Part 2 of the 4-part debate review. This covers the full first hour of the debate, in detail. The full debate can be viewed here: • Matt Dillahunty Vs @Mu...
Пікірлер: 764
@samlarson91207 ай бұрын
I've never been in a structured debate, so perhaps I'm misguided, but it seems like the moderator should've jumped in to remind Danny what the topic of the debate was. I don't think that would be unfair to Danny, I think not doing so is unfair to Matt and the audience.
@BigPapaMitchell7 ай бұрын
Modern day debate is a dumpster fire platform that likes to pretend it's a professional debate platform. They will literally put up anyone and they never really moderate debates.
@jmjw007 ай бұрын
I don't fault you at all, but it was held by Modern Day Debates. Notorious for dumpster fires and no moderation.
@GameTimeWhy7 ай бұрын
Yeah having a moderator that actually moderates the debate isn't anti-free speech despite what the debate bros keep saying. You need a moderator to keep the debate on topic otherwise you get garbage like this where one person shows up to debate the topic and the other person shows up to sermonize on something that is different than what was agreed upon.
@TestTestGo7 ай бұрын
It depends what the debate is for. Scholarly debate is to hash out the arguments and test their weaknesses. Entertainment debates are about creating a spectacle. Some people like watching acrimonious and chaotic arguments, so there is a market for that. That's what modern day debates caters to. If you don't find that entertaining, then don't watch debates there. It certainly won't be edifying. If Matt doesn't like debating without moderation he should find a different venue.
@JayMaverick7 ай бұрын
@@TestTestGosome of us seem to still believe that a debate is a debate. If you want to go watch a circus, do that.
@user-jk8pi9je2t7 ай бұрын
2:03:23 You asked about more debate reviews like this one, absolutely yes. This was great. Keep them coming 👍
@TriXteRPhillips7 ай бұрын
Agreed! This play-by-play style analysis is most helpful.
@MelanieiLynxHjorth7 ай бұрын
I very much agree with this as well.
@fartingduck53167 ай бұрын
I cancelled my subscription to Modern Day Debates over the lack of control the mod showed. it wasnt a debate it was an attack.
@user-yn5sk5ru5g7 ай бұрын
Mee too, no interested in supporting MDD if they dont fix their debates and dont moderate
@littlefurrow24377 ай бұрын
After that Andrew one... sheeshsus
@VeggiesOutFront5 ай бұрын
@littlefurrow2437 after the walk out with big papa fascist I unfollowed. I don't have time for content like that
@ossiedunstan44193 ай бұрын
That's all religion has !
@the-trustees2 ай бұрын
Good for you. MDD's declaration of things that are "juicy" should make it clear that their only care is about views and NOT reality.
@tyronnemoss7 ай бұрын
I’ve been following Matt since ‘The Atheist Experience’ was in the old format. I would literally pause the video and look up words or arguments Matt used during the calls😂. I’ve learned so much from this guy. The knowledge I’ve gained has made me more confident whenever god is brought up, especially being that I’m black and live in GA. Matt, thanks for what you do. ✌🏾
@rhondah15877 ай бұрын
I feel your plight of living in Georgia. I live in Louisiana, and things here are full of arrogant, know-it-all theists. Best wishes for the new year. Hang in there.
@blackzilian7 ай бұрын
Yup. Mixed gal here; with family roots in Oklahoma and Brazil. Black father from Oklahoma, afro-Brazilian/Sicilian Mom from Brazil [so obvi catholic], both born in the 50’s. The, struggle, was, real. 😥 My folks were never gross about it though. They definitely indoctrinated me but once I was around 11-12’ish, felt confident to let me decide whether or not to stick with it. Appreciated that I questioned everything; even though it was often difficult for them to answer said questions. All they wanted was for me to be a good person and do what’s right. My parents were the exception though. I kept quiet about my atheism, well into my 30’s. **Plot twist** We all converted to Mormonism in the late 90’s (against my will). They didn’t care whether I believed or not. They just wanted me to be apart of their baptism. I love them. I did it. No regrets because it’s meaningless to me. Also, just wanted to fuck around in that little pool they dunk us in. AND, got to roast TF out of my older bro. Couldn’t do anything about it because he was a missionary now… 😆 it was fantastic. 😑 AGAIN THOUGH! THE STRUGGLE!
@tyronnemoss7 ай бұрын
@@rhondah1587 According to the house speaker, Mike Johnson, Shreveport, Louisiana is the second most Bible believing city in the country. Hopefully you reside elsewhere. Thanks for the kind words and happy new years to you as well.
@tyronnemoss7 ай бұрын
@@blackzilian That’s a cool and interesting background, definitely wasn’t expecting the Mormonism conversion. Seems like you dodged a bullet from the way you expressed your parents not being fundamentalists, could have been a lot worse. My family would go to church on Sundays until I was about 7 or 8. I hated it! I remember as a young child doubting the existence of a god. The first time I saw someone catch the “Holy Ghost”, I cringed and thought to myself how stupid and over the top. Luckily my parents weren’t really religious. Actually, I think my dad is an atheist(we’ve never spoken about it) and my mom believes but she doesn’t attend church. Like your parents, I believe mine just wanted me to be a good person and I’m grateful I wasn’t indoctrinated. 😅
@rhondah15877 ай бұрын
@@tyronnemoss I live in Baton Rouge. Believe it or not, my area has a lot of liberal Democrats. Still outnumbered by religious nut bags though.
@rocketsfan61167 ай бұрын
Matt...first off, I was at this debate sitting in the second row and observed every second from an hour before the debate until long after it was over. You did a great job of not letting Daniel control and mislead the room. Despite being there in person, I HIGHLY appreciate this new format for debate review...getting to hear your opponents actual words, tone, etc really enhances your breakdowns.
@Andrea.1tree7 ай бұрын
I personally don’t consider this a debate because it was so one sided. The annoyance factor with Matt’s opponent was difficult to endure.
@agpym41727 ай бұрын
You are so right this isn’t a debate this is a first year theology student in their intro to philosophy class and Professor Dilahunty has to continually correct this student as every other person in the class groans as he continues to run his mouth believe he knows more than the instructor and this is deminstarted by how much Matt as to explain to him the basic concepts
@TheLostDarkly7 ай бұрын
He's insufferable.
@IllustriousCrocoduck7 ай бұрын
Modern Day debates are always like this. They let any yahoo have screen time.
@Aksarallah4 ай бұрын
it's hard to follow a guy who says being a cuck helps his marriage and goes on to say he's divorced
@loki66267 ай бұрын
Thanks Daniel. My TV stopped working and the repair guy is on holiday but now I realise I don't need his analytical thinking, I'll take the back off and use my far superior intuition. If that doesn't work I'll pray.
@ianchisholm57567 ай бұрын
Thank you for taking the time to do these debate analyses: looking back over how an argument develops (or goes off the rails) is a very useful way to develop critical thinking skills.
@jmjw007 ай бұрын
I always appreciated the earliest debate reviews you did where you are showing clips and then responding directly. I don't care that it may be longer, from a viewer perspective. I fully understand there may be increased time and effort on your part and wouldn't fault you for trying to make the most use of your personal time. I just think reviews are so much more effective and educational with a clip of the context accompanying the review. On my end, it means nothing if that makes a 30 minute review sans context, turn into two hours.
@gungan78597 ай бұрын
I similarly prefer this format. When Matt posts a debate review I try to watch the entire debate beforehand, but it's hard to recall some of the details that he addresses. This format solves that problem.
@patriklindholm75767 ай бұрын
Yes indeed and agreed. The saddening part is that Matt actually reiterates and does the effort to perhaps open up and clarify what he actually already has stated during the discussion and some still refuse to understand.
@bootskanchelsis33377 ай бұрын
Daniel is an insufferable fool.
@bigryan94477 ай бұрын
There really is something profoundly stupid about a man raging against progress from behind 2 laptops
@SleepyMatt-zzz6 ай бұрын
Wonder why he even needed two laptops.
@IrieFiery5 ай бұрын
@@SleepyMatt-zzz One for each brain cell
@user-jk8pi9je2t7 ай бұрын
Matt, this has to be the BEST debate review of yours that i have seen. Please continue with them, i think it is very informative.
@stevenpinkston62607 ай бұрын
[Currently at the beginning of this video] I have a degree in physics, and a couple of my physics professors in college talked about 'training our intuition' about how certain things worked, posing questions without much information aside from our understanding of the underlying mechanics. 'Intuition,' in my training, is about exposure and understanding of underlying principals, NOT some universal understanding given from on-high. So in that way, one's 'intuition' is only as good as one's education and experience. Which...I suppose tells us something about this guy's reliance upon intuition in his argument.
@rdizzy17 ай бұрын
Yes, there is very very little that would be categorized as true inherent intuition. If you took a baby and raised it in a large fenced in area, with absolutely no human contact and absolutely no education until age 18, and then questioned them about various supposedly "intuitive" things. 99% of these things would not be intuitive to this individual. Very similar to the idea of "common sense", extremely subjective.
@stevenpinkston62607 ай бұрын
@@rdizzy1 Exactly. So many of the things the debater listed as 'intuition,' I was like, 'we *could* demonstrate with empirical evidence that those are a product of social training, like counting--one of the first things an infant is taught--and not inherently understood. But the experiments needed to do it would be highly unethical.'
@Halloween_19857 ай бұрын
This is an excellent format for debate reviews, it's great getting to see the debate in real time with your commentary, great new format!
@Vorcha29117 ай бұрын
I enjoyed the extended breakdown.
@Origin_unkn0wn7 ай бұрын
I love this review style it lets us see the debate and get Matt's thought process through the whole thing. Hopefully he keeps this style
@bilboswaggins38417 ай бұрын
As someone who grew up muslim, I dont blame anyone if they chose to become a total islamophobe after a conversation with danny pikachu
@kejialabi7 ай бұрын
This is a great format, Matt! Please continue! 🎉
@Antonium3527 ай бұрын
I agree!
@colliedev65687 ай бұрын
Love this style Matt! Would love to see more videos like this 👍
@nickelus92257 ай бұрын
This style of running the video and pausing to make comments on it is great. Yes, do this more!
@010zach7 ай бұрын
Thanks for making this. These reviews are appreciated.
@Scarletpooky7 ай бұрын
I love these debate reviews. I learn more from them than the debates themselves which often just have me raging at the screen.
@MrMxxt7 ай бұрын
Matt I really love this long version, reaction style review of your debates! Definitely do more like this in the future!
@IslesKin-gg2do7 ай бұрын
Keep up the good work Matt, we love it!!
@ShutUpWesley7 ай бұрын
We ? Is that a royal we, or are you a group of people Watching, and decided to leave a comment as a collective. Or are you multiple people inside one body. I need to know.🤔
@Acehamster7 ай бұрын
We love it too
@Gradgar7 ай бұрын
"We love it also." ~GradBorg Collective
@RoozleDoozle-92107 ай бұрын
@@ShutUpWesleysystem people are very interesting
@andrewfairborn67627 ай бұрын
@@ShutUpWesleywe love this style of video, great work from Matt even if he’s an American.
@joshuaj7917 ай бұрын
This format of review is very informative for me, and I enjoy long form stuff anyway! Would love to see more. I’m actually stunned at how confused and distorted Daniel’s understanding of the world is. Thanks for breaking it all down for us.
@feasted29417 ай бұрын
YES!!! Do THIS style all the time!!!
@bigryan94477 ай бұрын
This format is really nice. I'm sure it's a ton of work but I definitely appreciate it
@kapa16117 ай бұрын
i like this format where you show the video 👍👍 keep up the great work
@joshuam48357 ай бұрын
I prefer this debate review style, Matt. More of this, please.
@rachelfey7 ай бұрын
"My argument can't stand up to analysis, therefore analysis is bad."
@bobunyun7 ай бұрын
Daniel is exhausting. It's good to see a full breakdown of the debate cutting through his constant diversions and dishonesty. He said nothing substantive and his whole position, based on his statements later in the debate (apologies for jumping ahead), demonstrate that he doesn't even care if Islam is true, he just wants a religion (any religion, doesn't matter which) to use as a cudgel to enforce an ultra conservative, repressive society on everyone. I'm looking forward to Matt tackling the bit where Daniel asserts that secular humanism is responsible for the gulf war.
@simonkoster7 ай бұрын
As long as you are willing and able to put the necessary (and considerable) effort into it, I prefer this longer review style. But I'll take whatever you put up.
@Angel-Kitten7 ай бұрын
Thank you, Matt, for this good 2-hour-long New Year's gift. I liked the videos in the format you did before, and I'll be happy to listen to them in this format as well.
@no_sht_sherlock46637 ай бұрын
Terrific video and analysis! ✌️ Please keep this format when plausible 👏👏👏
@sigridm.hughes7 ай бұрын
Yes, I enjoy this style of breaking down the debate with your commentary and explication. Looking forward to part 3.
@ChardC117 ай бұрын
I appreciate the long format review and content. The MDD debate format is extremely frustrating (not expecting any surprises there) as a listener, when unmoderated off-topic blithering swamps the content, so the clarification and reactions are satisfying. Keep doing what you're doing and I look forward to your crew providing a reasonable alternate platform for debates in whatever form they take.
@Intrepidthegenuine7 ай бұрын
I prefer this style of review because it helps me remember who the person was that you debated and what they said. Also it covers you against false accusations of you saying something about a person you debated that wasnt true. I also like that it can give you a chance to expand upon something you said in the debate.
@Kimberly.3907 ай бұрын
This format is so much better than not having the clips
@ryanbaker45827 ай бұрын
Oh wow, a 2 hour video! I am excited for this one!
@Sweeti9247 ай бұрын
Happy new year everyone ❤😍🥰😊💕💗
@23498cna7 ай бұрын
Same to you buddy🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉. To whoever reads this: may your wishes come true and mine too 😃😃😃😃
@littlefurrow24377 ай бұрын
Merriness back at ya.... here's a joke: How do geeks ascertain if they are at a fun party? Mirthematics!
@ms.blackfire29277 ай бұрын
yey Happy New Year🎆🎆🎉🎉🍾🍾🎇🎇🥂🥂
@mr.c24857 ай бұрын
We can only hope. Of course….2023 didn’t set the bar very high. 🎉😢
@deeccummings74817 ай бұрын
Matt, I truly do not blame you for walking away from Modern Day Debates. Guests such as your opponent here demonstrate (to my eyes) their preference for mere spectacle than reasoned discussion.
@TR-zf6io7 ай бұрын
I’ve been watching your content for MANY years and I absolutely LOVED this long form debate analysis for opponents who do not debate in good faith like this.
@iancrewe82307 ай бұрын
Another plus one vote for the debate reviews with clips. However echoing what an earlier commenter has said, completely understandable that the time and effort it takes to make this kind of vid vs your other debate reviews may not be desirable for you. Would choose the shorter vids over no vids, thats for sure.
@LOH__7 ай бұрын
Loved this format sooo much. Watching along and having each point dissected is so helpful and interesting.
@usef0997 ай бұрын
Finally we have the part 2!!
@marcpatton52077 ай бұрын
You have my sincerest applause for not walking out of that debate. His level of intellectual dishonesty and smugness is making me angry two screens removed. I can't imagine how you sat through that in person.
@nietzschescodes7 ай бұрын
I find that close analysis quite interesting. I like that format.
@simonbee6317 ай бұрын
You asked about more debate reviews like this one, absolutely yes. This was great. Keep them coming i liked this format especially after watching some of original debate .
@littlefurrow24377 ай бұрын
Great breakdown format. Cant wait for the other parts.
@waltjames4077 ай бұрын
Speeding it up 25% makes Daniel 25% more infuriating. It's the Ben Shapiro Effect.
@RebeccaCoatsMD7 ай бұрын
Also, addressing each point is incredibly valuable. I hope you can find the time and energy to finish the rest of the review. We really appreciate it.
@jonherrin7 ай бұрын
I'm sorry to be late commenting, but I LOVE the extended review format. I like the deep dives and the detailed explanations of what happened and why. As a side note, Matt at 1.5 speed is INTENSE! 😊
@markallen80227 ай бұрын
Thanks for the blow by blow on this debate. I highly recommend you continue to do debate reviews like this as it shows the holes in their debate in real time. Probably takes you a lot longer but your viewers will thank you over and over.
@markallen80227 ай бұрын
I also like that you sped Daniel up to 1.25 speed. I usually listen on 1.25 so that puts Daniel up to faster which is all the time I really want to hear his BS. It also is great for telling when Matt is talking during the debate (at a faster speed) verses when you (Matt) are going through it later at regular speed.
@INSOLIASTUDIOSJIMM7 ай бұрын
I like this format, Matt. I like hearing your thoughts as the debate is going on. Thank you for this.
@HaizeyWings7 ай бұрын
I love this type of review, having the examples of parts of the debate that you're breaking down makes everything so clear.
@Sweeti9247 ай бұрын
Yes we like this way at least we can see what the opposition is saying rather than just summarizing
@Grimmibo7 ай бұрын
Hey Matt - I think that this form of debate review is awesome! Definitely more engaging and interesting to watch as a viewer, and laying out the actual debate video for analysis is much clearer. Cheers!
@g.m.24277 ай бұрын
Hats of for your patience
@botlovingbeard67087 ай бұрын
For what it's worth, I much more enjoy the long review format addressing points from the video. I feel it adds to clarification and saves having to rewatch a long debate and search for the specific points addressed to refer to.
@navanafti7 ай бұрын
I'm a fan of this format where you show the debate and then comment and expand on it, especially since I haven't rewatched the debate since it was originally posted.
@jacksonflintstone4447 ай бұрын
I like the new format. Long time fan too love your work mate
@coachfrankie11127 ай бұрын
I love this breakdown of your debates Matt. Its a lot but well worth it. Thank you
@bigbanshi79037 ай бұрын
Really appreciate these breakdowns Matt, it allows people to consider and better understand the ideas and rebuttals you have put forward, without these clowns shouting over you.
@maul17687 ай бұрын
I absolutely prefer this debate review format. Especially when the debate you are speaking about happened quite a long time ago.
@glenngibson92017 ай бұрын
I'm only 14 minutes in but I need to sleep. Looking forward to watching the rest. Happy New Year, Matt!
@TheAmericanCthulhu7 ай бұрын
I really enjoy this style. Thanks for doing them!
@Kennetten7 ай бұрын
This format is really interesting! I learn a lot more, so please keep it up! 😊👍
@Big-Papa-Smurf6 ай бұрын
"The theist is always at a disadvantage if he has to mold his arguments to satisfy a mind that's primed to reject anything that's not empirical" - Daniel Haqiqatjou Well said, Daniel. Let's prime more minds to be skeptical and committed to relying on empirical evidence when assessing extraordinary claims.
@zecuse7 ай бұрын
This method of review brings the context of the debate into your review as you're giving it. It lets those that don't want to support the channel for the various things that have happened on it see the context. It also reminds those that saw the debate live without having to rewatch it and therefore contribute to the channel more they want to. Mind you, I have a bias for liking this debunking style of presentation (Viced Rhino being one of my favorite channels). I see this only as a supplement to your usual style of review seeing as removing the video playback pretty much doesn't change the substance at all (obviously some minor sentence transitions would need slight tweaking).
@IllustriousCrocoduck7 ай бұрын
This is wild. Daniel is portraying analytic thinking as some plague that a dominating society forcefully applies to other people. So oppressive! That's a new one.
@kitty_love26857 ай бұрын
I absolutely loved this debate review. Thank you Matt for taking the time.
@LarryMarvin7 ай бұрын
I love this format! It helped me to understand your thought processes. Thank you.
@cheesburgr7 ай бұрын
I figure what you've been doing works well in most cases, but this one is a special occasion. I prefer this method (re-watch, pause, comment) for an event as awful as this one. There have been multiple debate reviews that I felt I truly didn't need to have seen the debate (which I had seen before the review).
@SmokeyEternal7 ай бұрын
The long anticipated video! Can't wait!
@XPISigmaArt7 ай бұрын
It still boggles my mind how adults can defend fairy tails made up by ancient people that had no idea how the world worked at the time. Thanks Matt, it's great seeing these vids from you!
@Fenkibbs4 ай бұрын
Yet the same people advocate for gender ideology when its way absurd than any fairy tale ever written. At least the fairy tales are interesting
@philm77587 ай бұрын
Thank you for breaking this debate up and adding commentary. I did not and would not have watched the debate, as I find most debates of little value. Your analysis of the debate, however, I find invaluable. Keep up the great work!
@MooncubedesignAu7 ай бұрын
This debate deserved the deep dive method and worked really well. Awesome stuff ✌️
@Mia-ep4zu7 ай бұрын
Very interesting and very clerifying! I actually like yout reviews better than the actual debates.
@codbug7 ай бұрын
I like this new format. Despite it being longer, it's much more useful to someone like me who may not have time to seek out and watch all the debates on different platforms/channels, but am interested in seeing the analyses on this channel. It's a good way to kill two birds with one stone. Long format stuff isn't necessarily bad either when you need something to listen to in the background.
@davinchat27 ай бұрын
I really enjoyed the long form breakdown. Would love to see more like it
@zeroglitch13107 ай бұрын
Absolutely want more of these long form reviews. Love them. It’s interesting to see your thoughts on specific points. I’ve wondered that before with things like your Ray Comfort “Debate”, or your Sye Ten Bruggencate and Matt clips vs. Matt Dillahunty debate.
@lesterclarke837 ай бұрын
Thank you Matt for an excellent master class , in how use critical thinking, especially in of irrational resistance.
@BlairOutLoud7 ай бұрын
Although it was tough to get through, I enjoyed this long form analysis because you were able to discuss so many facets of epistemology and foundations of logic. I don’t know how you didn’t get sick of answering the same question over and over in the debate and then having to explain it over and over in the review. But kudos for that.
@RoozleDoozle-92107 ай бұрын
Unlike some people I appreciate the wait from part one to part two, it deserves a lot of time and care put into it to properly examine 💜💜💜
@JoePUNK_Was_Here7 ай бұрын
Thank you for this. Love it
@glenhill98847 ай бұрын
Kudos to you, Matt, for withstanding these types of people. What I've seen from many of your debates is essentially two lines of attack they take. 1. They bring up some philosophical mumbo jumbo instead of presenting evidence. 2. They do what this guy did and try to poison the well on science instead of presenting evidence. If people believe and come to a debate that asks them to PRESENT EVIDENCE, the moment that it is clear they don't do that is the moment the moderator should step in and shut things down. I applaud you walking out of other debates in those instances, but James the moderator is a weakling and useless.
@ms.blackfire29277 ай бұрын
yeah there's no reason to entertain idiots and people who just waste time especially this height here of nutjob like his whole argument (the only kind of one he had) is "it is coded into DNA believing in a god" and I am living proof that it is false because I grew up without religion, I never knew of religion or spiritual stuff or the After Life until I was 10 years old? when I learned it in school in history lessons about North mythology and the North pantheon in my opinion his whole argument is a load of b*******! because he clearly does not know of countries where religion is almost gone together with Spiritual beliefs, just take any child from those countries and ask them "is there god?" or "do you know what God is?" and boom! he's proven false
@NewNecro7 ай бұрын
I don't watch every debate that's on MDD but 80% of those I've seen feel disingenuous under guise of impartiality. Without enforcing any methodology at all it will always devolve into someone saying "nuh-uh" for the duration of the debate and that's it. I feel strongly that this lax moderation is sole reason why 'certain' Muslims, Creationists, Flerfs even show up on that platform at all. And they are also the few ones willing to actually debate on their position within those topics.
@skateboardingjesus40067 ай бұрын
This format of breaking down the debate points is excellent and affords the extra elaboration they needed. Commiserations on having to suffer the protracted ignorance of your Gobshite interlocutor in this instance, which is par for the course with Haquacqanchew. Sending a big happy new year to you and yours Matt, from Dublin, Ireland 👍.
@linknlag7 ай бұрын
On the topic of this vs shorter format debate reviews Pros: - More in-depth analysis. You naturally have more to say when going through the debate with us as opposed to going off of memory or notes, some of which is occurring to you for the first time meaning we get more reflection over all. - The subject of your comments is paired in time with the comments themselves. Rather than taking on faith your description (or interpretation) of the events or having to watch the debate separately, we can immediately see what in the debate prompted your comment. - The structure of the review matches the structure of the debate. This may be a minor pro that does not affect everyone, but it does help me associate the comment with the moment when the debate is reviewed chronologically. I don't remember any instances of you jumping wildly around in time when reviewing debates in the past, certainly not that caused me any issue in following the review, but I do appreciate the extra enforcement of structure in this format. Cons: - More Pikachu (and the health risks associated with it) - It's more effort for you to watch it once to take notes and a second time with us during the review Overall, I think this format offers better explanatory power and more numerous and effective instances of teaching, but I can't in good conscious request that you subject yourself and the rest of us to more headaches. If you decide of your own volition to continue in this format, you have my support.
@MagiaErebea17 ай бұрын
I really enjoy this type of commentary, it helps better understand your positions
@Jonathanh19867 ай бұрын
I like the reviews more than the debates. Mostly because I watch them to try and educate myself on understanding arguments better. Hearing you explain certain aspects of the debates even when clarifying your own statements makes it helpful for me in the future, not even for just "god" debates but others too. Thanks Matt. Keep fighting the good fight. ❤❤
@CatDaddyGuitar7 ай бұрын
He wasn't there to debate. He was there to argue.
@NoStringsAttachedPrd7 ай бұрын
So many "debates" nowadays are better described as live Twitter arguments with an admission fee. Looking at MDD
@rdizzy17 ай бұрын
Not surprised, most internet debates are arguments. Especially on that platform. Moderators do not moderate there, extremely little structure to be found.
@TheMagev7 ай бұрын
I like the content please keep it coming in this form. It helps me understand my own thoughts better than just the initial debate being had that often leaves me lacking because of previous lack of education on the topic. This fills in those gaps very pleasantly.
@thenerktwins7 ай бұрын
YES- I like this format of video, a lot
@sbushido55477 ай бұрын
I have no idea why they think it's a good idea to argue from a position that "we should lower the bar of evidence required to accept these claims!" That's...like...the *_*opposite*_* of what you should be saying if you're talking to/about people who are already skeptical of what you're selling. Just in his opening statement he keeps saying that certain beliefs/ideas are "universally shared" as if that's not anything more than a bald-faced assertion. One that's probably trivially easy to dismiss if he actually tried to give specifics. Because at that point all you'd have to do is point to one culture that *_*didn't*_* hold to those ideas and...there goes that.
@Leith_Crowther7 ай бұрын
It’s not hard to figure out why they want to lower the bar: if they don’t their favorite idea doesn’t pass. Just ask Low Bar Bill.
@Randy.Bobandy7 ай бұрын
“I’ve watched people sleep” - Matt Dillahunty.
@igap77077 ай бұрын
"I skipped it so you don't have to spend two hours here" - proceeds to record two hour video :D Great content Matt! I've learned a lot from you and this content is exactly what I'm looking for!
@chgoyugo2 ай бұрын
I loved the play by play analysis, Matt, especially when your opponent is “Gish-ing” all over himself. Demonstrating each fallacy not only helps to identify when someone I am debating commits that error, but also helps in preventing me from commiting that same error. In the last 15 years, your words have helped me tremendously in adopting a more skeptical approach to understanding the world and my life is demonstrably better for them. My vote is for the longer format and a sincere thanks for all of your efforts.
@slaugmromni67437 ай бұрын
I love when apologists complain that they can't defend their positions in accordance with the best standards of evidence and reasoning, and then act like this is a grave injustice foisted upon them. "Well _of course_ I can't provide evidence, and how dare you ask me for such!!" It would be like a high school basketball team playing the Denver Nuggets and complaining when the Nuggets insist that points count only when the ball goes through the rim. "Well _of course_ we can't score if we actually have to put the ball _through_ the rim, and how dare you as us for such!!" The apologist is basically challenging the atheist to a basketball game and demanding to be rewarded points just for _attempting_ a shot.
@ronalddepesa62217 ай бұрын
Ironically Daniel was using analytic "thinking" to push for his intuition argument. Lol
@mosotheshowstarta71837 ай бұрын
So true. He debunked himself w/o realizing it. 😂 Daniel is an interesting character, he is not dumb, yet in order to justify his belief he has to abandon his intelligence and tap dance around logic and reason. My intuition tells me he is either playing dumb to get secondary gain from his social media platform, or he is a true believer desperately trying to make sense out of nonsense. Either way I'm right, according to Daniel, bc I'm using intuition.
@ronalddepesa62217 ай бұрын
@@mosotheshowstarta7183 Bingo. Another thing after years of studying the 'Internet' version of Presuositional / TAG argument and comparison contrast with teachings of Van Til, Clark and the complete Bahnsen 'Defending the Faith' series I can confidently say Daniel is following the same script here in this debate. He won't defend his position but instead shift to a world view comparison and use it to attack Matt's epistemology. Un-fn- believable
@theamazinghaole23847 ай бұрын
Daniel is incredible dishonest. I couldn't stand how he argued Matt can't prove harming someone is wrong when in a previous debate he was provided multiple studies that child marriage is harmful to the child and in the same debate kept saying there is no evidence that its harmful. Pure dishonesty.
@Tilten7 ай бұрын
I find the debate analysis much more interesting than the debate itself. 😊