Hitchens: religion degrades humanity.

Q&A part VII of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate: http://www.vimeo.com/1904911

Hitchens repeats a strong anti-theist point: if you do a moral deed "for god" it is done for a reward or out of fear but not out of empathy or solidarity -it thus abolishes morality, individual choice etc.

Tureks stupidity (or the credulity of his followers) forces this repetition upon us, his point about the immorality of materialism is old as well. I would guess it is a (corrupted) version of the "argument from despair" against naturalism: humans are supposedly not able to live decently without a "cosmic meaning of life".
Also cringeworthy is Tureks announcement that he stops believing in Christianity if the body of Christ is discovered (!?).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_naturalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequences

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Christopher
• Hitchens
• David
• Hume
• Turek
• god
• VCU
• debate
• atheism
• Humanism
• meaning
• life
• tautology
• theism
• Christianity
• IC
• empathy
• morality
• creationism
• intelligent
• design
• christian
• fundamentalism
• Dawkins
• empiricism
• materialism
• naturalism

[TheSamuraiGoomba]

Wow, Turek is unbelievably thick. I'm not even saying this as an atheist or supporter of Hitchens (even though I am, but I can give theists credit when they have good arguments), but Turek is a brick wall of solid ignorance through which no evidence or logic can pass. He seems to think being loud is the same as winning an argument.

[TomFynn]

@cosmosmonger "Human laws don't restrain man's evil will" If history is any judge, God's laws didn't either. On the contrary, nothing made people more happily commit atrocities as when God willed it.

[saguhh00]

Turek destroyed his own argument. If empathy is not right, then what is?

[ClumsyRoot]

@stew918

Well put.

[stew918]

What I don't understand is how Turek's argument makes sense in this debate. He's looking into the void of which we do not know for certain, pre-big bang, and other cosmic arguments, and claiming certainty out of no direct evidence. Hitchens is held to solid, direct, observable evidence, and Turek is claiming the unsubstantial and unknown as evidence...and this is accepted. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the person who looks into the sky, sees nothing, yet claims something is there?

[Sm1412341]

@Cha11engerD I noticed this too. I found it rather frustrating, because I've heard his responses to the exact same questions before. And of course, he exposed how fatuous they were.

I wonder why there was so much of a disconnect there. Perhaps a combination of the booze and being repeatedly asked childish questions?

[finchtoob]

Turek is proof that one can be "intelligent" whilst still being an idiot

[Cha11engerD]

I'm a bit surprised at Hitchens in this video. As far as I can tell, he never actually answered Turek's question of why certain actions, i.e. heroism, bravery, etc. are 'morally right.' It appears he misunderstood the question when he went on to say that just because we're all primates means we can't be moral. I do agree with what was said, but he either avoided the question or misunderstood it. It's not something that happened with Christopher with virtually any degree of frequency.

[trebange]

The problem with Turek is that he has misguided intelligence. He forms the belief before he considers the facts.

[M8E8L]

@TheSamuraiGoomba lol indeed at the beginning of the vid Turek looked like he was about to cry like a little bitch xD

[metyzermanfan19]

I worked with the guy who was on that bus who chopped that guys head off. His name was Vince Lee and I worked with him at McDonalds in Thompson Manitoba. Only a few hours away from where the incident occurred.