"I don't think that's why mother Theresa went to the streets of Calcutta"
Wrong!
If people with faith based on Biblical beliefs still conducted themselves, literally, by the book, mother Theresa would need permission to commit charity, or to spread the word of Jesus.
2 Timothy says clearly that women can NOT have authority over men.
That it's in fact a disgrace(like prostitution) that she'd pray in public or teach anything, and the verse states that she should have her head shaved as punishment.
I just read about this debate in the pathetic Ravi Zacharias book 'The End of Reason'. In the foreword, Strobel claims that Harris got schooled by Hewitt. I must be watching a different discussion.
Hugh says that his faith does not justify or allow cruelty. He has not read his Bible. Both the old and the new testament allow for slavery, as one example. Does Hugh really believe that slavery is not cruel? I could give many more examples of cruelty in the Bible to show that Hugh is lying about his Bible or is ignorant of what it says.
"We have to credit hundreds of years of secular dialog and scientific insights" <- Hopefully, these fruits of the Enlightenment will spread also to the religious parts of America and the Middle East. It feels like it is a "race" between Enlightenment on the one hand (still going on) and on the other hand the risk that fundamentalist religions will spread (and thus risk the future of humanity). On a pessimistic day, I'm not sure which will be most successful. But usually I'm optimistic.
I highly dislike the "there's no proof" of god arguement. Believe it or not, it's not about proof. You don't need proof to know that 1+1 will never equal 3. Similarily, you don't need to proof to know gods can't, never has and can't ever exist. A religious person will just use the "alternative dimension" excuse.
Something can be proven or disproven logically. And logically, no such being as a god can exist.
@ClumsyRoot Heh, me too. But it was a religious dude who said it, and they have said more incoherent things than that, so one should probably not be too surprised.
@footosaur76 Yah, it cracked me up... the moron Hewitt was trying desperately to pretend to "speak from Authority" by slipping in the notion that his law degree somehow made him much more respected to speak to an imagined authority for magic and gods existing, and his sly attempt to used "theory" of theology as thought that would somehow make it a REAL science. LOL
I dont even get what Sam is trying to say? Theres no direct evidence, sure. But theres always the question of "Why are we here?" which people have been asking since the beginning of human thought. Religion can be evil, and it can be beautiful. "I like your Christ, but not your Christians." Theres no direct answer and each of these people are being (as everyone is) biased.
@imafoolhahaha yeah, absolutely.. Hewlett does not address the question.. he is not debating.. he is faced with an intelligent well thought out point and he dare not respond... and to top it off he's a jerk.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need religion, hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important, qualitative differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption.
Homosexual activists, with complete support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims and martyrs; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@shanyin1234 try marginalize religion.. believe in astrology of you like, fairies, ghosts, UFO and personal gods.. then society will marginalize you.. makes sense.
Nice comeback. Sam Harris is a clown ... WLC, Ravi, and many others have consistently owned him because he is a clown paperback book seller. He is simply good at selling books .... he has little background in actual scholarly pursuits. I don't know any atheists who take the dude seriously. He is a joke and a noob.
@l33tpwnzord, If your version of an argument is calling doctors of neuroscience clowns, I'm sure you're right: you would totally own him in a debate. I'm scared just to engage you on YouTube for fear I might get owned and exposed as a noob/clown/joke. You're the man.
@l33tpwnzord you would probably own sam in a debate about as well as ray "the banana man" comfort owned evolution. And then after having opened a can of creationist ass-whooping you would probably resort to calling sam a noob or a clown or a joke. Kind of like Hugh's finishing argument of "you're not that smart". Valid point Hugh!
While it's a waste of time thinking you'll ever change the mind of someone like Hewitt, it's good to have someone like Sam Harris out there debating them in public on this topic. When put beside each other, the reasoned, well thought out points and questions made by the likes of Sam are in such stark contrast to the waffle, spin and obfuscation coming from the likes of Hewitt. It has to help the people on the middle ground think about all this crap and see it for what it really is.
Hewitt closes out by telling Sam Harris "... you're not that smart". You always know when someone is beaten in an argument... they resort to personal insults that have nothing to do with the argument/discussion at hand. I'm sure Sam took it as a compliment !!
I like how Hugh just throws in "because they are separated from god" in the middle of a sentence and continues on, like it's a matter-of-fact or something.
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
The problem with religious moderation is this: the vast legions of the moderate believers makes a fertile ground from which the fanatics spring. Ultimately, you cannot separate them. How many degrees of separation are there between the minds of the moderate and the fanatic? It's not clear. There is a gradation surely. The moderate and fanatic are afflicted with the same basic intellectual poison--just in different amounts.
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
it's like hewitt is saying because men are evil then we should just shrug our shoulders and live with the problem of religious fanatacism. At least Sam is wiling to call out those groups deserving rebuke.
Hi ffgew22 I have a question I would like to ask Sam Harris or any other atheist. Would you agree that our level of morality and ethics is becoming lower and lower? I ask this (I am a Christian) because both my wife and I work with youth. My wife is a teacher, and I work with youth in conflict with the law. Anyway, we were talking on the topic some time ago at how the respect for authority by our youth is so non existent, it is actually scary. We didn't think of discussing 'morals'... cont
pt 2 ...but considering that also, I would have to say there is clearly reason for concern. Are you concerned about our modern day morality, and our morality of future generations? I love kids, and would love to have my own one day, but back in my mind is the understanding that this world is becoming increasingly harder to grow up in. IE, there are more temptations and evil to draw kids into a destructive direction. Do you have any of these concerns of the future?
HE'S NOT A CHRISTIAN!!!!!!!!!! HE'S TAMPERING IN DARK-SIDED STUFF...SO DARKSIDED...EVERYTHING'S UNGODLY...GARGOYLES...PSYCHICS...I REBUKE IT IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!
As Harris says, Christianity in its day was every bit as intolerant and vicious as modern day Islam. Muslims call non-believers "infidels" while Christians historically called them "heretics" and killed them by the thousands, with their favorite method of disposal being to tie them to a tree, a stake or some other fixed object and set them on fire. Secular philosophy and science have been THE civilizing influence on the world.
Mother teresa is his big trump card - omg. I refer you to the Missionary Position by Hitchens..plus anyway, charity and dontation is a very common thing in many people given the right circumstances. Furthermore, she questioned her own faith.
"It's the wrong question Sam". It's rather the wrong response, he completely dismissed the fact that both group were in the same situation exact for religion, and one is more violent than the other. Simply saying "man is evil" is a simple explanation, but sometimes you have to analyse further to understand how to reduce or contain this evil. Religion there was obviously the problem
Hitler was a theist, but his actions were not motivated by his beliefs. Why must theists always protect religious morality by refering to Stalin or Hitler. Neither Stalin or Hitler were motivated to kill people because of a belief or lack of belief in a God/religion. They were deeply paranoid and mistaken. The idea that science promotes killing and immorality, or that science misinterpretted can promote that is false. Religion can and has throughout history. Not in the case of Hitler thoug
@Campineiroamericano With or without a belief in a God, Hitler would have believed the arians were a superior race, and I would even debate his belief in a God contributed very little to his belief in the first place. Anti-semitism and facsism were the driving forces of his genocide
That man is a law professor & he believes in God? Just to even get into law school you have to take the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) &, even though that test has nothing to do with law school, it is designed to test an individual's critical thinking skills, analytical skills, & logic. I'm trying to understand how he could be a professor of law while believing in something that absolutely defecates on free thought, intellectualism, & everything else that has allowed humanity to make progress.
@andyrooney12 If you can lie to youself, make up lies for others, bend the rules of logic in a persuasive way, then charge for your sevices... you'll make an excellent lawyer or a priest.
@andyrooney12 This all fine and good, but LSAT is not a god-proof test. I'm sure the reason he got on the show is because he tried real hard, and made some impressive, if inadequate efforts to defend his belief. Everyone will run into this problem who believes, but they just apply the best of their reason to other things. The head of the Westboro Baptist Church has a JD. That's why they know exactly what to do and how to legally do the things that piss so many people off.
@andyrooney12 remember the prase,the hart as its reason that the reason do not understand. in other word when emotion is imply once lose their critical thinking science imply intellect and religion emotion for any kind of rason if your emotion is solicitate on something your judment can be altered and religion is a master of playing with your emotion state so you lose critical thinking (playing with your fear is their weapon of predilection)
@andyrooney12 You don't need to be grounded in fact in order to profess some knowledge of Law. You only need to be able to come up with an argument and what better to argue about than something for which there is no can can be no proof.
That's most people, who believe in something like christianity or the afterlife, who also competently work some job. Algebra was invented by muslims. So it's not true to say if you believe some silly story about an angel talking to some guy on a mountain then you can't do math.
We need to ditch Judaism...Right SAM HARRIS?....oh I forgot you're Jewish....I hope that doesn't deter you from Criticizing Israel's Policy of Aparthied on the Palestinians based on a biblical notion in the Hewbrew test that "This land belonged to "ABRAHAM"...
Then Hugh, why aren't there any suicide Atheist bombers. As a matter of fact you can't find any Atheist doing any evil around the World in the way you find religious Zealots do it.
@cocobear33 Not really, in fact the most intelligent u r the more Atheist u become. Look x Sweeden, Japan, Finland, Denmark, full Atheists. only noobs and brainwashed fools believe in a god. a jealous, retarded one.
Sam Harris has a PHd in neuroscience, and Hewitt has a law degree. Obviously Harris knows more about science than Hewitt. How can Hewitt claim Harris' knowledge of science to be poor?
At 3:46 Hugh makes clear that he's rooted in his adapted "Christianity" (What I call "American Jesus-ism) to the exclusion of the enormous problems his so-called faith "in North America in the 21st Century."
But watching his mental gymnastics, knit picking or grossly generalizing when it suits him is a lesson in itself. belief in "a living God and His Word as revealed."
The Bible has a God who favors one group over another. and sends them out to kill in His Name. Make of that what you will.
Hugh comes to this discussion with carefully crafted statements and questions that that reinforce his comfort. He dodges the main point(s) of Harris's book. He ignores the enormous problems in the Bible.
Sam's pointing out the danger of believing in a personal DIETY who allegedly favors one group drastically over another, and a unquestionable book that names enemies to be conquered or killed and ignores or marginalizes the bulk of human history and contributions from "outsiders."
Humans, like many complex mammals, are born with innate desire to survive and propagate, either literally or metaphorically. Other animals don't label their behavior as being "good" or "evil" because they're incapable of experiencing our level of self awareness (which leads to moral insight). I also think that awareness of mortality can lead to all sorts of desperate/evil acts. Other animals, for the most part, remain blissfully unaware of their fragility and transience
This also carries the huge presumption that Hewit's religion is the correct one to begin with. He rants about how Religious evil happens because men are inherently morally imperfect..the latter of which is a true statement, but his false premise that the Bible only justifies violence in the case of just war is absurd. Jesus himself said he came ''Not to bring peace, but a sword''. The Bible justifies violence against dozens of minorites, so this man is either dishonest or a poor Theologian.
Funny how Hewitt doesn't go into specifics about the alleged historical innacurracies of Harris' book. I've read it and I didn't notice any glaring Historical errors.
He also employs the Theological debating method that Ayaan Hirsi Ali has so frequently and so elegantly destroyed. The constant effort to divorce wicked Religious actions from Religion. It's not even vaguely logical to assert that suicide bombers do what they do because they're divorced from God..
yes a lawyer would have a better understanding of science then a a dr of neuroscience, lol.secondly atleast in new testament there is nothing about "a just war" that republican empire building apologist rhetoric.a very smart man once said the last christian died on a cross.hewitts a lawyer that muddys the debat so you cant say he lost but he didnt win,and in the litigious realm,not losing means you win.
I don't think there's any liberal atheists "still defending" the viewpoint that God specifically created the German race to rule the world and it is a duty to remove other people from Central Europe to make room for them, depsite Mr. Hewitt's assertion.
It’s hilarious to listen to Hugh talk about Sam’s book as poorly grounded in history, science, or the "theory of theology". I wonder how historical Noah’s ark is, you know, like the flooding of the entire planet and a boat with every single species on board. Or how historical the Tower of Babel is. Please. Or how about how scientific a talking snake is, or someone walking on water. I’m almost too embarrassed for Hugh to comment. What an insult to our ancestors who made it out of Africa.
@fidenful What, you have 3 examples of power Hungary people who did irrational things for something different than God? What is your point here? Look at the history of religious faith, and there will be all millions of examples, and all you got is 3? LOL
I never read the part of the Bible that says "violence is okay during just war under a properly ordained state." Hugh proves Sams' point by showing how Religion can justify ANYTHING. Such nonsense.
@ScottKeith7025 There's one part of the Bible that says any war is okay as long as you remember to kill everything in sight (except rapeable virgins), and another part that says violence is never permitted since it's better to just let God torture your enemies for you after they die. So it's easy to see why Mr. Hewitt is so confused. The Biblical situation re:violence would be comparable to Paul maintaining that homosexuality is wrong, and one of the books of the Torah being graphic gay erotica.
I love how the moderator ends with the line "how far will Sam Harris go to purge the world of religion?". Seems fairly clear what side of the argument he's on!
Typical Christian response to evil. There's evil is the world because of people who don't believe in god or my particular version of god. This is why Christians don't view atheist in a good light.
@GoogleVideoMan And that ignores atheists who live good or (in the religious parlance) "righteous" lives. Are they mindlessly being good, or do they actually recognize that life is better lived as a society when we work together, rather than tear each other apart?
Christians always misguidedly bring up Hitler as an Atheist. What I think is humorous about Christian dogma is that the Jew is condemned to hell for not believing and killing Christ but if the Natzi soldier, whom just pulled the switch on the gas chamber and killed 1000 Jews, then leaves and gets "saved"....he is going to heaven.
Mr. Hewitt is articulate enough, but his use of language does nothing to mask the lack of good argument underneath. Hugh, you are not in a court room anymore.
Joseph Smith and L Ron Hubbard are goofy as Hell! I have scutinized 122, 461 authors of religious bibles around the world and 16 in other panetary systems. Joseph Smith and L Ron Hubbard are the sanest!
Hewitt, nothing but a question dodger....and a lawyer as a debate opponent to a scientist/author? That sounds like the most obvious attempt to misrepresent an issue by manipulative language. What does a lawyer know about religion in culture other than how to phrase it nicely.
You're probably confusing Theory with Hypothesis. General relativity is accepted to be true, yet it is still a theory by definition. In fact, if one is to be completely technical- there are really no true, inviolable, universal axioms because they would have to apply to every corner of the universe, which is far beyond the limit of our testing. Hope that clears up any misconception.
Since when do law professors know science... Law professors have a pretty bad rep in this kind of discussions when it comes to science *cough cough I.D. related nonsense*. Law is not a scientific discourse, it's a social discourse.
at 2:27 Hewitt says "When you will not deal with the evidence that runs counter to your case, or you distort the evidence that is counter to your case..."
Gotta love the "projection." Hewitt couldn't care less about the evidence that runs counter to his case.
I never understood that, how is that to believe and take as literal parts you like from a holy book, and to reach total failure of the parts you don't like and you don't believe that can be taken as literal? What do you mean to say something in a fucking holy book is real if you just take as literal only what you like? If for you all the world's animals fit on an ark, I would say that faith is only satisfy you mentally.
It's funny he mentions the problem of evil. I wonder if he knows of Epicurus.
It's funny Hugh mentions freewill. I wonder if he's has read the debate through the ages on god and freewill (I'll bet he sides with Aquinas, even though his bible denies freewill...quite a few times.
and if god is everywhere (omnipresent), how are we cut off from him?
he's saying what he's taught. that's it. He constantly misses the entire point Sam is trying to make (like so many other theists).
This has been flagged as spam show
"I don't think that's why mother Theresa went to the streets of Calcutta"
Wrong!
If people with faith based on Biblical beliefs still conducted themselves, literally, by the book, mother Theresa would need permission to commit charity, or to spread the word of Jesus.
2 Timothy says clearly that women can NOT have authority over men.
That it's in fact a disgrace(like prostitution) that she'd pray in public or teach anything, and the verse states that she should have her head shaved as punishment.
Ebvardh 1 week ago
Sam Harris & Richard Dawkins always have the best arguments.
Athrun000 2 weeks ago
@Athrun000
That would be Hitchens !..
NexisFilms 6 days ago
@NexisFilms For you maybe,,, not me.
Athrun000 6 days ago
@Athrun000
Can we agree that he's got the funniest ones ?
NexisFilms 6 days ago
@NexisFilms We can.
Athrun000 6 days ago
I just read about this debate in the pathetic Ravi Zacharias book 'The End of Reason'. In the foreword, Strobel claims that Harris got schooled by Hewitt. I must be watching a different discussion.
Not2butONE 2 weeks ago
Sam Harris kicks ass in all his debates!
ethos79 4 weeks ago
Hugh says that his faith does not justify or allow cruelty. He has not read his Bible. Both the old and the new testament allow for slavery, as one example. Does Hugh really believe that slavery is not cruel? I could give many more examples of cruelty in the Bible to show that Hugh is lying about his Bible or is ignorant of what it says.
ghostframer 1 month ago
Hugh is an idiot can't wait for the generation of believers to just perish
quachimba 1 month ago
Hewitt is full of shit. LOL
xephyr1000 1 month ago
"We have to credit hundreds of years of secular dialog and scientific insights" <- Hopefully, these fruits of the Enlightenment will spread also to the religious parts of America and the Middle East. It feels like it is a "race" between Enlightenment on the one hand (still going on) and on the other hand the risk that fundamentalist religions will spread (and thus risk the future of humanity). On a pessimistic day, I'm not sure which will be most successful. But usually I'm optimistic.
0debug 1 month ago
I highly dislike the "there's no proof" of god arguement. Believe it or not, it's not about proof. You don't need proof to know that 1+1 will never equal 3. Similarily, you don't need to proof to know gods can't, never has and can't ever exist. A religious person will just use the "alternative dimension" excuse.
Something can be proven or disproven logically. And logically, no such being as a god can exist.
alique087 1 month ago
rid the world of religion for the sake of a better future
loly1969 2 months ago 2
Speculation leads to debate, division, conflict, fear and violence.
WolfEyesatNight 2 months ago
"the theory of theology" LOLOLOL
footosaur76 2 months ago 2
@footosaur76
LOL! That cracked me up too. :)
ClumsyRoot 2 months ago
@ClumsyRoot Heh, me too. But it was a religious dude who said it, and they have said more incoherent things than that, so one should probably not be too surprised.
0debug 1 month ago
@footosaur76 Yah, it cracked me up... the moron Hewitt was trying desperately to pretend to "speak from Authority" by slipping in the notion that his law degree somehow made him much more respected to speak to an imagined authority for magic and gods existing, and his sly attempt to used "theory" of theology as thought that would somehow make it a REAL science. LOL
xephyr1000 1 month ago
props to the host for actually letting sam speak
peamealbaconrules 3 months ago
Fuck that geezer, arrogant piss junkie needs to hop off his high horse and get real with it
DjLumbee 3 months ago
science was the excuse for nazism, but it stemmed from hate and racism based on religious discrimination
reznorfan7635526149 3 months ago
"easy commandments to follow"? wtf
\he's basically saying you can be sinless
LobsterPotsticker 3 months ago
Harris is brilliant on this enterview.
DrErkencho 3 months ago
@DrErkencho Entertainment + Interview = "E"nterview?
willk27 3 months ago
@willk27
hahaha, just noticed that -- ];) yeah I gues this is an "E"nterview.-
DrErkencho 3 months ago
@benthemiester yeah that's the main reason, but they believed that they were holy in their actions and that is why religion is dangerous.
StripesOnAZebra 4 months ago
I dont even get what Sam is trying to say? Theres no direct evidence, sure. But theres always the question of "Why are we here?" which people have been asking since the beginning of human thought. Religion can be evil, and it can be beautiful. "I like your Christ, but not your Christians." Theres no direct answer and each of these people are being (as everyone is) biased.
fcmilsweeper9 4 months ago
I think people flew planes into our buildings because we are occupying and building military bases on there land.
benthemiester 5 months ago
5:18, what comes out of Hewitt's mouth: "again It's the wrong question, Sam"
what he's actually thinking: "shit.. good point. "
imafoolhahaha 5 months ago
@imafoolhahaha yeah, absolutely.. Hewlett does not address the question.. he is not debating.. he is faced with an intelligent well thought out point and he dare not respond... and to top it off he's a jerk.
daNDayati 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need religion, hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important, qualitative differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption.
Homosexual activists, with complete support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims and martyrs; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 5 months ago
Hugh is a such a tool.
hznfrst 5 months ago
Hewitt just spews bullshit; it's hard to pick a jump-off point to form each logical counter
TAz69x 6 months ago
Up next: how far would Sam go to purge religion from the world!! LOL!!
shanyin1234 6 months ago
@shanyin1234 try marginalize religion.. believe in astrology of you like, fairies, ghosts, UFO and personal gods.. then society will marginalize you.. makes sense.
daNDayati 5 months ago
@shanyin1234 I just thought it was funny that the host was making really misleading statements
shanyin1234 5 months ago
Comment removed
shanyin1234 6 months ago
a nice respectful debate, thank you.
Heffsta02 6 months ago
Lee Strobe-light was all for Bush wars in 2004. I watched him on local Boston cable.
Tippersnore 6 months ago
"You can tell you've created god in your own image when it turns out that god hates all the same people you do".
Anne Lamatt
scotttebben 7 months ago 20
@scotttebben This sure is a different picture from the one Lee Strobel painted, no?
GRasputin91 3 months ago
I shiver when I hear the voice of Strobel
Baeloth 7 months ago
Sam Harris is such a clown. I could own him in a debate
l33tpwnzord 7 months ago
@l33tpwnzord
Fail
refuckulate420 7 months ago
@refuckulate420
Oh the irony
l33tpwnzord 7 months ago
@l33tpwnzord
Trollololol
refuckulate420 7 months ago
@l33tpwnzord, You would be the first. Congratulations on being so very smart.
etsneroj 7 months ago
@etsneroj
Nice comeback. Sam Harris is a clown ... WLC, Ravi, and many others have consistently owned him because he is a clown paperback book seller. He is simply good at selling books .... he has little background in actual scholarly pursuits. I don't know any atheists who take the dude seriously. He is a joke and a noob.
l33tpwnzord 7 months ago
@l33tpwnzord, If your version of an argument is calling doctors of neuroscience clowns, I'm sure you're right: you would totally own him in a debate. I'm scared just to engage you on YouTube for fear I might get owned and exposed as a noob/clown/joke. You're the man.
etsneroj 7 months ago
@l33tpwnzord now you know one, nice to meet you.
kickmeout1 7 months ago
@l33tpwnzord you would probably own sam in a debate about as well as ray "the banana man" comfort owned evolution. And then after having opened a can of creationist ass-whooping you would probably resort to calling sam a noob or a clown or a joke. Kind of like Hugh's finishing argument of "you're not that smart". Valid point Hugh!
brpowerful 6 months ago
Is faith ir-ray-ational?
watermelonygoodness 8 months ago
i love how Sam Harris listen to the opposing view and respondes and a relaxed maner
heathsawyer 8 months ago
@heathsawyer
agreed. but then he didnt have much of an opponent. By oppponent, I mean the bumbling miscreant Hewitt
Piglatinsuperstar 7 months ago
They both made good points until a bit over halfway through , then hewitt starts to make little to no sense , at least in my unbiased opinion.
Danksternify 8 months ago
While it's a waste of time thinking you'll ever change the mind of someone like Hewitt, it's good to have someone like Sam Harris out there debating them in public on this topic. When put beside each other, the reasoned, well thought out points and questions made by the likes of Sam are in such stark contrast to the waffle, spin and obfuscation coming from the likes of Hewitt. It has to help the people on the middle ground think about all this crap and see it for what it really is.
nefmot 8 months ago
Hewitt closes out by telling Sam Harris "... you're not that smart". You always know when someone is beaten in an argument... they resort to personal insults that have nothing to do with the argument/discussion at hand. I'm sure Sam took it as a compliment !!
nefmot 8 months ago
@nefmot
Amen brother!!
Piglatinsuperstar 7 months ago
I like how Hugh just throws in "because they are separated from god" in the middle of a sentence and continues on, like it's a matter-of-fact or something.
amoteofdust 8 months ago
Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Brian Flemming are my heroes.
ThrashEagle 8 months ago 3
Hewitt is such a pompous lil prick! He just gave Harris this win.
thinlizzybone 8 months ago
Watching Harris' face is funny when the other guy is talking. I'm amazing it wasnt twitching.
TheBiddleMan 8 months ago
"Faith Under Fire"
I ROFL'ed
john0908c 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
shieldsff 8 months ago
'if its not close you can't cheat' @ least has a cool title for his book.
burnhippiesforfuel 8 months ago
The problem with religious moderation is this: the vast legions of the moderate believers makes a fertile ground from which the fanatics spring. Ultimately, you cannot separate them. How many degrees of separation are there between the minds of the moderate and the fanatic? It's not clear. There is a gradation surely. The moderate and fanatic are afflicted with the same basic intellectual poison--just in different amounts.
DandAinTac 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
shieldsff 8 months ago
Hugh Hewitt and his religion have an answer for EVERYTHING... that alone is illustrative of his argument's weakness... not its strength
ffgew22 9 months ago
it's like hewitt is saying because men are evil then we should just shrug our shoulders and live with the problem of religious fanatacism. At least Sam is wiling to call out those groups deserving rebuke.
followHimnotUs 9 months ago
I love how Sam never loses his composure
ffgew22 9 months ago 62
@ffgew22 watch his debate against Deepak Chopra. He gets very very close.
FarazR2 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hi ffgew22 I have a question I would like to ask Sam Harris or any other atheist. Would you agree that our level of morality and ethics is becoming lower and lower? I ask this (I am a Christian) because both my wife and I work with youth. My wife is a teacher, and I work with youth in conflict with the law. Anyway, we were talking on the topic some time ago at how the respect for authority by our youth is so non existent, it is actually scary. We didn't think of discussing 'morals'... cont
DeaconCliff 3 months ago
pt 2 ...but considering that also, I would have to say there is clearly reason for concern. Are you concerned about our modern day morality, and our morality of future generations? I love kids, and would love to have my own one day, but back in my mind is the understanding that this world is becoming increasingly harder to grow up in. IE, there are more temptations and evil to draw kids into a destructive direction. Do you have any of these concerns of the future?
Thanks in advance.
DeaconCliff 3 months ago
@ffgew22 Me, too.
writersblock26 3 weeks ago
Violence in the name of rationalism? What?
bayanimills 9 months ago
HE'S NOT A CHRISTIAN!!!!!!!!!! HE'S TAMPERING IN DARK-SIDED STUFF...SO DARKSIDED...EVERYTHING'S UNGODLY...GARGOYLES...PSYCHICS...I REBUKE IT IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!
TransAm282 9 months ago
What is wrong with our society is our socioeconomic system.
benandreas369 9 months ago
3:36
Then you're not a Christian. Period.
This is a huge issue with religion. If you don't believe 100% in the Bible, you are NOT CHRISTIAN.
BlckSbthMan 9 months ago 3
As Harris says, Christianity in its day was every bit as intolerant and vicious as modern day Islam. Muslims call non-believers "infidels" while Christians historically called them "heretics" and killed them by the thousands, with their favorite method of disposal being to tie them to a tree, a stake or some other fixed object and set them on fire. Secular philosophy and science have been THE civilizing influence on the world.
JackKangaroo1 10 months ago
Mother teresa is his big trump card - omg. I refer you to the Missionary Position by Hitchens..plus anyway, charity and dontation is a very common thing in many people given the right circumstances. Furthermore, she questioned her own faith.
nathanmarto 10 months ago
"It's the wrong question Sam". It's rather the wrong response, he completely dismissed the fact that both group were in the same situation exact for religion, and one is more violent than the other. Simply saying "man is evil" is a simple explanation, but sometimes you have to analyse further to understand how to reduce or contain this evil. Religion there was obviously the problem
2CSST2 10 months ago
Smash all Gods and Dictators
Stresskiller89 10 months ago
Hugh Hewitt is a fucking idiot. Theology is an unfounded construct, not a theory in any sense.
spacep0d 10 months ago
Hitler was a theist, but his actions were not motivated by his beliefs. Why must theists always protect religious morality by refering to Stalin or Hitler. Neither Stalin or Hitler were motivated to kill people because of a belief or lack of belief in a God/religion. They were deeply paranoid and mistaken. The idea that science promotes killing and immorality, or that science misinterpretted can promote that is false. Religion can and has throughout history. Not in the case of Hitler thoug
ErwinERommel 10 months ago
@ErwinERommel Hitler's paranoia made him believe that God created the arian race to rule the world over all other races.
Campineiroamericano 10 months ago
@Campineiroamericano With or without a belief in a God, Hitler would have believed the arians were a superior race, and I would even debate his belief in a God contributed very little to his belief in the first place. Anti-semitism and facsism were the driving forces of his genocide
ErwinERommel 10 months ago
That man is a law professor & he believes in God? Just to even get into law school you have to take the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) &, even though that test has nothing to do with law school, it is designed to test an individual's critical thinking skills, analytical skills, & logic. I'm trying to understand how he could be a professor of law while believing in something that absolutely defecates on free thought, intellectualism, & everything else that has allowed humanity to make progress.
andyrooney12 10 months ago 13
@andyrooney12 If you can lie to youself, make up lies for others, bend the rules of logic in a persuasive way, then charge for your sevices... you'll make an excellent lawyer or a priest.
elbowbiter1 10 months ago
@andyrooney12 This all fine and good, but LSAT is not a god-proof test. I'm sure the reason he got on the show is because he tried real hard, and made some impressive, if inadequate efforts to defend his belief. Everyone will run into this problem who believes, but they just apply the best of their reason to other things. The head of the Westboro Baptist Church has a JD. That's why they know exactly what to do and how to legally do the things that piss so many people off.
CreedBalboa 5 months ago
@andyrooney12 remember the prase,the hart as its reason that the reason do not understand. in other word when emotion is imply once lose their critical thinking science imply intellect and religion emotion for any kind of rason if your emotion is solicitate on something your judment can be altered and religion is a master of playing with your emotion state so you lose critical thinking (playing with your fear is their weapon of predilection)
mystisme 5 months ago
@andyrooney12 You don't need to be grounded in fact in order to profess some knowledge of Law. You only need to be able to come up with an argument and what better to argue about than something for which there is no can can be no proof.
FrodoDojo 4 months ago
@andyrooney12
That's most people, who believe in something like christianity or the afterlife, who also competently work some job. Algebra was invented by muslims. So it's not true to say if you believe some silly story about an angel talking to some guy on a mountain then you can't do math.
charlesvan13 3 months ago
I enjoy that this is a calm debate. Both men are clearly intelligent, and both men have some decent points.
pandaeater123 10 months ago
@pandaeater123 Intelligent points from both men? Really? Explain?
elbowbiter1 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We need to ditch Judaism...Right SAM HARRIS?....oh I forgot you're Jewish....I hope that doesn't deter you from Criticizing Israel's Policy of Aparthied on the Palestinians based on a biblical notion in the Hewbrew test that "This land belonged to "ABRAHAM"...
LSRochon 10 months ago
Totally looks like Ben Stiller here.
D3ltra 10 months ago
Then Hugh, why aren't there any suicide Atheist bombers. As a matter of fact you can't find any Atheist doing any evil around the World in the way you find religious Zealots do it.
jrwilson98 11 months ago
Lee Strobel is the dumbest fuck on the face of this earth
TheLuckySaGe 11 months ago
@TheLuckySaGe I think that title would go to Kent Hovind
ilovesatan1000 11 months ago
Sam Harris is head and shoulders above these credulous, gullible, imaginary friend having clowns.
Deepbluhuntr 11 months ago
Sam Harris is head and shoulders above these credulous, gullible, imaginary friend having cloiwns.
Deepbluhuntr 11 months ago
Hugh Hewitt is a knob
thunderlightman 11 months ago
only fools say that there is no GOD
cocobear33 11 months ago
@cocobear33
Only fools believe in things for which there is no evidence. Gods are imaginary, the one you believe in and all the others too.
Deepbluhuntr 11 months ago
@cocobear33 Not really, in fact the most intelligent u r the more Atheist u become. Look x Sweeden, Japan, Finland, Denmark, full Atheists. only noobs and brainwashed fools believe in a god. a jealous, retarded one.
nikur 11 months ago
Pwned badly at the end :)
Hermoor 11 months ago
Sam Harris has a PHd in neuroscience, and Hewitt has a law degree. Obviously Harris knows more about science than Hewitt. How can Hewitt claim Harris' knowledge of science to be poor?
chrisinsocalif 11 months ago 2
wtf is the theory of theology? Does it include martyring yourself?
gotitans999 11 months ago
I love Harris' expression when other people are talking, he doesn't scoff or make stupid faces he just listens and looks like he's high as fuck.
mS28811 11 months ago
As soon as I saw Lee Stroebel's face, I almost hit the stop button!
womanlybassplayer 11 months ago
lol Hewitt is such a tosser! I love seeing religious wankers get owned!!
MrJohndl 11 months ago
At 3:46 Hugh makes clear that he's rooted in his adapted "Christianity" (What I call "American Jesus-ism) to the exclusion of the enormous problems his so-called faith "in North America in the 21st Century."
But watching his mental gymnastics, knit picking or grossly generalizing when it suits him is a lesson in itself. belief in "a living God and His Word as revealed."
The Bible has a God who favors one group over another. and sends them out to kill in His Name. Make of that what you will.
bramachari 1 year ago
Hugh comes to this discussion with carefully crafted statements and questions that that reinforce his comfort. He dodges the main point(s) of Harris's book. He ignores the enormous problems in the Bible.
Sam's pointing out the danger of believing in a personal DIETY who allegedly favors one group drastically over another, and a unquestionable book that names enemies to be conquered or killed and ignores or marginalizes the bulk of human history and contributions from "outsiders."
bramachari 1 year ago
Humans, like many complex mammals, are born with innate desire to survive and propagate, either literally or metaphorically. Other animals don't label their behavior as being "good" or "evil" because they're incapable of experiencing our level of self awareness (which leads to moral insight). I also think that awareness of mortality can lead to all sorts of desperate/evil acts. Other animals, for the most part, remain blissfully unaware of their fragility and transience
ritter89 1 year ago
This also carries the huge presumption that Hewit's religion is the correct one to begin with. He rants about how Religious evil happens because men are inherently morally imperfect..the latter of which is a true statement, but his false premise that the Bible only justifies violence in the case of just war is absurd. Jesus himself said he came ''Not to bring peace, but a sword''. The Bible justifies violence against dozens of minorites, so this man is either dishonest or a poor Theologian.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
Funny how Hewitt doesn't go into specifics about the alleged historical innacurracies of Harris' book. I've read it and I didn't notice any glaring Historical errors.
He also employs the Theological debating method that Ayaan Hirsi Ali has so frequently and so elegantly destroyed. The constant effort to divorce wicked Religious actions from Religion. It's not even vaguely logical to assert that suicide bombers do what they do because they're divorced from God..
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
at 2:45 he says people commit violence in the name of rationalism lol
oontyex 1 year ago
yes a lawyer would have a better understanding of science then a a dr of neuroscience, lol.secondly atleast in new testament there is nothing about "a just war" that republican empire building apologist rhetoric.a very smart man once said the last christian died on a cross.hewitts a lawyer that muddys the debat so you cant say he lost but he didnt win,and in the litigious realm,not losing means you win.
maxfedor1 1 year ago
I don't think there's any liberal atheists "still defending" the viewpoint that God specifically created the German race to rule the world and it is a duty to remove other people from Central Europe to make room for them, depsite Mr. Hewitt's assertion.
bcgonynor 1 year ago
*facedesk*
splicedenergy 1 year ago
It’s hilarious to listen to Hugh talk about Sam’s book as poorly grounded in history, science, or the "theory of theology". I wonder how historical Noah’s ark is, you know, like the flooding of the entire planet and a boat with every single species on board. Or how historical the Tower of Babel is. Please. Or how about how scientific a talking snake is, or someone walking on water. I’m almost too embarrassed for Hugh to comment. What an insult to our ancestors who made it out of Africa.
northoforacle 1 year ago
Hitlerism? LOL I think he means National Socialism or Fascism^^
0xPUNKROCKx0 1 year ago
@0xPUNKROCKx0
No..Hitlerism is a valid term.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
Sam is ignoring WHAT counter evidence? The evidence of how god makes you feel? Give him a break.
pureperil 1 year ago
Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc. did what they did because they forgot to believe in Micky Mouse.
fidenful 1 year ago 47
@fidenful
That's not right... Hitler and Stalin did it because of their mustaches... Only Mao didn't believe in Micky Mouse! :p
0xPUNKROCKx0 1 year ago
@fidenful That's a genious analogy!
2CSST2 10 months ago
@fidenful Hitler believed in Donald Duck though
ADDodger 10 months ago
@fidenful What, you have 3 examples of power Hungary people who did irrational things for something different than God? What is your point here? Look at the history of religious faith, and there will be all millions of examples, and all you got is 3? LOL
StraightMOATED417 9 months ago
I never read the part of the Bible that says "violence is okay during just war under a properly ordained state." Hugh proves Sams' point by showing how Religion can justify ANYTHING. Such nonsense.
ScottKeith7025 1 year ago
@ScottKeith7025 There's one part of the Bible that says any war is okay as long as you remember to kill everything in sight (except rapeable virgins), and another part that says violence is never permitted since it's better to just let God torture your enemies for you after they die. So it's easy to see why Mr. Hewitt is so confused. The Biblical situation re:violence would be comparable to Paul maintaining that homosexuality is wrong, and one of the books of the Torah being graphic gay erotica.
bcgonynor 1 year ago
at 2:50 ... who has commited violence in the name of rationalism :S ?? rediculous
oontyex 1 year ago
Comment removed
JDoucette 1 year ago
I love how the moderator ends with the line "how far will Sam Harris go to purge the world of religion?". Seems fairly clear what side of the argument he's on!
bernlin2000 1 year ago
Is Hitlerism even a word?
rawssremix 1 year ago
@rawssremix
Yes, yes it is. It would have taken you 2 seconds to google it.
BelfastAtheist 1 year ago
@BelfastAtheist I suppose it would have...
rawssremix 1 year ago
Typical Christian response to evil. There's evil is the world because of people who don't believe in god or my particular version of god. This is why Christians don't view atheist in a good light.
GoogleVideoMan 1 year ago
@GoogleVideoMan And that ignores atheists who live good or (in the religious parlance) "righteous" lives. Are they mindlessly being good, or do they actually recognize that life is better lived as a society when we work together, rather than tear each other apart?
bernlin2000 1 year ago
Christians always misguidedly bring up Hitler as an Atheist. What I think is humorous about Christian dogma is that the Jew is condemned to hell for not believing and killing Christ but if the Natzi soldier, whom just pulled the switch on the gas chamber and killed 1000 Jews, then leaves and gets "saved"....he is going to heaven.
Stupid Christians.
mrjholland1 1 year ago
Mr. Hewitt is articulate enough, but his use of language does nothing to mask the lack of good argument underneath. Hugh, you are not in a court room anymore.
Baaldyn 1 year ago
Joseph Smith and L Ron Hubbard are goofy as Hell! I have scutinized 122, 461 authors of religious bibles around the world and 16 in other panetary systems. Joseph Smith and L Ron Hubbard are the sanest!
Zeeeeek 1 year ago
HITLERISM?????
JohnnyZenith 1 year ago
Sam harris shows no emotion. SAM THE ROCK HARRIS
iblessedx 1 year ago
Who would name their kid Hugh Hewitt?
TheRobertDeee 1 year ago
can some1 tell me what the theory of theology is plz. bwahhahaHAHAha. all Wikipedia said was that this Christian guy is talking out of his ass.
jaylias 1 year ago
Just starting to wonder... is there anyone out there for an Atheist to debate other than a syndicated radio or television host?
instereovideos 1 year ago
4:06 - Ah, the Hitler argument who comes in. Lookup history, Hitler was no atheist and even if he was, what he did certainly wasn't based on atheism.
ccheng21 1 year ago
Hewitt, nothing but a question dodger....and a lawyer as a debate opponent to a scientist/author? That sounds like the most obvious attempt to misrepresent an issue by manipulative language. What does a lawyer know about religion in culture other than how to phrase it nicely.
boorens18 1 year ago
"The days of gaining respect by simply putting "reverand" at the beginning of your name are over" C.Hitchens
examinfo 1 year ago
LOL the "Theory of Theology"!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAH
MrUsername5678888 1 year ago 56
@MrUsername5678888 Yes, I do wonder why testable hypotheses have been derived from theological theory
Nemesis000000 1 year ago
@MrUsername5678888
I got a laugh out of that too. Can you believe they hand out PHD's in that nonsense ? Doctor of Divinity, Vs Doctor of Scooby Doo, who's crazier ?
Deepbluhuntr 11 months ago
@MrUsername5678888 LMAO. i can't believe i didn't catch that.
WowThisWasntTaken 11 months ago
@MrUsername5678888
You're probably confusing Theory with Hypothesis. General relativity is accepted to be true, yet it is still a theory by definition. In fact, if one is to be completely technical- there are really no true, inviolable, universal axioms because they would have to apply to every corner of the universe, which is far beyond the limit of our testing. Hope that clears up any misconception.
MrBeeflomein 10 months ago
@MrUsername5678888 Hahaha, I replayed that like 5 times..
treasuredroperX 10 months ago
@MrUsername5678888 Something like "Theory of Three-Little-Pigs-ology".
Ronni3no2 9 months ago
Ahh Sam Harris - the voice of reason.
Jcm9991 1 year ago
Since when do law professors know science... Law professors have a pretty bad rep in this kind of discussions when it comes to science *cough cough I.D. related nonsense*. Law is not a scientific discourse, it's a social discourse.
Entertainmentwf 1 year ago 2
He does I hate how he is patronising in saying; "that's not the right question sam". Bastard lol
TheHippo18 1 year ago
Hewitt dogmatically talks about faith on one hand, and blames Sam about evidence on the other. Hewitt has a pedantic annoying style.
robhoey 1 year ago
Religious is Extremist
fjones71 1 year ago
Huge Hewitt could have listed names of Santas Reindeers during the whole debate, and made just as much sense as he did on this clip.
"No, no, Sam. Its Dasher and Dancer, Prancer and Vixen...."
Ridiculous nonsense, its such an embarrasment that we still have to waste time fighting superstition.
bary1234 1 year ago 2
at 2:27 Hewitt says "When you will not deal with the evidence that runs counter to your case, or you distort the evidence that is counter to your case..."
Gotta love the "projection." Hewitt couldn't care less about the evidence that runs counter to his case.
fusedchromosome 1 year ago
"There is fanatics or fundamentalists"
I never understood that, how is that to believe and take as literal parts you like from a holy book, and to reach total failure of the parts you don't like and you don't believe that can be taken as literal? What do you mean to say something in a fucking holy book is real if you just take as literal only what you like? If for you all the world's animals fit on an ark, I would say that faith is only satisfy you mentally.
Mariet31 1 year ago
Comment removed
Mariet31 1 year ago
Another religious zealot claiming atheism causes violence. This guy doesn't say any facts but dogma. The mediator is also horrid.
orarkcray 1 year ago
It's funny he mentions the problem of evil. I wonder if he knows of Epicurus.
It's funny Hugh mentions freewill. I wonder if he's has read the debate through the ages on god and freewill (I'll bet he sides with Aquinas, even though his bible denies freewill...quite a few times.
and if god is everywhere (omnipresent), how are we cut off from him?
he's saying what he's taught. that's it. He constantly misses the entire point Sam is trying to make (like so many other theists).
jeromyrutter 1 year ago