly on the religious side.. I’m done with it. He kicks the metaphorical can down the road with it, releases new books on it, begins a tour on it.. he knows it’s his ‘sacred’ cash cow. I’ve no doubt - like Alex O’Connor - he’s interested in it deeply, the symbolism (Dawkins said he was drunk on such), the theology, but he should state his position on its truth claims, as O’Connor has - particularly as an empiricist (purportedly).
@@Alex-mj5dv Doing the right thing cannot be legislated. Thus outlawing things is our next step. Would you be okay with being called a loser by a sector of society? Words can have a huge positive or negative affect on us.
What would be your solution to people who are called names that have a negative influence on them?
And Peterson himself once remarked on why Dawkins always "kicks the hell out of" his opponents when debating theists. He really should have known it would be the same way with him and Dillahunty. When you have reason on your side, you don't have to try to bullshit your way through a debate. And that's why Matt kicks the hell out of Peterson.
@@godbeIess I am an amputee who uses a wheelchair. When I go out, i get stared at, do you advocate for me being able to sue the people who stare?
Peterson is a crybaby, he should go back to dreaming about his grandma
Wow what a waste of time. This went nowhere. I do blame Dinesh for that.
I don't understand why a serious person like Matt allots time and energy towards dialoguing with people like Dinesh, a clown with a long record of dishonesty and disingenuous mudslinging.
It's so frustrating how the religious defenders don't actually defend their core belief. They always and I mean always dance around the edges because they know that the core is indefensible.
The core does not need defending because it is the core from which all else arises.
We are waves on a vast deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
@@Ben-Jembaitheir core is delusional and cannot be defended.
@@Nick-Nasti
I'm not talking about their core, I'm talking about the core.
The core needs no defence.
We tried Rules of LAWS under God and King. It was called the dark age for a reason. Every revolution was to separate religion from LAWS.
If the afterlife is filled with deities, I will believe in the one who's there when I die. Theres no timeline established for belief, so why not wait
Randy, the flatulent purple unicorn, does not appreciate the disrespectful way Duh'Souza speaks of his kind.
'Happy'.
It's name is 'Happy' and he had his own TV show, it was great.
Not sure how this ties in to D'Souza yet, I just started :p
Great show tho!
Duh'Souza😂.....that's just perfect
Dinesh shouldn't do apologetics. He hurts more than helps
One example: Boebert literally said that american citizenship should be dependent on a christian examination of some kind.
So many times, when a theist like D'Souza is asked for their reason or evidence for a belief in God, it ends up just being a series of guided questions to the skeptic.
It's easy to be an atheist,they do not have to proof anything,they can talk bout anything ,as long as it come from an empty can.
D'Souza completely outclassed here.
I don't understand why it's difficult for most people to just say I don't know instead of something exists without any evidence and proof
It's said that people will believe a falsehood for 2 reasons. One, they want to believe its true. Or two, they're afraid that its true. In this case and the case of most religions, people want to believe its true. And there are certainly many motivational factors. Very few people want to believe that when they die, that its simply over. Unfortunately, life is short. And because life is unfair, its often even shorter for some unlucky few.
Another reason....The belief in a God that is the final arbiter of justice. Evil bad people should get what they deserve and people who have been good and faithful all their lives, should be rewarded.
And finally, people want to believe they will see their deceased loved ones again someday. Who wouldn't want this with every fiber of their beings? To see your grandparents again, or your parents. Your husband or wife who died when that drunk driver ran a red light. Your little girl who got cancer and died before ever reaching the age of 10 years old. If you say that this is not motivation enough to believe the unreasonable, then I don't know what to tell you.
Now I'm an atheist. I'm fully aware there are flaws even in the reasons I gave. People don't think what it would be like to be in a conscious state of being for eternity. Eternity in heaven would eventually be an eternity in hell. Yes evil people should be punished. But for an eternity in a painful burning place of fire and torture? No one deserves such a thing. The problem is, people don't usually think that far ahead..... or they don't want to.
Here’s the depth of what Desuzie is trying to say with his tortured analogies: people take risks; I call risk taking faith; faith means god is real.
May I point to an Alabama Supreme Court justice who included a religious reference in an opinion about a frozen embryo being a human.
I've never understood the purpose question, we don't know what our purpose is. Umm, yeah, we do. It is all around you, just look at society. It is to thrive and breed, same as any other species. Only difference is humans have this powerful brain that allows us to thrive so well, that we can also do all kinds of other things for any reason at all. As far as how religion influences policy, I have heard lots of political figures around the world "pray" for the answer, or say, "God told me to..." Even our president Bush got his answers to the Iraq war from God, so he claimed.
We are the universe observing itself, our purpose is to provide meaning in a meningless universe.
Apologetic in a nutshell: God is incomprehensible, now listen while I tell you all about him.
D’Souza’s use of Hitchens is an insult to Hitchens memory. D’Souza is a pretentious pseudo intellect, a fraud and grifter.
Person in Dinesh's mind: "Why do you want or have an abortion?"
Woman wanting an abortion: "Because it's fun!"
Holy shit people like Dinesh exist
Keep trying Dinesh.. just keep on trying! Even if you're wrong, which you are, eventually you'll wear somebody out.. and call it a big win
This is maybe the least a holeish and most pleasant I've heard Dinesh be and he's still only one or two increments below insufferable
And he is right
In general religious people, when children, adults toll them there is a god and that's the main reason why they belive it. They associate God with they're parents or authority ty figures and later they rationalize it
Convicted felon gets owned by a guy in a smoking jacket.
Three questions.
How everything started?
Why everything started?
Where is everything going.
That's why god.
My God.
Well, prove that, because I'm not convinced.
1st and 3rd are valid questions.
Your conclusion is wrong and baseless.
Matt is superb!
He is good debater but he can get rude and quite nasty at times.
@@pary327Apologists tend to deserve it when they won't stop the logical fallacies.
@@Eric-cj8sb I have seen Matt go off on people when they really just did not get it, they were quite polite and Matt just unleashed on them. Was hard to watch and really not deserved. .
Can’t he understand what is a theory ? A proposition ? Science works like this: observation, theory and proposition.
For these debates, Theists MUST propose a realistic model of what God could be in their hypothesis. You believe in WHAT exactly ?
A physical entity ? A pure « Energy » consciousness ? Otherwise anything goes and we always end up with the same conclusions….
Faith is total BS when debated in a scientific environment.
"How did the universe come to be?"
Why do people think this is an important question?
Can you give an example of a question that is "important", rather than interesting?
I find the question on the origin of the universe much more captivating than the purpose of life or what happens after death (both of which are void to me).
@landsgevaer
How can we get more people to live by the Golden Rule and make the well being of our children the number one ptiority?
@@spankduncan1114 Let me rephrase that to important questions about what IS (like all three original questions: what is the origin, what is the purpose, and what is the afterlife, in all cases if any), not what OUGHT.
@landsgevaer I see no importance in knowing (or thinking I know) the answer to any of those 3 questions. Accessing oxygen, water, food, shelter and love is all I need.
@@spankduncan1114 Essentially, you are still worried about the stuff that cavemen worried about, and you don't really value knowledge or understanding, is how I read that.
Well, dunno whatosay. Maybe follow a different channel that is about air, food, water, housing, and love!? Natural philosophy and cosmology may not be your thing then.
I was having trouble sleeping due to the pain from an ear infection… I ended up putting this on and slept like a baby! 😊
The hoops that religious apologists have to jump through in order for them to “believe” or have us “believe” is, on so many levels, emotionally, mentally, and factually exhausting. No matter how many times Matt slam dunks Dinesh’s hoops with rock solid logic, Dinesh, to his credit, creates yet another hoop, ad infinitum. Arguing logic with the likes of Dinesh, Laine-Craig et al., is akin to arguing with super intelligent kids who keep saying “yeah, but why….yeah, but why…..yeah, but why?” Enough with “whys”, already.
Religion has NEVER provided a definitive answer to ANY of those three questions.
Dillahunty, keep it coming. As a Christian, my favorite bumper sticker is “Jesus, save us from your followers.”
Hahaha that is amazing!
Surely the point about "knowing" that Papua New Guinea exists is that, along with all the ordinary evidence ( books, photos, maps, TV), all you need to do to prove it is get on a boat of a plane and go there.
You can't do that with God.
You can do that with God.
@@Ben-Jembai😅
@@truthbetold8233
Make the effort and get the result
@@Ben-Jembai if you mean you can find out that a personal god almost certainly doesn't exist,, then sure
@@Ben-Jembai prove it. Do it. Present the results.
Are Christian Apologists ever going to retire the God of Gap argument?
If you don’t know, you don’t know. There is a bliss and freedom in that. It leaves the future open to further discoveries and new mysteries.
Its ok not knowing why we are here or on what purpos.....humans do not have to know everything
Quick Dinesh! Change the perspective so you can't be found out. Declare something is evidence when it certainly isn't evidence. Declare that we don't use rationality in our everyday thinking, though we do. Proclaim that believing in things without any evidence whatsoever is still legitimate process for finding truth. Why does Dinesh get an audience at all?
Yes as an atheist, I do not know. But that is where I stop. Not ‘I don’t know therefore god.’
Only an atheist, who can see the wonders of the universe, the evidence right before their eyes, and believe that we must be here by accident, would have to have the same mind to believe Matt had the upper hand in this discussion…
For a person who doesn’t believe, “don’t you make your life talking about him?”…. Perfect….
I don't understand why some people think there *has* to be a purpose. Things just are. Make the most of it.
I totally agree.
"we are in violent agreement..." Love that line.
I’m agnostic but I find teaching children it’s possible your grandparents and passed loved ones may be watching you, definitely makes people grow up to make better decisions when no one is around. As someone who owns a laundromat with cameras, some peoples actions changed completely for the better knowing there were cameras. Before the cameras thefts happened frequently. It’s good to hedge your bets thinking someone above who loves you is watching. There’s only positive results making children ponder the possibility of an afterlife. Don’t indoctrinate them, but let them know we don’t really know, but an afterlife may be possible.
What if there is a god, and the actual test of faith is not believing in them due to lack of evidence, but despite this you live a good life and are a good person. It’s easy to act right if you fully believe in a heaven, but if you act right believing no reward awaits you, you’re morally superior.
I lived a big part of my life believing in judgement and rewards after death and the past few years no longer believing in any god or judgement. The only crime I commit is speeding, I like to go a little fast. I don't believe I am "morally superior" to my past religious self. My morals didn't change with my beliefs, only my beliefs about magical thinking changed. There are immoral believers and nonbelievers and the relative morality of a person is totally independent on their belief or nonbelief. Religious people do all the immoral things nonreligious people do.
Dinesh Dsouza is out of his depth
The convicted felon is the guy in the blue blazer.
As crabby as Matt gets on the call in shows(and I personally very much enjoy the verbal lashing folks get from Matt) these hopeful religidiots keep trying to debate Matt, because they keep not being able to do it and present their case and prove it. If this matter was settled, these debates would’ve stopped a long time ago.
A majority of people are uncomfortable with not knowing or not knowing the meaning of something! So these stories are made that comfort people with an answer and comfort them with a meaning. Some of us don't care about comfort we care about what is actually true nomatter how it makes us feel!
The answer to "what happens after I die" is fear-based. Otherwise, why does no one ask "What happened before I was born"
Earliest of Christians believed everyone went to heaven regardless of their beliefs, or actions. A book that didn’t make the final cut, posited that no women went to heaven. They then made heaven performance, and belief, based.
It’s all a crock full of lies and 💩!
I loved the agreement on the 3 basic premises, where the universe originates, what our purpose is and what happens after we die; the religious or superstitious need a certainty to feel comfortable about life, but can stop the search beyond that, especially when survival is more of a priority. However a sceptic has a luxury open to them and will always EXPLORE these ideas until we have something meaningful to everyone and results in a greater understanding of everything, and we'll die and pass on our ideas and hope the next generation will continue this journey.
A conversation with Dillahunty and Katt Williams would be very interesting
Wow! It took me a long time, with several breaks, to get through this video, all because of D'Souza. I have the greatest respect for Matt Dillahunty for putting up with this irrationally obsessed religious charlatan.
I notice how this Dillahunty guy loves to interrupt Dinesh before he gets to make his important points. He interrupts in order to try and steer Dinesh away from his point because he won’t be able to argue against it.
The thumbnail is wicked
So awesome
15:45 if there is some sort of cosmic justice, what crimes do you think you commit in private that would need to be held accountable?
I wonder.
God is irrelevant. Life is precious.
God is Life and Life is God
@@Ben-JembaiWhat an absurd claim. You can’t even demonstrate that the deity you believe in exists. The sentence doesn’t mean anything.
@@ZlaRah
We are waves on a vast and deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
@@ZlaRah
We are waves on a vast deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
@@ZlaRah
We are waves on a vast deep ocean.
To some waves the ocean is self evident.
Other waves deny the existence of the ocean and ask for proof of the ocean.
Regardless of either of these positions the ocean is real.
The waves are a part of the ocean.
The waves would not exist without the ocean.
The waves themselves are proof of the ocean.
Dinesh seems like the kind of guy that would turn on some Ben Shapiro podcast when it’s his turn to choose the song at a party.
For those who try to substitute “confidence” over faith, the Latin root word is “con-fidere” which means with faith.
Hitchens said that before one has an abortion, they must stop and think about the repercussions. I agree. So let's make it the law that anyone wanting or needing to get an abortion must stop and think about the repercussions before they make THEIR decision.
D’Souza’s dog analogy was a pathetic -and desperate-grasping of straws.
Quantum physics, mathematics, and geometry is God’s language. God isn’t a separate being. God is in all of us.
Only watched the first 2minutes. I'm from the UK so not around the craziness of Americas Christian culture but I am pretty sure I heard that they are trying to force Christian pastors/priests into schools now so they have a say on how things are run etc etc.... Now I think any child from birth that is taught any religion is child cruelty because you are fundamentally taking away that childs right to decide but to bring in a certain religion only into your schools in a country that declares freedom of religion....pretty sure that goes completely against that!
Let's be honest, all religions know that if they can't teach children from birth, they can't force kids into said beliefs that all religions would die out within a couple hundred years or so. Some other religions would probably eventually be born but at least not to the degree of the big 3 we have in the world!!
3:24 "By the order of God, a soul is sent to a particular womb, but by this contraceptive he is denied that womb and has to be placed in another. That is disobedience to the Su-preme."
Basing everything on evidence is such a naive way to navigate through a universe that is so vast, that we merely know nothing about‼️
Ah, so you would like to make things up, and then just believe those instead?
Belief in the vastness of the unknown is healthy. It begets fascination, and exploration.
D*mw*ts who proclaim knowledge they clearly cannot know, to then deny such exploration and fascination is a crime against the human condition.
Dillahunty: gives relationship advice.
Is divorced.
It’s absolutely ridiculous to think that education can overcome the natural distribution of intelligence.
D’Souza keeps missing the point. Perhaps this is his thing.
D'Souza reminds me of all the religious supporters who try to debate their god existence. He can't present any evidence to support his belief, so instead he tries to dismantle Dillahunty's claim, "there is no evidence to support gods/creators of the Universe" by using silly analogies. If anything, D'Souza destroys himself and his faith by even being on the stage.
Dinesh just keeps on failing, but you have to give him credit for keeping on trying.
"God told me to invade Iraq" - George Bush Jr.
One of these two statements is true: 'There is at least one god.' ' There are no gods.' We cannot prove either.