Quote (Snyft2 @ Jan 15 2023 10:05am)
he looks very shifty and not really well intentioned :cry: !
this is why i dont watch debates anymore. i probably wont see any new arguments for anything and im kinda oldschool on this, if they arent introducing anything new, its a waste of my time watching it. also i dont think debates are a place for free interaction with the audience as it can distract and even lead the debaters into...less useful behavior so to say :wacko: pretty much any debate with freely interacting audience loses on its value
also i got a pretty good intuition so i can see easily how much full of shit someone is. harris is shifty as fuck, he has an agenda in this. peterson is highly neurotic so he might not have an agenda but actually believe everything he says, including the idiotic shit like his opinions on group preference and internet anonymity. could have an agenda though :unsure: now look at someone like roger penrose. completely honest, sticks to evidence and only evidence, doesnt try to demean but actively understand the view of the person hes talking to, and the best thing, has an insanely high iq so dont expect to pull any demagoguery bullshit like in the pseudodebate mentioned above :wacko: also even though hes an atheist, his opinion agrees with the current research, that consciousness seems fundamental and cant be explained by the theories we have right now. funnily enough, his view also agrees with many religions out there, that we are basically put here in a world with certain rules, to learn something. and he isnt really alone. some great minds back at the start of 20th century (and people had a higher iq back then) thought the same, although back then the religion of scientism didnt exist so it was easier to be honest about personal beliefs :(
i have to note that there is an established relationship between atheism and societal collapse. now its not that easy to establish which is the cause and which is the consequence, perhaps they are even interconnected. but it does mean that if (((someone))) wanted to get rich, he would push atheism in the science circles in order to get it spread through the population. so there is a motive :wacko: the only thing you need to do is push something in the most prominent circles, and the midwits will follow the trend as they always do :wacko:
one of the funniest things I am remembering right now was a part of a debate william craig/hitchens.hitchens gave the bullchit line "its not a disbelief but a lack of belief" graig responded "why dont you just call it smatheism" the look on hitchens face lol
