Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Did you watch their debate?
I assume this is the conversation you are referring to...?
I haven't finished all of the audience questions yet, but it's actually a pretty good discussion. Of course Dillahunty comes across as much more intellectually honest and grounded, but this was the first time I actually somewhat enjoyed JP. And their constant talk of throwing Sam Harris off the stage is pretty funny.. 😂
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
I assume this is the conversation you are referring to...?I haven't finished all of the audience questions yet, but it's actually a pretty good discussion. Of course Dillahunty comes across as much more intellectually honest and grounded, but this was the first time I actually somewhat enjoyed JP. And their constant talk of throwing Sam Harris off the stage is pretty funny.. 😂
Made it 21 minutes in and so far, I love this debate. One thing I don't like is how aggressive and intense JP is. He reminds me of me when he gets like that and I specifically do not like that quality about myself. I'm trying to be much more like Dillahunty because his approach is by far much more approachable and engaging. His demeanor and body language - even the wording he uses - are much more relaxed. He's ready to engage. He's not there to get upset but simply to engage and calmly discuss.
I watched about the same amount as you, ddm. Yeah JP's body language is very off putting. It's very twitchy or something, like he's always rubbing his hands together and he doesn't seem to make natural eye contact, like he's forcing himself to do it. He feels very uneasy there. I'm also not terribly impressed with his points.
In fact, I just think he's not very good at debating in general, from what I've seen. Like both "debates" that I've seen with him he seems strained and he struggles to make his points. He seems better when he's allowed to just talk and ramble for long periods of time without being challenged at all, which is when he starts struggling.
Dillahunty is much better and seems more natural and at ease with the whole thing. Also his points and questions are better and clearer. Don't get DMB's comment about him being uncivil, he was very civil unless something happens later that I didn't see. He was more civil than JP.
Lol too funny:
Wait here is the entire interview lol:
This is another Cathy Newman. Awesome.
EDIT: Lol@ him doodling while talking to this woman
Originally posted by BackFire
I watched about the same amount as you, ddm. Yeah JP's body language is very off putting. It's very twitchy or something, like he's always rubbing his hands together and he doesn't seem to make natural eye contact, like he's forcing himself to do it. He feels very uneasy there. I'm also not terribly impressed with his points.In fact, I just think he's not very good at debating in general, from what I've seen. Like both "debates" that I've seen with him he seems strained and he struggles to make his points. He seems better when he's allowed to just talk and ramble for long periods of time without being challenged at all, which is when he starts struggling.
Dillahunty is much better and seems more natural and at ease with the whole thing. Also his points and questions are better and clearer. Don't get DMB's comment about him being uncivil, he was very civil unless something happens later that I didn't see. He was more civil than JP.
Had a chance to watch more. It comes from both sides, actually. The condescending shitty attitudes. Dillahunty is quite an ass to Peterson. Peterson admits he was being difficult with Dillahunty (which is why Dillahunty was being an ass).
Peterson puts forth the idea that whether or not an atheist accepts God, their consciousness and creativity is from God. I think? This is a standard position for almost any theist, however. And it is a position that any strong atheist objects to, proposing that godly traits can come from solely the individual and does not need a deity actor to influence that system
Anyway, Peterson calms down a bit and makes eye-contact. He still has the intense forward-lean but laughs, jokes, sits back, etc. So it gets better.
What I would really like to ask Peterson is just confront him about how the common religious person who believes goofy, impossible things and the harm that has been (and continues to be) caused by it, by dangerous religious texts. If the whole world saw religious texts as metaphorical stories that'd be great, but they dont.
But of course he would probably just dance around the issue with verbal gymnastics...
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]What about the Non Religious Common People that belives in "Goofy , Impossible things and the harm that has been (and conitiues to be ) caused by it.".? [/B]
I see what you did there! You're so clever, Fly!! You and your green text! 🙄
...and your insatiable ability to make assertions without examples. Of course religious people aren't the only people who believe things that can cause harm, but in this instance I'm speaking of the beliefs of religious folks that directly cause harm like believing "God" despises homosexuals, women, etc.. Believe it or not, non-religious folks don't have any otherworldly reason to believe such things. It's just the religious, because it was written in a book thought to be sacred.
What say you? Or are you just going to quietly bow out or say some incoherent nonsense about SJW? Sick of your shit, bro. Get a clue or don't try to talk to the adults.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
I see what you did there! You're so clever, Fly!! You and your green text! 🙄...and your insatiable ability to make assertions without examples. Of course religious people aren't the only people who believe things that can cause harm, but in this instance I'm speaking of the beliefs of religious folks that directly cause harm like believing "God" despises homosexuals, women, etc.. Believe it or not, non-religious folks don't have any otherworldly reason to believe such things. It's just the religious, because it was written in a book thought to be sacred.
What say you? Or are you just going to quietly bow out or say some incoherent nonsense about SJW? Sick of your shit, bro. Get a clue or don't try to talk to the adults.
Your post reminds me of this quote:
"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion."
Stings like a sunnuvabitch.
Also, your point about people believing God despises homosexual people...
I have it on good Word (New Testament) that Jesus readily and freely forgave an adulterer. And treated her with love, kindness, and compassion. All sin is evil before God but harming another with your sin through adultery is probably not nearly as bad as a consenting homosexual relationship. But the adulterer received love, compassion, and kindness. Even if we assume that doing homosexual acts is a sin, doesn't seem like God despises homosexuals at all. Not even a little. I find the case that "God hates F*gs" is impossible to make if you're Christian. It's just not in the message.
Originally posted by dadudemonPeterson puts forth the idea that whether or not an atheist accepts God, their consciousness and creativity is from God. I think? This is a standard position for almost any theist, however.
Dilahunty being an "ass" is fully warranted.
The civil comment was mainly referring to that shitty tweet where he's like "when are his 15 minutes of fame gonna be up" which is why I gladly said Peterson is more famous than he will ever be.
But I hope you realize how ****ing nutty it is to say "athiests actually believe in god, they just don't know it."
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
That's it the standard for a thiest doesn't make it any less asinine, egotistical, or worthy of mockery.
I agree. Atheists can plug their ears and pretend their entirety is godless but it doesn't change reality. grouchoawe
Look at me, now...the ol' switcherooooo!
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Dilahunty being an "ass" is fully warranted.
Disagreed. Neither is justified in being an ass to the other. If they wanted to keep it civil, they should have stayed civil. It's possible.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Fair Enough.But I hope you realize how ****ing nutty it is to say "athiests actually believe in god, they just don't know it."
Are you a gnostic atheist?
Originally posted by dadudemon
Your post reminds me of this quote:"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion."
Stings like a sunnuvabitch.
I mean you know, a western society like the US can be stable and functional and prosperous with the majority of people being Christians, whereas marxism rots away any society it's implemented in and leaves countless starving at best and people genocided at worst and a lot of people in academic positions like to peddle it in the west... but no no, Christianity is the most appropriate ideological stance for people to obsess over trying to purge from society... genius! Yeah... Christianity is clearly one of the biggest ideological threats to a stable functional society in the world... absolutely... no sarcasm here...
Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, your point about people believing God despises homosexual people...I have it on good Word (New Testament) that Jesus readily and freely forgave an adulterer. And treated her with love, kindness, and compassion. All sin is evil before God but harming another with your sin through adultery is probably not nearly as bad as a consenting homosexual relationship. But the adulterer received love, compassion, and kindness. Even if we assume that doing homosexual acts is a sin, doesn't seem like God despises homosexuals at all. Not even a little. I find the case that "God hates F*gs" is impossible to make if you're Christian. It's just not in the message.
And as far as the Christians I do know who morally disapprove of homosexuality... none of them fit the description of "OH **** THOSE PEOPLE THEY ARE GAY WE HATE THEM REEEEEEEEE," more the point of view of "oh I don't morally approve of their sexual behavior but they deserve the same love and respect anyone else does."
Originally posted by Emperordmb
I mean that quote could just be applied to ideology in general... weird that people like to hone in on religion specifically.I mean you know, a western society like the US can be stable and functional and prosperous with the majority of people being Christians, whereas marxism rots away any society it's implemented in and leaves countless starving at best and people genocided at worst and a lot of people in academic positions like to peddle it in the west... but no no, Christianity is the most appropriate ideological stance for people to obsess over trying to purge from society... genius! Yeah... Christianity is clearly one of the biggest ideological threats to a stable functional society in the world... absolutely... no sarcasm here...
Why are you being like this? Why didn't you think of Branch Davidians or Islamic Extremists? Why do you have to just use Christians? Have something against Christians I don't know about? It's odd that you singled Christians out as the group of people that would use religion to make a good man do evil...
Originally posted by Emperordmb
And as far as the Christians I do know who morally disapprove of homosexuality... none of them fit the description of "OH **** THOSE PEOPLE THEY ARE GAY WE HATE THEM REEEEEEEEE," more the point of view of "oh I don't morally approve of their sexual behavior but they deserve the same love and respect anyone else does."
I'm in Oklahoma...those people are literally everywhere all over the place judging the shit out of anyone who doesn't fit their self-righteous bullshit meter sticks of a Sunday Church Going Family.
Sure, they aren't a majority but...well, pretty much any Southern Baptist Church is full of them to be honest. 😐 Many Mormons in Utah are like that, too (and all over the world, you'll find Mormons like that...but most are in Utah for some reason).
Originally posted by dadudemon
Why are you being like this? Why didn't you think of Branch Davidians or Islamic Extremists? Why do you have to just use Christians? Have something against Christians I don't know about? It's odd that you singled Christians out as the group of people that would use religion to make a good man do evil...
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm in Oklahoma...those people are literally everywhere all over the place judging the shit out of anyone who doesn't fit their self-righteous bullshit meter sticks of a Sunday Church Going Family.Sure, they aren't a majority but...well, pretty much any Southern Baptist Church is full of them to be honest. 😐 Many Mormons in Utah are like that, too (and all over the world, you'll find Mormons like that...but most are in Utah for some reason).