TheoreticalBullshit vs Matt Slick (Part 6)

[DaGavinX]

No, Matt you have to prove that the brains is more that electrochemical reactions. Neuroscience knows how the brains works naturally.

[opengates777]

Slick is a GREAT MAN!

[airborneanimal]

Matt Slicks argument boils down to the same thing every apologetic argument does. God did it. I don't have to explain it. I don't have to demonstrate it. I can just say God did it and because you can't prove he didn't I win. Logic my ass.

[utubepunk]

@airborneanimal Exactly. It sounds like the TAG argument is there's an A & B explanation. We're discounting a 3rd, 4th, etc explanation because we don't know what it is or if it exists (glad science doesn't do this). A is false, so B is true. B is true because god! And then go on to using circular reasoning & repetition as "proof".

[AAMovement]

Oh TBS... What a Gentlemen...! =]

[dkinetik]

this argument completely forgets all the other reasons why we dont believe in god .. there are many reasons .. and please what the fuck .. one minute god has an image then hes some sorta mist or non entity .. make up ur mind .. hes just gotta be one thing .. im sick and tired of all the bullshit answers u religious people give .. if u had a valid argument i would believe u .. but i dont cus its not possible to be gullible like u ..

[IzzyBunneh]

atheism isn't a philosophy, but materialism is, which almost primarily acompanies atheism, but atheism by deffinition is nothing more than a lack of a belief in a god, certain sects of budhists are atheists for example. i've also known atheists who believe in ghosts, and magic, and some kind of collective conciousness that we join when we die, but which didnt create the universe so isn't god

materlism is a philosophy, deffiantely, but atheism isn't, it's a label for a single lack of belief

[qwestwardly]

i wish they had let avi speak. he is well spoken rational and would have OWNED slick

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

Why does Slick think that human minds can't be the source of the laws of logic? (This is the key maneuver for him, because it's where he thinks atheism fails and God must enter the picture.) I heard 2 reasons from him:

1) Basically the "Argument from Reason": that material brains can't produce rationality.

The rebuttal to that is simple: evolution. (That can be elaborated on, but that's what it comes down to.)

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

(cont)

2) Human minds disagree, but logic is absolute.

That's one of those "it's so confused it would take pages to untangle" things. To begin: assuming that logic is from human minds, and noting that those minds sometimes disagree, does NOT produce the conclusion that logic is relative. (Compare: arithmetic is from human minds, and sometimes people get different answers when they do calculations, therefore arithmetic is relative.)

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

(cont)

Pause to consider what he's saying. Slick's seemingly claiming that because some wag might say that "A = A" is false, humanity is thrown into the nightmare/error of affirming logic's relativism - a nightmare/error that can only be averted or corrected by God's guarantee that "A = A" is in fact true. Who would've guessed that one moron/jerk could so threaten our reality - and thereby prove God's existence?

Here's a question: what would you say to someone who claimed that "A = A" is false?

[RlCHART]

@VeryEvilPettingZoo sorry but I think either you or I have a misunderstanding here, or you are mistaken. Arithmetic is NOT relative. If that were so, Mathematics would not have the certainty that it does. People get different answers because they are not computing correctly, not because it is relative. And the false dichotomy that Matt D says there is, is incorrect as well. There are two claims, not one, its either A or B, if you are denying both, it is only because there is a third option.

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

@RlCHART

I agree. I wasn't clear. I interpreted Slick to be arguing that if you accept "X is from human minds" and that "human minds can disagree about X", then his conclusion is "therefore X is relative". I suggested comparing that reasoning to arithmetic. An arithmetic comparision was meant as a COUNTER-EXAMPLE proving that his argument is false in general. Arithmetic satisfies his 2 premises, but his argument's conclusion, that arithmetic is relative, is obviously false (just as you said).

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

0. Atheism isn't a philos0phy, it's a term identifying a certain belief state. Slick's argument sounds like it's really directed at Physicalism. But to avoid confusion, I'll play along and call it atheism - a philosophy.

1. An atheist can "accounted for" Logic.

2. Even if an atheist couldn't, it wouldn't prove that atheism was false. Perhaps whatever philo is meant by atheism is incomplete, or perhaps atheism is true, and that logic simply has "no account".

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

cont

3. Even if atheism (philo version) were false, it wouldn't establish that monotheism, much less the Christianity, is true.

Thus Slick is wrong at every turn.

His argument is "impossibility of the contrary", but atheism is the "contrary" only of some deity of some type existing. It's not the "contrary" of monotheism or Christianity. As his argument is that "atheism can't account", he can't conclude atheism is "impossible" (or false). And his "atheism can't account" part is just wrong anyhow

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

(cont)

It's kinda ironic: The stronger he argues that atheism is a full blown philosophy with many commitments and consequences, the more he invalidates his own TAG argument for God. That's because EVEN IF he succeed in defeating this philosophy of atheism (which he hasn't), the LOGICAL conclusion wouldn't be that "God exists", but rather the conclusion would be that at least some part of this big philosophy of atheism is in error - and it doesn't have to be the "God does not exist" part!!

[RPFS2008]

TBS pointed out major problems with Slick's argument on about 4 occasions. Slick completely dodged the points.

[mowgli123456789]

if atheism didnt have tennents then we couldnt all identify as atheist. thats so funny matt.

atheism is the lack of a belief. 'armless' is a lable that like atheism describes a persons lack of something.

so, it would be like saying "being an 'armless' person is a philosophy". its just silly

[DarkKnightBob1o1]

hot chick in top left at 4:30

[Griefscar]

Excellent debate series. The audio was iffy here and there, but overall well done. Thank you for uploading this.

[AtheistAtLARGE]

Well here's where christianity is morally bankrupt

You allow a conceptual ET to dictate its conceptual wants and disires upon humanity by using its disregaurd for human life to give you the christian an essance for existance

Youre afraid of ET so you believe in ET

Youre just afraid of the dark christians thats why you believe in a god, where as I maybe be afraid of what lurks in the dark, youre just afraid of the dark

[AtheistAtLARGE]

I conceive that the number two absolute in the universe is that gods dont exist

WOW I win the argument again matt

Matt needs a better argument because simple statements just pwn him according to his "logic"

[AtheistAtLARGE]

wait what YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT HIM ?

When the attributes matt mentions are not perceivble by mankind one must use an imagination to think about god then has to indulge in illogic to say they believe in said god, since logic demands things that are perceivable by humans in some way other than imagination

[martiangrundy]

---Cont.

are only just now starting to get to grips with the fact, that we are growing up as a race, and getting to a stage of education where religion is being seen for the deluded supernatural Myth, that it surely is.

This is a backlash from the believers, to try to make any non believer into a demon, devoid of any "god given grace".

I'm glad to say, religion is on the decline, and in not too long will be a minority activity, seen for what it is by the rest of the populace.

Outdated sillyness.

[martiangrundy]

Why do some of you Yanks insist in asserting this rubbish about "atheists".

NO NO NO!!!

There is no dogma, or tenets, or anything like this that Slick has just asserted again.

I'm sorry to tell you but this really does not fly, Over in the rest of the educated first world, in Europe, atheism is THE norm. Everyone is regarded as an individual, and god/religion very rarely comes into the conversation.

It seems it is only over in the USA that you have this crazy skewed view, because you

Cont.---

[Naked4Jesus]

First, thanks very much for uploading this debate. It's a shame the audio was a bit scratchy but it is what it is and I understood just about everything. Next, Matt Slick is such a douche! Sorry but it's sooooo true! All my best to you and Theoretical Bullshit.

[ClumsyRoot]

A rose is a rose is a rose.

And a prick is a prick is a prick.

[InLucidReverie]

I wish it wasn't so choppy.

Btw- Anytime Matt can't answer a question, he gives complements to TBS and talks about his life, then changes the subject.

[OneHariSeldon]

TBS: What mechanism does God function by?

Matt: ...Ontological...

TBS: That's not a description of how.

Matt: ... Repeat....

TBS: What do you use tag for?

Matt: Rant much ado about nothing.

TBS: What do you use tag for?

Basically how the argument went the entire way. Ask, dodge, ask, dodge assert, ask, dodge assert, ask, dodge assert... ad infinitum.

[Droptopcadillac]

I hope all you atheists keep putting up these talks with matt slick!

thank you!!

Atheism should die faster that it already is in the world.

[nidodson]

First, learn to type out English.

Second, Matt Slick fails at every single serious debate he has. He either starts to repeat himself losing all integrity, or claim fallacies as true without proof.

Third, Atheism is on a fast increase in the US. All research is showing that there are more Atheist than what the statistics are showing right now due to Christian misinformation, and putting the Atheist population over 20% in the US.

[opengates777]

@nidodson

YOU ARE CLEARLY AN ATHEIST, YOUR NOT INTERESTED IN FACTS.

[nidodson]

@opengates777

I made that comment 2 years ago, and you are clearly a theist by even replying to it.

[imbarisaxy]

yeah you need to learn english and if you didn't know atheism is actually on the rise. more people are realizing that reality always wins against mythology.

[VioletCosmonaut]

Always claiming to know how an atheist feels. I think when they do that, they are projecting their own feelings.

[Englishdosser86]

I found it insulting the way he kept doing that.

[darkfudge]

U ALL FUCKING SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!