Matt Dillahunty debate: Source of Morality
Offline Matt has stand alone stuff about this topic both in podcast and in their weekly show, but this is the first formal debate he has done on the topic.
A link to all the different Atheist Community of Austin stuff:
http://www.atheist-experience.com/ Main weekly public access show location
http://www.atheist-experience.com/archive/ Series archive
http://www.nonprophetsradio.com/ Regular podcast
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Main_Page Anti-apologetics wiki created by the group
http://atheistexperience.blogspot.com/ Blog
Part 1 below, see this site for the whole batch or just go to youtube. http://atheistexperience.blogspot.com/2010/11/source-of-human-morality-debate-videos.html
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
- Login to post comments
Have I ever mentioned that I have a man crush on Matt? Around 2:00 in part 2 he gets me all gooshy
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
Yeah, I like Matt. He's a good spokesperson for atheism as well as being an entertaining host. Actually I like all of the hosts of the Atheist Experience, they all bring their own individual perspective while still maintaining quality counterarguments against theist's claims.
Yeah, didn't he do a lecture on "the superiority of secular morality" ?
Haven't seen this in debate form yet, so thanks for posting.
So....how long before the other guy Godwins this thing ?
Rofl, it doesn't take long. In his closing he says secular morality leads to concentration camps and the crowd boos a bit and someone shouts "Godwin!" at him and Matt motions for the crowd to calm down. Matt actually gets pretty pissed about it and takes him to task with a question in the Q&A.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
Signature ? How ?
Are you serious? Did you even listen to Dillahunty's nonsense? I'm pretty much an atheist and I could listen to Hitchens all day and all night, but this guy is a moron. The Christian debater, whoever he is, ran rings around him. Dillahunty didn't even know how to respond to the simplest comments he made. Pathetic, seriously.
*shrug*
I guess I am crazy, lol.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
Sorry, Mel, I think I was a little harsh in my comment. I didn't mean to be obnoxious. I guess I'm spoiled by watching Hitchens debate people. He has this uncanny ability to make anyone who counters him look like a fool in two minutes flat. I just didn't think this guy represented the atheist position with the savvy it deserves.
Part of the problem, and I don't *think* I'm just rationalizing this, is the length of the debate. With a debate this short you had two opening statements and two short rebuttals and that's it. So with that, two things. 1) Either you debunk or you represent your own position and either way you have to pick and choose. 1) The thing wasn't about atheism vs. theism, it was supposed to be specifically about morality.
Having said that, I'm more combative that Matt was...in his closing he chose to push his own message, I think I would have attacked the preacher about his entire philosophy being based on the equation that emotion=truth. That is a pretty easy thing to tear apart.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
I love watching Hitchens debate.
“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno