Dillahunty and Bionicdance - Criticism on what makes a Theist/Atheist





The interactive transcript could not be loaded.



Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Sep 18, 2012

Note: there is a follow up video to this one called 'Belief in God Quantified' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NB5qd_...

Feel free to 'like' or 'favourite' this video (as these seem to be the primary means any video in this part of YT gets to fresh eyes and spark debates nowadays) ...... or to tell me I am talking out my backside (though don't be surprised if I am not offended)!

It is important to differentiate between there being only two outcomes, ie a god exists/ no god exists; coin lands heads/coin lands tails, and there being only two relevant propositions. This is a critical distinction.
Especially where the outcome is still unknown the proposition which we would accept and assert our belief in is perhaps most likely NOT one which directly reflects either of the outcomes absolutely and this is the root of where the problems begin imo.

Note on defining words. Words are defined through usage. As such we need to look at two things:
1) What people mean when they use a word.
2) What they are referring to when they use a word.
This is not always the same thing!
Thus, most people may confirm that they use 'theist' to mean those who accept the proposition 'God exists' - and only those people - but they will use the word to refer to people who, technically speaking, ought reject that claim as they acknowledge they can never possess absolute certainty.

In this video i reject the claims of Matt Dillahunty and Kate (Bionicdance). I claim that their argument neither reflects usage, is not pragmatic or useful, nor are they really handling the argument of what propositions can consist of in a realistic way: that you can only accept or reject any given proposition is true, but largely irrelevant.

PS: Nice to get back to what we DO here on YouTube which is to openly debate, not stifle debate and discourse as happens in some other places. disagreeing with people, such as I do here with Matt and kate, is not indicative of hostility (I like them both) but taking their ideas seriously. If that isn't integral to what a 'freethought' environment should be like then i just don't know.

Some links:
BionicDance "You Believe or You Don't!"
Matt Dillahunty "the atheist experience #627 [part 05 of 08]"


When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next

to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...