ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Atheist Debates - Debate Review vs Haqiqatjou Part 3
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ม.ค. 2024
- Part 3 of the 4-part debate review. This covers the second hour of the debate, in detail.
The full debate can be viewed here: • Matt Dillahunty Vs @Mu...
Throughout history the tip of the sword has been highly compelling. It has been the most effective way of spreading religions.
Could you imagine if this claimed Jesus or the claimed Prophet, Muhammad had a sword in the public streets today? They'd be shot down within seconds.
Sword then indoctrination
Religion cannot survive unless one of two, perhaps both, elements are in place. Threats (direct or intimations of damnation) and early childhood brainwashing to believe mythology is real. Without these, the fantasy of religion evaporates into the dustbin of history.
A fathers belt can be compelling. It doesn't make him or his questionable parenting good, true, right or beneficial. And so goes for Islam, being as compelling as any tyrant or abuser could be.
Hitting children causes brain damage and PTSD
Umbrella? RE fan? 😮
ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM FTW
That’s right
@@CAPSLOCKPUNDITwhat the hell does that mean?
Though I am less than two minutes in, here is my response: I would ALWAYS rather have two hours of Matt systematically disemboweling his weaker opponents than thirty minutes. Always.
If you want to get infernal, you can watch the clip over and over and over again ... and the disemboweling is repeated over and over and over again.
Agreed. Twist, push, lacerate. And rinse and repeat. DH has some really unpleasant, vile, medieval beliefs. And this was what he was willing to say publically. Imagine what he says behind closed doors. 😮
He is acting exactly as Quran has ordered him to ( verses 6 and 7 in chapter Bayenah , which says that muslims are the best of creatures and non muslims are the worst of the creatures.). That is why Haqiqatjou is so rude in all of his conversations and debates with non muslims. I am an former muslim and I know exactly how he sees Matt.
To him Matt ( and all non-muslims) are worse than animals ( exactly as Quran says : non-muslims are worse than cows, sheep and etc ) @@mhoppy6639
The bottom line is that for the vast majority -- perhaps as many as 98% of all religious people -- the religion they find the most compelling is the one they were born and raised in (family and/or community).
The fact there are so few actual religious conversions (i.e. from one religion to another as an adult) by comparison _is_ compelling evidence that no religion is compelling enough to overcome basic childhood indoctrination in another faith. Kind of sad, in a way.
Thanks for your work Matt
When I read that Daniel used "Islam is compelling" I assumed he meant emotionally compelling, and expected Matt to point out that that's entirely subjective. But no, it's just about popularity, which is even more pathetic. The popularity of a religion like Islam or Christianity is due to military power and birth rates, nothing more.
And colonialism, thats a huge reason the religions spread
@@drhexagonapus That fits under military power.
Islam is *compulsory not compelling.
@@pansepot1490 I'm sure, many, if not most, Muslims would indeed claim it to be emotionally/mentally compelling. But they'd be wrong; it's just indoctrination.
Daniel is one of the worst humans i have ever had the displeasure of meeting.
tell us more!
As a former Muslim, listening to apologists like Haqiqatjou makes me reflect on my own past as a practicing Muslim. For many years, I staunchly defended Islamic teachings, unknowingly supporting immoral concepts such as slavery, child marriage, and the execution of apostates. At that time, I believed unquestioningly in the righteousness of these teachings, considering them to be divine commands from Allah.
I now feel deep shame for my previous blindness and unquestioning acceptance. How did this happen? The answer lies in the way we were raised-taught to believe that questioning Islamic teachings was a greater sin than polytheism itself. The fear of being labelled an apostate discouraged any critical examination of the teachings, creating an environment where conformity was valued over inquiry.
Upon initiating my own research, it took me a mere five days to renounce Islam, despite decades of devout practice. My commitment to Islam was so profound that I had learned Arabic as my third language to comprehend the Quran. By the age of 17, I was teaching Tajweed, the correct recitation of the Quran.
An intriguing aspect of my journey was that, despite understanding the true meaning of Quranic verses, I failed to recognize the ethical issues within passages related to slavery, raping prisoners of wars, child marriage, and the punishment of apostates.
How could I have been so blind? One of the answers, which I believe also applies to Haqiqatjou, is twofold: first, the fixation on the promised rewards in the afterlife, particularly for young Muslims who were sexually inclined, played a role. Second, the constant exposure to terrifying descriptions of hell in the Quran instilled deep-seated fear from an early age, discouraging doubt and critical thinking. This fear compelled many of us to accept the teachings without question, perpetuating a cycle of conformity and stifling intellectual exploration.
The debate was overall weak from Daniel's side. I felt that your rational and factual approach adequately ridiculed his dogmatic assertions. I agree this middle section was the least interesting in that 'compelling' appears to be a thinly veiled attempt to use the argument ad populum. Keep up the good work!
"overall weak from Daniel's side" is the understatement of the year.
Daniel's side was a FUBAR clusterf@ck.
I really enjoyed the two hour video you produced the other day, thank you.
Although my head still hurts from part 2 the other day, I think I can take this!🤗 I got a bottle of good wine, and I am not going to let the insanity of Haqiqatjou (🤧GESUNDHEIT) get to me!😎
I know I shouldn’t chuckle at people’s names but this is just too good not to like and he is so awful that he deserves all the opprobrium that we can throw at him. Great job Bob-of-Zoid! Love it. 🎉😂
Yeah, it's like clicking on an episode of Black Mirror, I have to take a deep breath and go "ok, I can handle this" first! Daniel Ha-Pikachu.
@@matthewscott7198 I watched the debate, but I was smart enough to wear proper certified facepalm protection!😂
I prefer the videos where I don't have to see or hear Daniel Pikachu.
Pikachu doesn't deserve that...
I love these breakdowns. Thank you 🏆
I didn't watch the debate, but hearing this recap has me thinking: "So his entire argument was basically a reskinned argumentum ad populem. Yup, definitely a waste of time."
Now watch Matt partake in 10 more useless wastes of time that get no one anywhere, he'll never debate a jew on zionism, or a racist pagan on their Gods.
Which is funny since an argumentum Ad Populum actually contradicts what Islam teaches about creation and the history of religions.
Thanks so much, Matt!
Gotta Catch ‘Em All Matt! 😁
I'm in the process of finishing listening to the debate, it's been painful. But I have to come here to comment. Matt, I love you...long time fan. But by any definition I've ever heard, you are not a Millennial lol. You are absolutely Gen X.
Update: Just got to the part of the Q&A where Matt corrects himself 😂
20:25: came to think of someone bragging about taking the fourth place in a competition with four entries.
That's the problem. You harp rightfully on the truthfulness of a religion but Theists don't care about it's truth just if it's "compelling" for the people they want in their In-Group.
I always wonder, with characters like Daniel, if they believe any of the nonsense they spew. Danny seems intelligent enough to know better which leads me to think that he's saying all of these things to become a larger figure in Islam or get a book deal or something.
I think religious fundamentalists like Daniel really believe the bs they spew. But I understand the cynicism that he's faking it.
Never underestimate the power of people to be stupid.
Matt, could you increase the volume on these? I have a hard time hearing you unless I'm sitting right at the computer.
Thanks!
Equivocation fallacy: the two definitions of "compelling".
1. to physically force i.e. "He compelled me to stand up," vs.
2. to convince by unimpeachable evidence, i.e. "I found his arguments compelling."
I'm glad Matt spotted this quickly. Islam (like Christianity) often compels adherence through brainwashing and the threat of ostracism or violence, but its supernatural claims are not rationally compelling.
How many actually believe and how many say they believe on fear of death if they say they don't or out of losing friends and family
Or that they genuinely don't know anything else. Or that it was simply the first idea they were exposed to and immersed in and thus are the most comfortable with and knowledgeable of.
This series could have been numbered Part 0, Part 1, 2, 3 to be less confusing. Good content regardless
The power of compelling compels you
Hey Matt! I'm assuming you've already recorded all the parts but if you haven't please check out the clips he himself has posted on his channel and maybe even include them on your review! To me it's the clearest proof of how full of crap someone is when they're so terrified of showing the entire discourse
I'm assuming youtube's gonna auto-delete or hold my comment if I link something so I'll do a separate comment. Check out the reply comment
Here's one of them: th-cam.com/users/shortsAhWXtgQBLIU there's two more of them on his own channel I think, they mostly like to milk the fact that you (Lost it) during the debate even though all you did was.. walk up to him after being asked to? idk
Screenshot taken just to see if youtube deletes your link.
@@redmed10 Hah no it won't happen then!
The automated system would do it instantly if it was gonna do it
The one thing popular religions, historically, have had and do have in common is the threat of the consequences of leaving or of no longer believing the tenets of their respective dogma. There is an inherent loss of freedom through fear of retaliation; if they got rid of this, what became of them would definitely be better than what we have and have had. Islam is famous for their punishments for those who depart or even think about questioning Mohammad and their texts.
I'm back! And I love you all! ❤
Finally, some compelling evidence... Thank you, Jeezus!
@@EnjoyPAEntry to heaven granted 🙏
*Set Up For Failure ?*
Why did Allah allow Christianity to become fully entrenched in the ancient world,
before giving Muhammad his _last and truest message ?_
_Why not just give it to Moses instead ?_
I thought the claim was that God did give the true message to Moses, but man had changed/corrupted it since then, and God was correcting them?
Probably due to free will or god's mysterious ways or some other bs. Must be like that because god is all-knowing 😂
@@kevinshort3943 If that were true, then how do we know that Mohammad's message was not corrupted as well ?
_If it could happen to Moses's message,_ (and God/Allah could not prevent it), then Mohammad's message could also have been corrupted.
@@woutermortier2771 This has always been the problem.
The supposedly _most important messages_ must be taken on "faith" from the mouths of men.
And the list of men that claim to _speak for God,_ are endless. (yawn)
@@moodyrick8503
They will probably claim something along the lines of the Koran is a direct copy of the original, and they didn't mess with it like the Christian did at Nicaea.
But who's to say it wasn't just all made up in the first place anyway?
I was there for this debate, loved seen both Matt and Aaron, but the actual debate was meh, Danial was delusional and there was not much gain besides seen how pathetic he was. Hell, he got owned by a 12 year old.
His wife?
😅
@@BassByTheBay huh?
@@plbpardo "He got owned by a 12-year-old."
You know Daniel's stance on child brides?
@@BassByTheBayToo old
@@locococo7362 😄
I do I not find Islam to be compelling at all.
There. I win!
You're a really good role model. Thanks, man. If we could get more Matts and less Andrew Tate. The toxic masculinity in the world is vile and sad.
Religion in general needs to be done away with, but Daniel really makes me want to start with Islam.
average j3w gay lover
I couldn't finish this debate. Reminded me too much of the sye debate, only "more" dishonest? If that's possible? What hurt mor was hearing him be able to spin you up. His childish arguments and mocking attitude, just made my skin crawl. Love yah Matt, go navy!
I think I might actually like this short form better. Sometimes it's hard to stomach the other debater.
Hard to listen to Daniel so much in the last one.
Rather than Muhammed or Jesus, shouldn't the most influential person be Abraham? You know, *the guy who inspired both them and all three major monotheistic religion share his name?*
Hey, at least there's some contemporary evidence Muhammad once actually existed, better than the other two.
I wish someone could force Daniel to sit through Matt’s reviews. Even they did I doubt Daniel has the ability to even listen.
prologue, part one and part two!
I hit Fallacy Bingo 2000 times
Haqiqatjou!
Gesundheit!
Anyone who conflates "compelling" with "compelled" has lost their argument.
What you said about the lottery isn't necessarily true. There are many lotteries that never become +EV ever, assuming all players play using perfect game theory (i.e., if they can in no way communicate with the other players, they perfectly randomize their number choices). There are a lot of lotteries that do, but most of the popular ones effectively never actually become beatable, especially because taxes are a very real part of the cost of winning that are not reimbursed to the losers.
A lottery ticket isn't a good investment even if the payout is higher than the odds, because more than one person can win, and you have no idea how many people could possibly win. So unless you're somehow taking that into account, your comment about the lottery was incorrect.
I’m watching these because I appreciate the work you do, Matt. But I can’t stand Daniel. I don’t know how you spent more than 15 minutes speaking with him
Your love for sugar is because it's a fallen world.
LoL
All I can really say whatever group or whatever person organized this event shouldn't be worked with and given legitimacy because the format is god awful without a moderator and they are clearly more interested in WWE style train wrecks than real debates. Daniel was off topic nearly the entire time.
Do you have any updates on when part four might come out? I'm waiting with bated breath
Probably next month
🙏
21:50 to 23:30 It's a man's world😢
Most religions survive because they do not allow apostasy to a greater or lesser extent. Islam has apostasy enshrined in its doctrine.
once a man argues for child marriage, i don't think he should be platformed anymore because daniel knows the argument just enough to trick stupid people, gaslight, or those already biased towards religion.
cry gay lover
Why would a Muslim argue about which religion is most compelling? I thought the Quran says that there is no compulsion in religion.
Matt's beard is much cooler than daniels.
This is Muhammad >>>>>
corny
If you were in some kind of niche, esoteric Theology Conference, perhaps an argument could be made that Islam is the most compelling religion because it has theologically solved the problems that were left over from Judaism and Christianity. Eg Islam overcomes the problem of the Trinity by proclaiming that God is a holistic, complete singular being.
Outside of that kind of a context, the term "compelling" is too vague, ambiguous and empty to be of any use in a debate.
8:04 Eagerly waiting for this Part#4 I only wish I could publicly "mock the Prophet". But it seems I'm not allowed to do this here?
Mohammed: 🐷
Now what?
🤣
part 4 when
Nothing about Daniel warrants hours of retrospection. I would prefer to see people decline debates and avoid bringing any extra attention to him (a guy from Texas who is wearing a costume for attention. Its no coincidence that he picked the thing that would evoke the biggest reaction from his own community. A guy can be Muslim without dressing up like he's from another country.)
His 'ideas' can still be addressed, just through someone else. They're not unique.
You had asked if we would like more debate reviews in this format, where you actually play video from the debate in question. I personally love it, and while I don't think it's necessary for every review it's certainly useful for a Sizzler-sized buffet of bullshit like this human colostomy bag spouts.
so no part 4?
Will you do a debate with Jay Dyer again?
savage
Beard coming in
I know you don't mean to spread it, but eating sugar does not cause Type 2 Diabetes. There's stigma because of this idea. Uninformed may think all types of Diabetes as preventable and stigmatize people with Diabetes because they deserve it for not taking care of themselves and eating crap.
Type 2 Diabetes is caused by the pancreas under-producing insulin or the cells resisting the insulin that the body produces. Once you have Type 2 Diabetes, your body isn't able to effectively manage the glucose in your bloodstream. (Which I think is what you were saying)
The shred of truth underlying the myth that Diabetes is caused by eating too much sugar is that over-consumption of sugar can lead to obesity, cardiovascular disease, a buildup of liver fats, and other conditions that reduce insulin sensitivity or put strain on systems in your body.
But even that isn't the same for everybody.
Metabolism, Genetics, other Health Conditions, and Lifestyle factors (both things one chooses to do and things they don't) all may predispose someone to diabetes, but they may provide much more risk or much less risk because everyone's body is different.
Type 2 Diabetes is often or usually preventable, but it isn't ALWAYS. Someone can exercise daily, eat the most healthy diet, and do everything they can to take care of themselves and still develop Type 2 Diabetes. And someone can have all of the risk factors and encompass all of the stereotypes and still never develop it.
That's not saying that people shouldn't try to live a healthier life. You will be better off for it and less likely to develop Type 2 Diabetes. I just want to emphasize that it's something that can happen to anybody and it's in no way a moral failing of an individual.
Pretty sure I only referred to MY case... but thanks for the update.
Yes and no. Yes in that it's mostly genetic and a set of environmental factors that makes you predisposed for it. No in that within those predisposed people a healthy diet and lifestyle makes a difference in management AND prevention of it.
It's true that a predisposed individual can get it even with a perfect lifestyle, but among the likely factors, diet makes a difference even if merely for delaying it (as it's mainly beta-cells declining in function, which can happen for a variety of different reasons and mechanisms). Of course, there's again multiple causes and it definitely might not be true for everyone, but it's true for enough people to merit general consideration.
Thanks for destroying daniel
Imagine if Jesus had social media.
Do you think he'd have a lot of followers? He has over 2 billion now and he's not even on Twitter.
For a long time, he only had 12 followers - until that video of him riding into town on a donkey went viral.
If Jesus is omnipotent why is he not on social media? If he twitted his word we wouldn’t need to rely on the “witness of the holy spirit”, which is only convincing to believers and has obviously produced a lot of miscommunications.
Even better he could have his own app with public announcements for everyone and a private section with customized messages for the user.
He has 1,2M subscribers on TH-cam, though...
Twitter now being X... I imagine Jesus would insist on his own trademarked cross, not someone else's (Andrew's) 🙂
🐻I sat through the whole debacle... hard, hard viewing. Maybe there were parts where you weren't at your absolute best, but your opponent was one of the most ignorant, childish and despicable individuals I've ever come across. I don't know if my temper would have held as long as yours did. If I had ONE critique, when one of his trolls in the crowd asked you about animals, I wish you'd just said; "My issue is consent. Can an animal give consent in any meaningful way?" and left it at that. Other than that you clearly came out on top across the board, and his continued abuse of your partner was disgusting... (obviously I 'd think no less of you or your partner if you were both men, or your partner was trans or intersex. That simply doesn't matter one iota to me, but you'd already corrected him. THAT offends me, as did his attitudes on so, so many things...)
My main takeaway from this, having blotted out large swathes for my sanity, was his 10 minute analogy of the "pleasure machine", which was basically a plot synopsis of "Better Than Life", the second novel based on the cult tv show Red Dwarf... it wasn't even internally consistent, which you didn't even bother to call him out on, but all I could think was if everyone in this society was hooked up to this ludicrous machine for 20hrs a day, who's doing all this debating, or invading the next country?! It made NO SENSE! However I might have been tempted to pick it apart just for laughs, and possibly suggest that it might not be such a terrible machine for those unfortunates whose circumstances in this world render their quality of life near to zero... or used in a similar manner to those in Soylent Green to make someone's last moments more bearable... in the moment though, all I could think of was Barbarella... 🤗🐻
why have you walked away from debates against fascists and theocrats? they're the biggest danger to the world and you have completely abdicated. why are you so afraid?
I asked chat gpt to give me the top 10... here is the number 1
"Jesus Christ: He is considered the most influential person in history by many people. He founded Christianity, which is the world’s largest religion, and his teachings have had a profound impact on the world"
So I asked it a follow up question: "Why did you put jesus christ as number one when he has not been confirmed to even exist and did not actually found christianity"
To which I got:
"I apologize for any confusion my previous response may have caused. The existence of Jesus Christ is a topic of debate among scholars and historians, but many believe that he was a real person who lived in the first century. As for the founding of Christianity, it is true that Jesus did not establish the religion himself, but his teachings and life story form the basis of the Christian faith."
So Chat GPT literally LIED through its non-existent plagiarizing teeth