Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 37

Thread: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    7,503

    Default Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Matt Slick takes this off topic from the start. Its infuriating.


    Matt Dillahunty has begun a review of the debate which is so far interesting.

    https://www.patreon.com/posts/atheist-debates-7330289

    "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government".
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Burden of proof is the obligation on somebody presenting a claim to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing "side" to show the evidence presented is not adequate. If claims were accepted without warrants, then every claim could simultaneously be claimed to be true.

    History isn't written by the victors. It's written by the people with the time machines.

  2. Thank button Strato thanked this post
    Laugh button Azurisan21 laughed at this post
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    19,161

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    I watched about half an hour or more of Dilahunty and noticed the contrast with Slick. Matt D got his points in early. I have watched a lot of Dilahunty vids so there were few surprises. Then I watched Matt Slick for over 15 minutes, but could not maintain interest, because he didn't get to the point. Call me biased, but Matt Slick seemed to be mostly about word salad with little substance.
    Just stick to the idea that science tests falsifiable hypotheses to destruction.

  4. Like button DanDare, joele liked this post
  5. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    4,119

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Not sure I can face the debate, but the answer's clearly 'yes'. Christianity is tribal and believes others are going to face eternal torture for not leaping hoops while in humanism there is no 'other'. Christianity requires you lend credence to anti-human positions, buy into antiquated magical guff, and to remain infantile outsourcing ethics to the supernatural - humanism requires no magic and supports the idea of being responsible for ones' own actions.

    There's no comparison here at all. One is the collective shaved bumfluff of nasty little dingleberries vying for divine diktat to administer their squabbles, and the other is the hope that humanity can be more than children.

  6. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    143

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Imo, Matt should should stop providing people like Slick with (pseudo)credibility, by engaging with them in debates.

    People like Matt Slock don't care for either facts nor honest debates. All they care about is reaffirming their beliefs through whatever convoluted arguments they can think of.
    "Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."

  7. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    7,503

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Quote Spearthrower said View Post
    Not sure I can face the debate, but the answer's clearly 'yes'. Christianity is tribal and believes others are going to face eternal torture for not leaping hoops while in humanism there is no 'other'. Christianity requires you lend credence to anti-human positions, buy into antiquated magical guff, and to remain infantile outsourcing ethics to the supernatural - humanism requires no magic and supports the idea of being responsible for ones' own actions.

    There's no comparison here at all. One is the collective shaved bumfluff of nasty little dingleberries vying for divine diktat to administer their squabbles, and the other is the hope that humanity can be more than children.
    Do watch. Matt S does not engage the topic and goes off an a straw man argument and argument from incredulity that is astonishing in its awfulness. The second vid has Matt D going over the lead up to the debate and its most enlightening.
    Last edited by DanDare; 29th November 2016 at 08:32 PM.
    "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government".
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Burden of proof is the obligation on somebody presenting a claim to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing "side" to show the evidence presented is not adequate. If claims were accepted without warrants, then every claim could simultaneously be claimed to be true.

    History isn't written by the victors. It's written by the people with the time machines.

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    7,609

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Quote DanDare said View Post
    Quote Spearthrower said View Post
    Not sure I can face the debate, but the answer's clearly 'yes'. Christianity is tribal and believes others are going to face eternal torture for not leaping hoops while in humanism there is no 'other'. Christianity requires you lend credence to anti-human positions, buy into antiquated magical guff, and to remain infantile outsourcing ethics to the supernatural - humanism requires no magic and supports the idea of being responsible for ones' own actions.

    There's no comparison here at all. One is the collective shaved bumfluff of nasty little dingleberries vying for divine diktat to administer their squabbles, and the other is the hope that humanity can be more than children.
    Do watch. Matt S does not engage the topic and goes off an a straw man argument and argument from incredulity that is astonishing in its awfulness. The second vid has Matt D going over the lead up to the debate and its most enlightening.
    Nothing new there then.

    How I became an atheist: listened to arguments in support of religion. Realised they were full of shit. Kept paying attention. Nothing changed.

    I've been doing this for a long time, and frankly haven't come across a new or intellectually rigorous argument for religion in at least five years, probably longer. The best you get are people who only cannot be classified as lying purely because they genuinely believe the stupid bullshit they're peddling.
    -Geoff Rogers

    @Goldenmane3


  9. Thank button ptutt thanked this post
  10. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    People's Republic of Mancunia, Antipodes
    Posts
    1,609

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    I've been subject to this entire interaction since Slick's first call regarding TAG on TAE, and indeed I've interacted with Slick and kicked his arse on CARM chat.

    Some of you will recall a debate I engaged in at RDF, not my best performance, but still. That debate was instituted after Chris Weaver, then a student of apologetics at university (he says philosophy, but he's a Kraigbot, really) was throwing his weight around at CARM, so I visited the chat to give him what for. I got dog-piled by Weaver, Slick and their sycophants in the chat, so I challenged Weaver to a debate.

    I've watched the whole interaction with some interest as a result.

    Slick, as with all presupps, can't defend any position except via asserting that nobody but a presupp can account for the laws of logic, the laws of the universe etc. Of course, the presupp can only account for them by fiat insofar as he can account for them at all - not that they require an accounting.

    Slick is a perfect example of why reasonable people get frustrated at presuppositionalists,because trying to have a reasonable, reasoned discussion is like filling a string bag with custard.


  11. Like button DanDare, SEG liked this post
  12. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    7,609

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Quote hackenslash said View Post
    I've been subject to this entire interaction since Slick's first call regarding TAG on TAE, and indeed I've interacted with Slick and kicked his arse on CARM chat.

    Some of you will recall a debate I engaged in at RDF, not my best performance, but still. That debate was instituted after Chris Weaver, then a student of apologetics at university (he says philosophy, but he's a Kraigbot, really) was throwing his weight around at CARM, so I visited the chat to give him what for. I got dog-piled by Weaver, Slick and their sycophants in the chat, so I challenged Weaver to a debate.

    I've watched the whole interaction with some interest as a result.

    Slick, as with all presupps, can't defend any position except via asserting that nobody but a presupp can account for the laws of logic, the laws of the universe etc. Of course, the presupp can only account for them by fiat insofar as he can account for them at all - not that they require an accounting.

    Slick is a perfect example of why reasonable people get frustrated at presuppositionalists,because trying to have a reasonable, reasoned discussion is like filling a string bag with custard.
    For clarification, you're talking about Chris Weaver, not the poster Weaver (atheist ex-military firefighter) yeah?
    -Geoff Rogers

    @Goldenmane3


  13. Like button Spearthrower liked this post
    Thank button Spearthrower thanked this post
  14. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    People's Republic of Mancunia, Antipodes
    Posts
    1,609

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Keerect. One of them's a cretinous christian apologist who likes to flim-flam his way through lots of technical language, while the other one's Weaver.

    On the upside, I owe a fair bit of my intellectual development to that debate, because it taught me to be a bit more careful in ensuring that I unpacked terms completely, and taught me an appreciation for some of the finer points of logic.


  15. Like button Goldenmane, DanDare liked this post
    Laugh button Spearthrower laughed at this post
  16. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    7,609

    Default Re: Is Secular Humanism superior to Christianity? - Matt Dilahunty vs Matt Slick

    Just wanted to clear that up, for the record. You know how apologists can be.
    -Geoff Rogers

    @Goldenmane3


  17. Like button hackenslash liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •