The Amazing Atheist...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-07-2013, 01:16 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 12:15 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 03:07 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Yeah, religion sucks, that's why I want the right people for the right job. He isn't right person. TJ is an abrasive fuckface. What more can I say?


(27-07-2013 12:02 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  I don't to meet TJ to understand that he is an inarticulate dolt. He is abrasive and presents his arguments in an aggressive, hostile manner.

TJ is an amazing orator and speaker. The fact that he is abrasive and presents his arguments in an aggressive, hostile manner is why I love him so much. I hate these little pussies that can't handle a little yelling and bad words. AA brings flare to all his subjects and he is the model for all my posts on here along with Christopher Hitchens. Neither of them gives a fuck, or gave a fuck in Christopher's case, about what those pussies thought of them. They said exactly what was needed to be said about religion and kept us informed about the actual truth in things. Some people need to grow up and smell the roses and that's exactly what those great men made them do. When I grow up I want to a wonderful blend of both of them. Your right person for the right job comment is hilarious btw, when we need your monitoring of the speakers in the atheist community, I will be sure to call you.
I respectfully disagree, aggressive tactics are not very useful for effective speaking. I feel that Hitchens was great at what he did, and he surely smacked around a 'few pussies'.
There is a huge difference between being blunt [Hitchens] and being unnecessarily crude [TAA]. The point in speaking is to educate or convince people of your stance on a subject, TAA's tactics are more so funny (I guess, I don't find it funny but some people do) but they're not effective in any way. But this could just be my opinion, but TAA is a dark spot in the Atheists on youtube, I feel he gets much more attention than he's earned.

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Question's post
27-07-2013, 01:29 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
You two are a pair of poopyheads. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 01:33 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 01:29 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  You two are a pair of poopyheads. Tongue

Huh but...i love you D;

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 02:34 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 01:33 PM)Red Tornado Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 01:29 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  You two are a pair of poopyheads. Tongue

Huh but...i love you D;

Hug

OK, you're not a poopyhead. Just logica. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 04:00 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 01:16 PM)Red Tornado Wrote:  I respectfully disagree, aggressive tactics are not very useful for effective speaking. I feel that Hitchens was great at what he did, and he surely smacked around a 'few pussies'.
There is a huge difference between being blunt [Hitchens] and being unnecessarily crude [TAA]. The point in speaking is to educate or convince people of your stance on a subject, TAA's tactics are more so funny (I guess, I don't find it funny but some people do) but they're not effective in any way. But this could just be my opinion, but TAA is a dark spot in the Atheists on youtube, I feel he gets much more attention than he's earned.

My view is that there is no respect to be found in religion and there is no reason to try and converse with those right-wing Christians because they are bat shit crazy. AA isn't trying to go out and convince creationists to change their world view in a peaceful way he just wants to show how stupid they are. Adults that still want to choose religion over science when they are presented the evidence is not to be trusted or respected. Someone out there has to say how idiotic religion is because people like Hitchens and him are the only way atheism is going to gain any traction. Great example, "This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person."

We are taught to "respect" religious belief no matter how ridiculous it is and these men are standing up and saying no, we don't have to sit here and put up with this bullshit. I have watched many debates featuring Hitchens and it is obvious he wasn't there to talk nicely with his opponent and "respect" his views. The famous rants and raves these men orate show that they are there to crush and pulverize the religious argument in every sense of the word. They don't care about feelings or respect they are there to show the audience how stupid the opposition is and I really admire that. The time has come to topple the institution of religious power and it is people like AA, Grayling, Dawkins, Dennett, and Hitchen's works that are doing the job, not a "respectful" argument that tries not to hurt feelings.

It all comes down to if you can get your precious little feelings hurt without running into a hole and crying. People that can't handle that are not worth debating or conversing with because no one will get anywhere with the "respect" walls up. To me, everything other than physical threats or harming is fair game at all times. Though you may think they are too "hostile and abrasive," I think you are missing the point of the entire religion debate and since I expect you are a mature and responsible person, I would think you would be able to get over the aggressive nature of their talks, especially AA's.

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes elegant_atheist's post
27-07-2013, 04:08 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 02:34 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Hug

OK, you're not a poopyhead. Just logica. Thumbsup

I love you in my own way. Smile

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Logica Humano's post
27-07-2013, 04:12 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 04:00 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  My view is that there is no respect to be found in religion and there is no reason to try and converse with those right-wing Christians because they are bat shit crazy. AA isn't trying to go out and convince creationists to change their world view in a peaceful way he just wants to show how stupid they are. Adults that still want to choose religion over science when they are presented the evidence is not to be trusted or respected. Someone out there has to say how idiotic religion is because people like Hitchens and him are the only way atheism is going to gain any traction. Great example, "This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person."

We are taught to "respect" religious belief no matter how ridiculous it is and these men are standing up and saying no, we don't have to sit here and put up with this bullshit. I have watched many debates featuring Hitchens and it is obvious he wasn't there to talk nicely with his opponent and "respect" his views. The famous rants and raves these men orate show that they are there to crush and pulverize the religious argument in every sense of the word. They don't care about feelings or respect they are there to show the audience how stupid the opposition is and I really admire that. The time has come to topple the institution of religious power and it is people like AA, Grayling, Dawkins, Dennett, and Hitchen's works that are doing the job, not a "respectful" argument that tries not to hurt feelings.

It all comes down to if you can get your precious little feelings hurt without running into a hole and crying. People that can't handle that are not worth debating or conversing with because no one will get anywhere with the "respect" walls up. To me, everything other than physical threats or harming is fair game at all times. Though you may think they are too "hostile and abrasive," I think you are missing the point of the entire religion debate and since I expect you are a mature and responsible person, I would think you would be able to get over the aggressive nature of their talks, especially AA's.

However, it seems that you and TJ have both blurred the lines between their beliefs and the person. I trust you know what an ad hominem attack is, so you understand our position. TJ is immature, overly-aggressive, and apathetic. People like Michael Shermer, Carl Sagan, and William "Bill" Nye have much better approaches. Abrasive personalities only cause problems.
Drinking Beverage

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Logica Humano's post
27-07-2013, 04:23 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 04:12 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 04:00 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  My view is that there is no respect to be found in religion and there is no reason to try and converse with those right-wing Christians because they are bat shit crazy. AA isn't trying to go out and convince creationists to change their world view in a peaceful way he just wants to show how stupid they are. Adults that still want to choose religion over science when they are presented the evidence is not to be trusted or respected. Someone out there has to say how idiotic religion is because people like Hitchens and him are the only way atheism is going to gain any traction. Great example, "This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person."

We are taught to "respect" religious belief no matter how ridiculous it is and these men are standing up and saying no, we don't have to sit here and put up with this bullshit. I have watched many debates featuring Hitchens and it is obvious he wasn't there to talk nicely with his opponent and "respect" his views. The famous rants and raves these men orate show that they are there to crush and pulverize the religious argument in every sense of the word. They don't care about feelings or respect they are there to show the audience how stupid the opposition is and I really admire that. The time has come to topple the institution of religious power and it is people like AA, Grayling, Dawkins, Dennett, and Hitchen's works that are doing the job, not a "respectful" argument that tries not to hurt feelings.

It all comes down to if you can get your precious little feelings hurt without running into a hole and crying. People that can't handle that are not worth debating or conversing with because no one will get anywhere with the "respect" walls up. To me, everything other than physical threats or harming is fair game at all times. Though you may think they are too "hostile and abrasive," I think you are missing the point of the entire religion debate and since I expect you are a mature and responsible person, I would think you would be able to get over the aggressive nature of their talks, especially AA's.

However, it seems that you and TJ have both blurred the lines between their beliefs and the person. I trust you know what an ad hominem attack is, so you understand our position. TJ is immature, overly-aggressive, and apathetic. People like Michael Shermer, Carl Sagan, and William "Bill" Nye have much better approaches. Abrasive personalities only cause problems.
Drinking Beverage

Ultimately it is a taste thing but AA seems to be only good for preaching to the choir as he will never make inroads with the moderates or even the on the fence crowd. Hitchens could talk circles around people and never raise his voice, much better for actually moving the agenda forward. Now for the fresh and Angry atheist (most people who were really indoctrinated are rather angry about that fact once they break through so don't take it as a slight) could find some use for AA but ultimately other voices in the movement provide more substance and less abrasion. Personally I don't care for TAA, but then I don't think I am his intended Audience I am well informed about the issues and want a deeper argument other than we're right they're wrong neiner neiner! So while he has a place his substance is rather lacking compared to say Aaron-ra Thunderfoot or even Seth (great talker imo rotten debater not his strong suit). The upper tier of the Youtube Atheists are beginning to become on par with the Horsemen (Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, and Dennett) TAA is not nor will he ever be mentioned in that class.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 04:39 PM
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 04:12 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  However, it seems that you and TJ have both blurred the lines between their beliefs and the person. I trust you know what an ad hominem attack is, so you understand our position. TJ is immature, overly-aggressive, and apathetic. People like Michael Shermer, Carl Sagan, and William "Bill" Nye have much better approaches. Abrasive personalities only cause problems.
Drinking Beverage

The person makes no difference in a debate, therefore your position is void. It is not a personal debate where two people debate each other, they debate each others IDEAS and IDEOLOGIES. Neither of these things could even be susceptible to personal attacks. When Hitchens says, "This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person," he is talking about the IDEAS the person holds not the persons characteristics, therefore, no ad hominem applies. Nice try. Hitchens made the same, irrefutable argument most of the time because it didn't matter who sat across from him, whether it be a Christian, Muslim, Mormon, or Calvinist..... religion is religion and it is all bullshit.

[Image: Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement1.svg]

The top four are ones Hitchens and the great orators use regularly, barely ever hear the bottom ones so you're completely wrong.

You can call TJ whatever you like it doesn't advance your argument even an inch. TJ is not immature, overly-aggressive, but he surely is apathetic and so am I regarding religious belief. Just because you want to respect them doesn't mean we have to.

Quote:Abrasive personalities only cause problems.

Abrasive personalities cause heated discussion and sometimes arguments, but you know what? None of those things hurt anyone. When adults look past their feeble feelings and actually get down to the issue at hand is when things actually gets figured out, or at least you get an advanced argument which can be built upon, thus moving things forward. Feelings are for children in the school yard, not at the debate table as reasonable adults. Drinking Beverage

I feel sorry for you, not being able to watch heated discussions with amazing flare on both sides must make your YouTube experience very, very boring. Tongue

[Image: g-HitchensThinkSelf.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2013, 04:51 PM (This post was last modified: 27-07-2013 05:03 PM by Logica Humano.)
RE: The Amazing Atheist...
(27-07-2013 04:39 PM)elegant_atheist Wrote:  
(27-07-2013 04:12 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  However, it seems that you and TJ have both blurred the lines between their beliefs and the person. I trust you know what an ad hominem attack is, so you understand our position. TJ is immature, overly-aggressive, and apathetic. People like Michael Shermer, Carl Sagan, and William "Bill" Nye have much better approaches. Abrasive personalities only cause problems.
Drinking Beverage

The person makes no difference in a debate, therefore your position is void. It is not a personal debate where two people debate each other, they debate each others IDEAS and IDEOLOGIES. Neither of these things could even be susceptible to personal attacks. When Hitchens says, "This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person," he is talking about the IDEAS the person holds not the persons characteristics, therefore, no ad hominem applies. Nice try. Hitchens made the same, irrefutable argument most of the time because it didn't matter who sat across from him, whether it be a Christian, Muslim, Mormon, or Calvinist..... religion is religion and it is all bullshit.

[Image: Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement1.svg]

The top four are ones Hitchens and the great orators use regularly, barely ever hear the bottom ones so you're completely wrong.

You can call TJ whatever you like it doesn't advance your argument even an inch. TJ is not immature, overly-aggressive, but he surely is apathetic and so am I regarding religious belief. Just because you want to respect them doesn't mean we have to.

Quote:Abrasive personalities only cause problems.

Abrasive personalities cause heated discussion and sometimes arguments, but you know what? None of those things hurt anyone. When adults look past their feeble feelings and actually get down to the issue at hand is when things actually gets figured out, or at least you get an advanced argument which can be built upon, thus moving things forward. Feelings are for children in the school yard, not at the debate table as reasonable adults. Drinking Beverage

I feel sorry for you, not being able to watch heated discussions with amazing flare on both sides must make your YouTube experience very, very boring. Tongue

Actually, TJ quite consistently attacks specific people and their character within his videos. A face-to-face debate is not required to attack a person, this forum is evidence of that.

It is also quite easy to offend someone with an abrasive personality, especially when religion is so entirely personal for the majority of people. Again, you don't seem to have much experience at all in debating with people. I feel incredibly sorry for you, because you cannot seem to take part in an intellectual debate. If you want to be like Hitchens, you are a very long ways away.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Logica Humano's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: