Matt's debate with Sye
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-06-2014, 06:59 AM
Matt's debate with Sye
I listened (painfully) to this debate. One thing - okay many things but it's too much to mention - that tugged at me was that Sye kept saying,

"The Koran says the bible was the early version of god's word that's been corrupted. But the Koran also says that god's word cannot be corrupted. Therefore the Koran is false because the bible is true."

Did Matt not pick up on this fallacy? That if the Koran is false, then the part where it supports the bible as the word of god is false, and the part about god's word as incorruptible is also false.


If A supports B as true
But B being true means that A is false
Then A being false also means B is false.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 07:04 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
It was painful to watch. Sometimes the arguments are too stupid and circular to argue against, which is why they are used.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 08:12 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
I just can't stomach more than a few moments of Dumbrubenmeister or what ever the heck his name is.

I've met two year olds with greater reasoning ability. Drinking Beverage

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes KidCharlemagne1962's post
14-06-2014, 09:32 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
I think Matt was just not interested in calling him on it because it would have led to even more circular crap.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 10:09 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
A debate between an idiot and an asshole. It was intresting..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 10:20 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
I lasted about 5 minutes or so listening to the debate.

I feel like I need to Google some Hitchens to cleanse my brain.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Anjele's post
14-06-2014, 10:37 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 10:20 AM)Anjele Wrote:  I lasted about 5 minutes or so listening to the debate.

I feel like I need to Google some Hitchens to cleanse my brain.

I watched about an hour of Hitch-slaps on youtube yesterday. It was fun.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 12:33 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 10:20 AM)Anjele Wrote:  I lasted about 5 minutes or so listening to the debate.

I feel like I need to Google some Hitchens to cleanse my brain.

I have a new appreciation for how Hitchen's debates. I have often noticed that Hitchens would flat out not answer the question he is asked, and he got away with it because of his sexy english accent and his eloquentness. When you actually try and wade through these philosophical landmines, I mean sure you are right, but some how it muddies the debate so much no salient points can really get through.

That was my opinion of the debate. Matt nailed him, any second year philosophy major would be able to recognize that. Still, at the end, I just wanted to blow my brains out.

The valuable lesson I learned is don't argue with a christian that won't discuss scripture. The semantic word games are rewarding for nobody, and some how, even though they are wrong, they seem less wrong because everybody gets bored, irritated, and confused. That was probably Sye's intention all along, so in that way I think he won.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Michael_Tadlock's post
14-06-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 12:33 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 10:20 AM)Anjele Wrote:  I lasted about 5 minutes or so listening to the debate.

I feel like I need to Google some Hitchens to cleanse my brain.

I have a new appreciation for how Hitchen's debates. I have often noticed that Hitchens would flat out not answer the question he is asked, and he got away with it because of his sexy english accent and his eloquentness. When you actually try and wade through these philosophical landmines, I mean sure you are right, but some how it muddies the debate so much no salient points can really get through.

That was my opinion of the debate. Matt nailed him, any second year philosophy major would be able to recognize that. Still, at the end, I just wanted to blow my brains out.

The valuable lesson I learned is don't argue with a christian that won't discuss scripture. The semantic word games are rewarding for nobody, and some how, even though they are wrong, they seem less wrong because everybody gets bored, irritated, and confused. That was probably Sye's intention all along, so in that way I think he won.

In other words, baffle them with bullshit. Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pablo's post
14-06-2014, 01:04 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 12:35 PM)pablo628 Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 12:33 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I have a new appreciation for how Hitchen's debates. I have often noticed that Hitchens would flat out not answer the question he is asked, and he got away with it because of his sexy english accent and his eloquentness. When you actually try and wade through these philosophical landmines, I mean sure you are right, but some how it muddies the debate so much no salient points can really get through.

That was my opinion of the debate. Matt nailed him, any second year philosophy major would be able to recognize that. Still, at the end, I just wanted to blow my brains out.

The valuable lesson I learned is don't argue with a christian that won't discuss scripture. The semantic word games are rewarding for nobody, and somehow, even though they are wrong, they seem less wrong because everybody gets bored, irritated, and confused. That was probably Sye's intention all along, so in that way I think he won.

In other words, baffle them with bullshit. Big Grin

I think more so argue the points that are worth arguing. Nobody cares if it is possible that our whole existence can be a deception ie "brain in a vat". That point is neither useful for believers nor non believers. Sye knows that, which is why he framed the debate such that it wasn't possible to talk about anything else.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Michael_Tadlock's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: