Matt's debate with Sye
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-06-2014, 01:19 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 01:04 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 12:35 PM)pablo628 Wrote:  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.

I agree, he was being both evasive and deceptive. At the end, during questions, he simply refused to reply to anything from an atheist. Apparently they weren't worthy of a response from him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes pablo's post
14-06-2014, 01:26 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
I made it through the whole thing without throwing my iPod against a wall. Do I get a prize?

"While religions tell us next to nothing useful or true about the universe, they do tell us an enormous amount - perhaps an embarrassing amount - about ourselves, about what we value, fear and lust after." Iain M Banks
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes daylightisabadthing's post
14-06-2014, 01:28 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 01:26 PM)daylightisabadthing Wrote:  I made it through the whole thing without throwing my iPod against a wall. Do I get a prize?

Yep, it was that aggravating.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 01:52 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 01:19 PM)pablo628 Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 01:04 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  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.

I agree, he was being both evasive and deceptive. At the end, during questions, he simply refused to reply to anything from an atheist. Apparently they weren't worthy of a response from him.

The bible is true because God says its true, we know God is true because the bible says he is true.

You cannot place man above god. Questioning the bible is putting man above god. You cannot question the bible or god.

Sye has never been, nor it seems ever will be, in a debate about how reasonable christianity is. He is completely useless. It is good Matt took a bullet for all of us and debated Sye on his own terms, but still, there was no chance of this debate providing any novel concepts or idea. No chance of anything useful coming from it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 02:08 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 01:52 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 01:19 PM)pablo628 Wrote:  I agree, he was being both evasive and deceptive. At the end, during questions, he simply refused to reply to anything from an atheist. Apparently they weren't worthy of a response from him.

The bible is true because God says its true, we know God is true because the bible says he is true.

You cannot place man above god. Questioning the bible is putting man above god. You cannot question the bible or god.

Sye has never been, nor it seems ever will be, in a debate about how reasonable christianity is. He is completely useless. It is good Matt took a bullet for all of us and debated Sye on his own terms, but still, there was no chance of this debate providing any novel concepts or idea. No chance of anything useful coming from it.

Matt said himself on the first Atheist Experience show after the "debate" that he would never intentionally debate another presup. I don't blame him, although Sye did reveal himself for what he is without Matt having to do much at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2014, 05:47 PM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
If someone convinced Sye that god was a giant piece of asparagus, he'd still argue it from circular reasoning from the book of asparagus.

The guy is batshit crazy, dishonest, enjoys quote mining and has to rely on shitty dishonest tactics to debate instead of actually answering the question. Whenever challenged it comes down to, "Can you know? Do you know for sure? can i play word games that piss you off that try to make things sound like they're in my favor by ridiculing and making a mockery of things I don't understand? are you sure? can you? did you? can you be certain about that?"

Thankfully, he's painful enough to listen to that I don't think most people take him seriously. Perhaps the debate will shed light on that and get people to start seeing through his bullshit word games. Matt did a good job putting him on the spot and not feeding into his word games. You could tell Matt was getting pissed at him, but I think he did quite well keeping his composure.

Official ordained minister of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Please pm me with prayer requests to his noodly goodness. Remember, he boiled for your sins and loves you. Carbo Diem! RAmen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Logisch's post
14-06-2014, 07:29 PM (This post was last modified: 14-06-2014 07:33 PM by DLJ.)
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
Some other comments, for completeness.

Meanwhile, back to the OP.

Yes, it struck me as peculiar too... both the bible AND the Quran being untrue seems like a much more plausible conclusion.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
15-06-2014, 07:10 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 05:47 PM)Logisch Wrote:  If someone convinced Sye that god was a giant piece of asparagus, he'd still argue it from circular reasoning from the book of asparagus.

Does it make your pee smell after you read it?

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
[+] 1 user Likes Cathym112's post
15-06-2014, 07:25 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(15-06-2014 07:10 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  
(14-06-2014 05:47 PM)Logisch Wrote:  If someone convinced Sye that god was a giant piece of asparagus, he'd still argue it from circular reasoning from the book of asparagus.

Does it make your pee smell after you read it?

Wait... how did you know? Weeping

Official ordained minister of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Please pm me with prayer requests to his noodly goodness. Remember, he boiled for your sins and loves you. Carbo Diem! RAmen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2014, 08:00 AM
RE: Matt's debate with Sye
(14-06-2014 06:59 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  "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.

Sye's presupposition is that God is real and that his word is incorruptible. The question he was answering here was essentially "Given the choice between Islam and Christianity, how do you know which of these two is true?". Sye's answer is essentially "I exclude the Koran, which I say is self-contradictory and therefore self-defeating. This leaves only Christianity.". Under his reasoning the question of whether the God exists in the first place is moot, because it is sinful to ask the question... and that he cannot conceive that a universe could exist that is as apparently orderly as our own without a mind being the cause of that order. In this view it is self-evident that such a mind exists, otherwise logic itself would not operate consistently.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hafnof's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: