@@rootz1384 The existence of a soul? We’re not the ones making the claim, the person who says a soul exists is the person who has the burden of proof. It’s almost impossible to prove something *doesn’t* exist or happen. Can you *prove there is no such things* as six-foot tall gummy bears living in the mountains of the Himalayas? No? Then they must exist, I have faith those giant living candies are real 🙌🏼🙏🏼
"Like how boys are naturally attracted to the color blue" "Beauty is when something is symmetrical" "God like moving us towards a positive, objective, good" Jesus christ I almost lost the ability to think.
@@ordinarystuff6323 Except not really, symmetry can be a tool to convey 'something' in an art piece, but it's not a must have to attain appreciation. Also symmetry in people's visage being a guarantor of beauty is a bs platitude that has been debunked.
@Hazaroth Right so could you plausibly use that as a motivation for claiming that a portrait painted by Picasso is objectively worse than a child's first depiction of a cube? Of course, you wouldn't, which is why even mentioning that is irrelevant in the context of the portion of the conversation pertaining to artistic merit and subjectivity.
@Hazaroth I think only with regard to human features (face, body, etc), has symmetry been demonstrated as a very common attribute/component of beauty. But it is just one component, and there are many exceptions. Some examples are asymmetric facial moles, asymmetric smiles, asymmetric hair style, etc.
0:00 Preview 0:49 Introduction 2:33 Cancel culture 6:37 Transgenderism 24:45 Presuppositionalism and objective morality 38:42 The subjectivity of beauty and art 52:04 Systemic racism and solutions 1:29:08 Cultural clashes 1:36:23 Social conservatism 1:49:01 Post-debate
I love hearing someone say a bunch of things of varying stupidity, and just seeing destiny typing. like, I can't see the text doc, but I *know* it's there.
He danced around saying how it would be bad if categories had no meaning only at the end to really show his true intention, " "becasue then people would go around thinking they are transgender". The lengths people go just to not want trans people is amazing
its like a therapist taking passive aggressive notes but I know he has good reason for it. its hilarious. I used to really dislike steven, now I pretty much always agree with his stance on things.
He had the right idea though, I mean he understood the whole white privilege thing lmao and accepted it. He just misspoke. These conservatives were way more good faith than I thought I just think they watched a little too much Ben Shapiro and can probably be easily more socially left in the future. None of these guys are white nationalists for sure though. I hate that chat is just calling them retarded all the time. I also hate people that say someone is wrong without explaining why they’re wrong. Shits the most annoying thing in the world
@@paco1022 True, though I'll admit I found that guy a little too obssessed with statistics about black people. But either way, I just mentioned it because I thought it was funny.
Destiny makes one BIG mistake when talking about males and females. There is ABSOLUTELY a way to distinguish males and females regardless of chromosomes. This difference is based on whether the individual produces small gametes (sperm) or large gametes (ova). The production of either one is regulated by the activation, or lack thereof, of a gene called SRY present on a locus on the Y chromosome. If this region is present and activated the individual will produce small gametes and be therefore male. If the gene is not present or not activated the individual will produce ova and be therefore female. This is the one defining trait between males and females in all mammals.
Still...to be a republican today means subscribing in doublethink, which makes them hypocrites. Republicans complaining about cancel culture but wanted Kaepernick, Goodyear, and Keurig canceled.
@@phanatic215 This isn't very true at all, you can be a conservative person and have rather liberal or progressive views. Many people in my country and Conservative fiscally but have progressive outlook outside of the country's finances.
@@AccountingRaiding that's how older black people deal with conservatism. It's usually financial and religious. That's my grandparents, but my mom and dad are more socially liberal, and truly fiscally conservative, but not this fake shit like politicians do with overspending on military and pretending to care about budgets.
I mean some of them were tap dancing on the edge of race realist arguments and the 13/50 stuff. If these were youtubers with unknown political views these would be career disrupting beliefs to espouse.
@@phanatic215 Republicans being canceled from their jobs and their livelihoods isn't the same as some vague generalizations of what happened in each of those situations. There isnt and never was a conservative movement to cancel those things. But there is a legitimate movement to cancel conservatives over beliefs that are considered immoral, due to doublethink from the left. Not saying saying conservatives don't contribute to cancel culture, but that culture is endemic to the left. Not the right.
"it's beautiful if it leads you towards the highest good" So if I stand on a battlefield and witness mass slaughter, and it leads me towards "the highest good", that mass slaughter was beautiful. Interesting...
hearing Republicans talk about capitalism in a negative light has me thinking the new american right-wing movement is less-radical national bolshevism.
You people forget that anti capitalist rhetoric was an extremely large part of the Nazi platform right. Criticizing capitalism is not an inherently left wing thing, feudalists are anti-capitalist. Nothing about their criticism implied a commonality with leftist modes of thought.
He’s arguing that general principles like happiness have no weight in Destiny’s framework since Destiny rejects transcendental good. He’s not saying that he himself believes there’s no weight behind them. He’s critiquing Destiny’s worldview, not explaining what he himself believes.
@@blasphimus No. it's not. The only reason symmetry works is because most things and animals have simmetry, but that doesn't mean that for something to be beautiful it needs to be symmetric. In fact, breaking away from symmetry is a common way to enhance art, since it's boring to just look at things that are perfectly symmetrical.
I literally love how amenable how destiny is. His approach to viewing these political issues as simply a sociological issue rather than an emotional issue brings the best arguments out of his opponents. He comes off as intelligent, relaxed, and expressing good faith in each of his arguments and does not enter the conversation with any mal intent or aggression. This approach comes off as an exchange of ideas and as non patronizing. It’s so refreshing, it’s such an important step in our political conversation. Thank. God.
I was thinking the same. I align with the right wing all over the world on 90% of the issues. I discovered Destiny during the Rittenhouse trial. It is commendable that in today's times he can separate political disagreements from matters of fact and also be respectful and maintain good faith towards different people.
Most of the emotion in these conversations are just the expression of frustration that the other party doesn’t see things the way they do. To person A, it makes complete sense that the populous should be armed to the teeth. To person B, that idea is utterly insane and baffling. The emotion is derived from a disconnect between fundamental values.
they don't build their views downwards from fundamental philosophical beliefs, they already have conclusions set up and are working upwards to justify them
The first guy says that gender is important for happiness, but says acknowledging people as the gender they want to be acknowledged as is bad... Seems like a weird circle.
Just so everyone know, the per pupil spending ratio is calculated on a school district level. It does not take into account the significant funding disparity between poor and wealthy schools. From the study the conservative cites, in the "Limitations in District-Level Spending Analysis" section, "According to a recent study, the 10 largest school districts in California have spending gaps between high and low-poverty high schools from $64,000 to $500,000 per school (Education Trust-West 2005). This problem is not limited to California. A study of Baltimore, Cincinnati, and Seattle indicated district funding differences for high- and low-poverty schools ranging from $400,000 to $1 million (Roza and Hill 2004). These studies identified large disparities in school funding within districts, with schools serving high-poverty students receiving substantially less district funding." If you have a district with a predominantly white wealthy school and a predominantly black poor school, this analysis gives every student in the district the same funding per pupil value. Chalk another one up to conservatives not reading or understanding the studies they cite. I can't provide a link to the study because a word in the title is auto-banned by TH-cam :/
Isn’t the “per pupil spending” thing just related to like... how many black people there are? Like you fund a school a certain amount, and it’s like 20% black. So the per pupil spending is higher..
Kinda, there are definitely lots of factors. One of those greatly stems from the fact that poorer students begin at a baseline of lower "achievement" especially with literacy. Schools have to spend more money per student just to make up lost ground for the poor students. Arguably, these schools should be spending VASTLY greater amounts per student than richer schools because of the need to bring the students up to grade level, but the fact that it is only marginally is the glaring issue here. The students that should be receiving a much greater share of funding are only receiving slightly more. It is concerning
The lack of happiness in our world has more to do with the effects of the emergence of social media, online retail and the reliance of our markets on mass consumerism than anything else.
That first guy: The reason people are sad and not happy is because they dont structure society how I say and I have studies to prove it! *later* Same guy: Oh how are we supposed to study what's happy and what's sad? How do I measure how much someone enjoys a cheeseburger, come on! why do these types always refute themselves so quick?
the fundamental beauty thing was incredibly enlightening, don't think I've ever heard someone explain why conservatives cared so much about modern art like that before and I never understood it.
I say that LCTR fan should be replaced on all debate panels with the first guy Destiny had an exchange with here. It was actually honest, and although I reject his presuppositions, I appreciated the lack of memeing and declarations of winning despite all evidence to the contrary. For all I know he is already on the debate lord circuit, but if not, Dylan, put him on.
The “Dr. Seuss” family is who asked for the cancellation of six books. Canceling as in stopping publications on further books not taking them out of libraries or having a good old fashion book burning.
These books still exist, you can read them online. It's just not being published anymore due to some people considering them problematic. I wouldn't say this is akin to book burning.
"youre basing this on the assumption that happiness is good" "but its bad cause it leads to purposelessness in the youth today because gender has no meaning" so we can agree hapiness is good. We can assume that and move on. What is the point of questioning this fundamental assumption if you're gonna make the same assumptions in your argument? Why are you only questioning the worth of happiness when its the other side's argument and assuming that happiness is in fact desirable and suffering less desirable when it supports your own argument?
People with inherently illogical systems need to move further and further from their prescriptive statements to justify it and usually end up doing so by finding some perceived flaw in any oppositional statements.
fucking hell i suggested destiny to use "analysis and synthesis" instead of "deconstruction" because I thought the latter was a more loaded term with the idea of deconstructionism. also mathematics uses Fourier analysis and synthesis to break functions down for a better understanding before putting them back. but instead now people are thinking he's referring to Hegel's thesis-antithesis-synthesis. you can't fucking escape the grip of philosophy fuck
My gf brought up a good point Destiny missed around 1:39:00. Women aren't only unhappy presently because they are getting education and careers, it's because they have the expectation to do that IN ADDITION to the expectation from conservatives to have a family, take care of the house, etc.
I was so confused. I was waiting for him to start going on about scrupture and the "condemnation of god" but instead it was the fastest disagreement I've ever seen between an atheist and a theist. They must have set the world record.
hilarious that he mentioned the preference for the colour blue as an innate preference... only a few hundred years ago pink was the colour for men and blue the colour for women. simply completely arbitrary
I don't think he said it was innate. he was saying there are innate thing and non-innate things and I believed he used liking blue as a non-innate one.
I think a far better example would be tendency for aggression. Both sexes have it but the male sex is far more predisposed to it biologically. This is a basis for a lot of gender stereotypes (if we take gender to be the societal representation of sex characteristics) that may not hold true on an individual level but hold true on a population level. Or the biological difference in reproductive systems, resulting in a lot more hygiene problems for women than men historically speaking.
The moment when Destiny decided not to say anything when that guy accidentally said "rich people" vs "black people" is the most willpower I've ever seen a human being muster.
To be fair that’s pretty much how society in general has primed people to think, regardless of partisanship Whites are privileged and blacks are downtrodden.
I think that was a good faith move on part of destiny. The other guy was clearly making the point that black people were historically discriminated against (which includes keeping them poor). So even if right to free speech is the same, a rich people can get it heard over a black person who is presumably not rich.
@@iamhereblossom1588 heritage, sure, but the way your country group each other its asian, black, hispanic and white. mongolian, burmese and bangladeshi people all pick "asian" when filling out a form, and asians on average in the US do better than pretty much every other POC.
That guy was also constantly declaring what he thought and assumed Destiny’s views on topics were, because without that strawman his own views looked more ridiculous
Guy: "supporting transgender ideas is bad because it's destroying human happiness" That same guy 5 minutes later: "why are you assuming happiness is good?"
@@Blanksmithy123 I think his point is that he's questioning why destiny is assuming happiness is good but he clearly thinks happiness is good so why would he question destiny on that if he's not also questioning himself?
When Destiny mentioned schools in rich areas having better resources & the guy asks him to expand & he gives a super expansive answer with like 4 examples, that's why he's the champ
It depresses me that he had to explain it though. I mean, I bet (without having looked into it myself) that the study he cited will likely show that the spending which favors people of color actually only relates to government spending, and not the amount spent per pupil total. What that means is that while the government spends more on black people, far less is actually spent on those populations.
@@joeymac4302 if i interpreted your response correctly, in a lot of lower income areas, ghettos, actually have very high per student spenditure. Thousands per child, but are still very poor in academic achievement, some of this in my belief is due to government opportunities for college that is provided to them due to thier lack of success, and poor management of spending. Edit: i reread your response, and mine is not based of the study in the video.
For as much as conservatives decry “collectivism,” it sure seems like they derive all their meaning and purpose from it. The first guy basically admitted that in order for life to have meaning, he needs everyone to believe the exact same thing that he does.
That's a strawman. There's no way his position is "my life doesn't have meaning unless everyone believes the same thing I do". Because clearly he already believes his life has meaning since he's a christian. And clearly he recognizes that not everyone agrees with him or else he wouldn't be debating Destiny. That would be like saying "in order for christianity to be true everyone has to believe that christianity is true". Which is clearly false since most christians believe that christianity is true while simultaneously recognizing that not everyone is a christian. Maybe you misspoke.
He kept saying that people have a generally consistency between their faculties that lead to things that we universally find beautiful, like sunsets. And I can feel like I can see how that's something that could be seen as a good point, but then that leads me to question if that means that things that people don't find beautiful consistency across culture are an example of some kind of "false beauty" to them. Say for example a kind of music that is generally agreed upon within a culture that is beautiful, that when a person outside that culture is newly exposed to finds abrasive and unpleasant. Would that person bite the bullet and admit that all the things they find beautiful that don't fit that thin definition of universal beauty are "false beauty"? Probably not, I suppose. edit: And I suppose this is me interpreting what they were saying as differentiating between there being a difference between objective beauty, and subjective beauty. That these are two different things. But they had multiple opportunities to establish that, and they didn't. I just don't know how a person could operate their logic without that being the case.
@@joej.3848 That's the thing though, there are no things that are universally beautiful to people. There's a famous saying: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." And it's pretty straight forward. There are things that are "generally" considered beautiful because alot of people find it beautiful. A sunset may be a good example of that. On the other hand there are people who don't find anything special about a sunset, I'd be one of those persons. I would never say that a sunset is "ugly", it's just a non factor to me. I find an absence of sunlight much more aesthetically pleasing than actual sunlight, meaning nighttime of course as it exposes celestial objects. Value in beauty is not derived from objectivity but from nurture and evolutionary factors. Certain types of music aren't inherently beautiful. We are TAUGHT that they are beautiful by being exposed to them and adhering certain feeling towards them. Does the minor scale objectively sound more sad and beautiful? To our ears possibly because we are trained to garner those feelings when we hear that scale. Does a diminished scale objectively sound chaotic and dysphoric? To most western ears yes, because they aren't used to hearing those frequencies played together in those intervals. In classical music you often used diminished scales to display discomfort, dysphoria or an unpleasent sound. In metal music diminished chords are often used to sound "beautiful". Same goes for anything in this world. Some people in this world certainly find the element of "death" and crimson color of blood beautiful while most people probably find it repulsive. To reitterate. I don't think we have an inherit sense of what beauty is. What we find beautiful is based on our upbringing and is somewhat based on evolutionary elements like sexual drive. This is the primary reason why what's considered beautiful is different amongst different cultures in the world. Another primary drive behind beauty is volume of exposure. The more "rare" or less occuring something is to you, generally, the more beautiful it may tend to be observing it. A certain piece of music may sound beautiful to you, but if you listen to it long enough it may actually turn to torment for you. Lets use an extreme example. Say that you're locked inside a whiteroom in a straightjacket and you're played a "objectively" beautiful piece of music for days on end. I'm pretty certain most people wouldn't associate that piece of music with beauty in the end but with torture.
@@henrikswanstrom9218 very good illustration of what the arguement of subjectivity versus objective morals boils down to. Everything is subjective after the nervous system responses. A knee jerk isn't subjective. However whether we think it is good or bad to have a knee jerk reaction is entirely subjective. Feeling threatened can be objective - fight and flight responses. However what we see as threatening is mostly subjective. A messy topic. Which is why I think it's so naive for anyone to speak of objective morality like it's even remotely plausible.
Those weren't really debates (I assume you are talking about the Omaha people), it was more some crazy idpol people, this was better but it just was conservatives dancing around to avoid trans people, still watched both though
@@evolution__snow6784 right, but they were atleast more good faith, and while the peanut thing was weird, they weren't outright attacking him for shit or calling him hasans bitch boy. Like they were just normal (who knows what they have in their heads) so it was noce
@@evolution__snow6784 dude I would rather listen to conservatives dance around not wanting to say they aren’t comfortable around lgbtq then anything like those Omaha people
@Sneed Central "Denying that a theory’s ill-fit with our intuitions is[n't] a reason for doubting its truth. Consider the thesis that we have a common ancestors with apes, or that time flows slower when travelling at high speeds, or that a particle can exist in a superposition between distinct locations; all of these theses are highly counter-intuitive, but this gives us little or no reason to think them false."
I liked this segment a lot. Both parties seemed relatively respectful of each other and I appreciate everyone’s ability to not explicitly be an asshole. Discussions like this actually have the ability to change peoples mindsets and get them to work together. 10/10 content
@@TEHSOULREAPER Can you show me the evidence that I have not reviewed other possibilities and not gathered information about this individual to the point that I can reasonably claim my statement is correct? Because now you are just assuming I have not done that.
@@RunFreeRyan If the people who work at Disney decide to pull shows for one reason or another. That would still be cancelling a program. Cancel Culture doesn't have to be an external experience.
He was flopping between rich/poor and white/black making the comparison of more white people are richer than black people and thus can make their voices heard easier/have more societal impact. It was a small slip of the tongue but it wasn't Freudian or anything, he was using all four terms to make a point. It's cute to poke fun at him for it but let's not think he made some huge faux pas
@@mypartyisprivate8693 the main core of the fan base is pretty good, the subreddit and d.gg are both very well behaved. It’s mostly the TH-cam/twitch audience that are bad
That's a very short-minded take on what a conservative is... Do you lump all people on the "right" together? I'm a conservative ish and I enjoy destiny's content for the most part. That doesn't mean that there isn't a lot I disagree with him about.
@@512TURNER Most of the comments I've seen from new conservatives is (the far left is crazy I will now vote right). Typically thats not how beliefs evolve even if I was a conservative I wouldn't stop being a conservative just because Nick Fuentes became popular or another extreme right wing group became vocal. Not saying all conservatives are like this hell... if there are mental variances that make some men like things that some women like why wouldn't there be ones that make us more likely to naturally lean a certain way politically?
I don't see the problem... I've spent years driving around with "N" pressed against my car's rear window in order to make those behind me look at it... It's a completely normal letter and there's nothing wrong with it...
@@benbowland in some provinces in Canada, drivers need to get their N (new driver) which is a magnet that goes on the back of your car for 2 years, before being able to take another test to get you your full license. The N makes you only allowed to have 1 passenger and you can't have any alcohol in your system when driving.
Being a conservative is antithetical to the idea of going to college and learning things. "Would you say that you're similar to this guy Vaush?" "No, he's more of a socialist, and I wouldn't cross that line" "oh, so you're not the average liberal" fucking kill me.
the political engagement of the conservative movement is so far gone in the cytoplasm of their cells that I feel that there is just 1 line in the sand for all political ideas that they work with. On one end for them, it is the “truth/conservatism” end and on the other end it is “leftist/leftist in the closet” end. There is just no in-between, and because of that you get amazing conversations like the one u just mentioned lol. They cannot procreate an idea outside of this spectrum, because if they do it completely destroys their political framework.
No its actually conservative to learn new things. You're taking the conservative word too literally. Thats like saying you're not a Liberal because you think murder is wrong.
I think that's an important point because it means you can be smart but still very wrong on some issues or even just one aspect of an issue. Everyone has blind spots no matter how smart they are. Even if you are the world's best heart surgeon, it doesn't mean you have anything worthwhile to contribute about leg prosthetics and you couldn't design a bionic leg that actually worked. At least not without years more training and experience.
@@Isvoor I think you've misunderstood the situation with your analogy a little there, you're accusing him of having no worthy input to philosophy when he very clearly knew (from a definition and semi-deductive standpoint) what he was talking about. Something more analogous might be a Heart surgeon in training being put into a room with another surgeon and asked to perform Heart surgery.
I think there is a legitimate phenomenon where lefties both feel more self righteous in their beliefs and feel social pressure from other lefties to treat their beliefs in a super moralized super righteous way than typical republicans. To be fair alot of trump fans fall into this trap too but your average college Republican seems way more willing to engage with disagreement in a healthy way than the average college lefty
@@Daniel-ih4zh stating "beauty is objective" while not being able to substantiate that claim with anything other than "because God is real and beauty is that which makes you want to do good/spurs you toward God". If you reject the presumption that God is either real or inherently good (I would argue the deity worshipped by the cults of Yahweh and Jesus would be evil if it were indeed real but that's another argument altogether) then the conclusion makes zero sense.
22:00 the law of non-contradiction doesn't apply to a set of traits unless they are exclusionary. ie, the definition of the set of A *includes* the fact that the set excludes everything that is NOT A. So he right there admitted that being a man is essentially defined as not being a woman.
I really enjoyed his debate. He did piss me off a little because they were both saying really simple things with way too many words. It was also kinda weird the direction he kept taking it. Half baked and kinda brain smoothing, but I'm excited philosophy is getting pushed to a wider audience.
@@aydenr5467 Right? It deviates between mind numbingly simple and unbearably complex. The simplicity is achieved by strong conceptual understanding. (Not to imply my brain isn't smooth, I'm just speaking generally.)
That objection came immediately to me to. Step 1) Commit black and white fallacy. Step 2) Apply the law of non-contradiction to the concept you used the fallacy on.
This dude is arguing for objective beauty because humanity as a whole tends to gravitate toward certain standards of beauty, ignoring the fact that each person still has a unique subjective interpretation of those standards. He argued the complete opposite when it comes to the collective standard of morality: because it is possible for people to have a subjective take on the semi-universal moral standards human societies have adopted, then morality is meaningless (when he argues against secular moral systems). So on one hand, beauty is all-important, its objectivity proven by humans’ subjective tendencies. On the other hand, morality is rendered meaningless by humans’ subjective tendencies. This discussion proves that political discussions are POINTLESS. The only useful discussion to have is the one that addresses the root of the issue: subscription/devotion to metaphysical truths.
I think fetishes are proof that beauty is subjective, in a way. I will say that there are beauty standards humans tend to be drawn towards, but there's no definitive rule for what people will be attracted to.
@@TheBetweenSkill actually, with regards to heterosexual men's preferences there are trends that can be observed cross culturally. Men tend to like a good hip to waist ratio, healthy fertility markers (clear skin, large breasts) and neotonous facial features. So, obviously there are some deviations from this that differ on an individual basis, but these are trends that can be observed across the globe. I will say that a trend doesn't mean it is a rule though, and humans have a wide array of sexual preferences.
You can't really argue beauty has something to do with God when you can't demonstrate God exists. Without demonstrating God actually exists it is meaningless.
@@coreyander286 yeah that's another unsubstantiated claim, very frustrating. It was interesting to hear them admit that their views were all based on a belief in something they can't even demonstrate is real though. At least that was honest.
Yeah I was super confused by that little conversation On one hand beauty is whatever spurs you to god ( whatever that means) But it’s also a intuitive feeling that we like But also it must be learned to appreciate
Unironically, that’s the impression I get of a lot of right wingers, especially online. It’s like they get there whole world view off of /pol/ shitposting.
![Normal Maps, Tangent Space & IBL • Shaders for Game Devs [Part 3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E4PHFnvMzFc/mqdefault.jpg)
What is the best way to convince Destiny to give up atheism and return to his religious roots?
The power of a strong community
Look up Christians debunked presuppositional apologetics. Even we dislike darth dawkins.
he has to become raised by his father only and not by his mother. he is raised to down the middle, and so he is a BEYTA ATHIEST.
Making him watch atheism is unstoppable or similar anti theist content
Tell him Destiny is a Christian's name
when is destiny 2 coming out, he has been debating for 20 years!
Isn't that a
girl's name
Imagine destiny playing destiny 😳
A streamer should start up as Destiny 2. Pure marketing genius lol
@@BanditoRios One already did, his name is Vaush you should check him out.
@@FerociousPaul lol
Interlocutor: "I think there are very good reasons to believe in immaterial things: truth, beauty, the existance of a soul…"
Destiny: * rapid typing *
I'm pretty sure you can see the wisps of smoke rising from his keyboard.
5 vcdvc@@kjjunior7918 v. Y. TxH. Go. C. Xxc v vhy fdfxx,x v
But can you prove hes wrong? 🤔
@@rootz1384 The existence of a soul? We’re not the ones making the claim, the person who says a soul exists is the person who has the burden of proof. It’s almost impossible to prove something *doesn’t* exist or happen.
Can you *prove there is no such things* as six-foot tall gummy bears living in the mountains of the Himalayas? No? Then they must exist, I have faith those giant living candies are real 🙌🏼🙏🏼
@@NotimetoVero But we have the historicity of the bible and our faith as evidence 🙌✝️
"Like how boys are naturally attracted to the color blue" "Beauty is when something is symmetrical" "God like moving us towards a positive, objective, good" Jesus christ I almost lost the ability to think.
The second point is actually based in reality. But the others are just..like..no.
@@ordinarystuff6323 Except not really, symmetry can be a tool to convey 'something' in an art piece, but it's not a must have to attain appreciation. Also symmetry in people's visage being a guarantor of beauty is a bs platitude that has been debunked.
@Hazaroth Right so could you plausibly use that as a motivation for claiming that a portrait painted by Picasso is objectively worse than a child's first depiction of a cube? Of course, you wouldn't, which is why even mentioning that is irrelevant in the context of the portion of the conversation pertaining to artistic merit and subjectivity.
@@gaston6800 Absolutely correct. Imagine what would happen if republicans actually took history in college.
@Hazaroth I think only with regard to human features (face, body, etc), has symmetry been demonstrated as a very common attribute/component of beauty. But it is just one component, and there are many exceptions. Some examples are asymmetric facial moles, asymmetric smiles, asymmetric hair style, etc.
0:00 Preview
0:49 Introduction
2:33 Cancel culture
6:37 Transgenderism
24:45 Presuppositionalism and objective morality
38:42 The subjectivity of beauty and art
52:04 Systemic racism and solutions
1:29:08 Cultural clashes
1:36:23 Social conservatism
1:49:01 Post-debate
Thanks bucko
Thanks so much dude
@@lavellelee5734 🐸 🦞
What a gangster! Thanks, pal.
I love hearing someone say a bunch of things of varying stupidity, and just seeing destiny typing. like, I can't see the text doc, but I *know* it's there.
It's like watching someone walk into a trap.
He danced around saying how it would be bad if categories had no meaning only at the end to really show his true intention, " "becasue then people would go around thinking they are transgender".
The lengths people go just to not want trans people is amazing
@@brandonden795 “people gojng around thinking they are trans” is gender dysmorphia. Not some liberation of a niche gender identity.....
its like a therapist taking passive aggressive notes but I know he has good reason for it. its hilarious. I used to really dislike steven, now I pretty much always agree with his stance on things.
@@Americansikkunt you have heterodysmorphia, because you acting gay as hell.
your debates are art, because they make me think about high level topics unironically
The way Destiny flinched when the guy said "a rich person can make their voice better heard than a black person," lol. 59:40
He had the right idea though, I mean he understood the whole white privilege thing lmao and accepted it. He just misspoke. These conservatives were way more good faith than I thought I just think they watched a little too much Ben Shapiro and can probably be easily more socially left in the future. None of these guys are white nationalists for sure though. I hate that chat is just calling them retarded all the time. I also hate people that say someone is wrong without explaining why they’re wrong. Shits the most annoying thing in the world
@@paco1022 True, though I'll admit I found that guy a little too obssessed with statistics about black people. But either way, I just mentioned it because I thought it was funny.
Destiny makes one BIG mistake when talking about males and females.
There is ABSOLUTELY a way to distinguish males and females regardless of chromosomes. This difference is based on whether the individual produces small gametes (sperm) or large gametes (ova). The production of either one is regulated by the activation, or lack thereof, of a gene called SRY present on a locus on the Y chromosome. If this region is present and activated the individual will produce small gametes and be therefore male. If the gene is not present or not activated the individual will produce ova and be therefore female.
This is the one defining trait between males and females in all mammals.
this was the one of the better ones, they didn’t seem totally stupid and insane
Still...to be a republican today means subscribing in doublethink, which makes them hypocrites. Republicans complaining about cancel culture but wanted Kaepernick, Goodyear, and Keurig canceled.
@@phanatic215 This isn't very true at all, you can be a conservative person and have rather liberal or progressive views. Many people in my country and Conservative fiscally but have progressive outlook outside of the country's finances.
@@AccountingRaiding that's how older black people deal with conservatism. It's usually financial and religious. That's my grandparents, but my mom and dad are more socially liberal, and truly fiscally conservative, but not this fake shit like politicians do with overspending on military and pretending to care about budgets.
I mean some of them were tap dancing on the edge of race realist arguments and the 13/50 stuff. If these were youtubers with unknown political views these would be career disrupting beliefs to espouse.
@@phanatic215 Republicans being canceled from their jobs and their livelihoods isn't the same as some vague generalizations of what happened in each of those situations. There isnt and never was a conservative movement to cancel those things. But there is a legitimate movement to cancel conservatives over beliefs that are considered immoral, due to doublethink from the left. Not saying saying conservatives don't contribute to cancel culture, but that culture is endemic to the left. Not the right.
"it's beautiful if it leads you towards the highest good" So if I stand on a battlefield and witness mass slaughter, and it leads me towards "the highest good", that mass slaughter was beautiful. Interesting...
Yeah, the conversation on objective beauty really filled out my "14 common characteristics of fascism" bingo card.
hearing Republicans talk about capitalism in a negative light has me thinking the new american right-wing movement is less-radical national bolshevism.
The horseshoe is bending
The left/right dichotomy is breaking down and it's beautiful
You people forget that anti capitalist rhetoric was an extremely large part of the Nazi platform right. Criticizing capitalism is not an inherently left wing thing, feudalists are anti-capitalist. Nothing about their criticism implied a commonality with leftist modes of thought.
"Why is happiness good?... You're appealing to general principals that have no weight behind them." -the guy arguing gender isn't a social construct
that shit is just pure edginess.
Art is objective and it's based on it symmetry. Also it's intuitive and you don't think about it.
He’s arguing that general principles like happiness have no weight in Destiny’s framework since Destiny rejects transcendental good. He’s not saying that he himself believes there’s no weight behind them. He’s critiquing Destiny’s worldview, not explaining what he himself believes.
@@blasphimus No. it's not. The only reason symmetry works is because most things and animals have simmetry, but that doesn't mean that for something to be beautiful it needs to be symmetric. In fact, breaking away from symmetry is a common way to enhance art, since it's boring to just look at things that are perfectly symmetrical.
I literally love how amenable how destiny is.
His approach to viewing these political issues as simply a sociological issue rather than an emotional issue brings the best arguments out of his opponents.
He comes off as intelligent, relaxed, and expressing good faith in each of his arguments and does not enter the conversation with any mal intent or aggression.
This approach comes off as an exchange of ideas and as non patronizing.
It’s so refreshing, it’s such an important step in our political conversation.
Thank. God.
Thank destiny*
I was thinking the same.
I align with the right wing all over the world on 90% of the issues. I discovered Destiny during the Rittenhouse trial.
It is commendable that in today's times he can separate political disagreements from matters of fact and also be respectful and maintain good faith towards different people.
@@stuti.sharma.ranchi what do you mean "all over the world"?
Most of the emotion in these conversations are just the expression of frustration that the other party doesn’t see things the way they do.
To person A, it makes complete sense that the populous should be armed to the teeth. To person B, that idea is utterly insane and baffling.
The emotion is derived from a disconnect between fundamental values.
My favorite part of these is when chat just starts spamming “???????????”
Let’s me know I’m not alone in questioning what the fuck is being said here
Has destiny thought of making a gaming channel? His Valheim stream was some top tier content
how can some of these guys be so educated on philosophy and still arrive at the worst conclusions?
Because they're starting at the conclusions and educating themselves on how to support them
''Anyone who disagrees with me as come to the wrong conclusion''.
they don't build their views downwards from fundamental philosophical beliefs, they already have conclusions set up and are working upwards to justify them
50:20 he says that beauty is supposed to be a very deeply understood subjective feeling... Why doesn't that apply to harm or happiness lmfao
It does. Earlier in the video he was trying to argue from Destiny's atheistic/consequentialist POV.
Someone in the chat said racism speed run and I lost it!
16:28 dude legit wrote down a list to respond too. He came prepared. This is the main character of the anime.
The first guy says that gender is important for happiness, but says acknowledging people as the gender they want to be acknowledged as is bad...
Seems like a weird circle.
Gender to a lot of people equals sex and not the concept of gender that Destiny talks about.
Just so everyone know, the per pupil spending ratio is calculated on a school district level. It does not take into account the significant funding disparity between poor and wealthy schools. From the study the conservative cites, in the "Limitations in District-Level Spending Analysis" section,
"According to a recent study, the 10 largest
school districts in California have spending gaps between high and low-poverty high schools from $64,000 to $500,000 per school (Education Trust-West 2005). This problem is not limited to California. A study of Baltimore, Cincinnati, and Seattle indicated district funding differences for high- and low-poverty schools ranging from $400,000 to $1 million (Roza and Hill 2004). These studies identified large disparities in school funding within districts, with schools serving high-poverty students receiving substantially less district funding."
If you have a district with a predominantly white wealthy school and a predominantly black poor school, this analysis gives every student in the district the same funding per pupil value. Chalk another one up to conservatives not reading or understanding the studies they cite. I can't provide a link to the study because a word in the title is auto-banned by TH-cam :/
Studies using gamer words smh
@@seriousbees I think the key word is r@c1A-L Doesn't even seem like a word that should be banned.
Content like this is why I respect destiny so much.
My favorite Cubana uploads again!
Isn’t the “per pupil spending” thing just related to like... how many black people there are? Like you fund a school a certain amount, and it’s like 20% black. So the per pupil spending is higher..
Kinda, there are definitely lots of factors. One of those greatly stems from the fact that poorer students begin at a baseline of lower "achievement" especially with literacy. Schools have to spend more money per student just to make up lost ground for the poor students. Arguably, these schools should be spending VASTLY greater amounts per student than richer schools because of the need to bring the students up to grade level, but the fact that it is only marginally is the glaring issue here. The students that should be receiving a much greater share of funding are only receiving slightly more. It is concerning
Well I was supposed to go to sleep but I guess I’ll just stay up and watch this entire thing. Great edits btw.
The lack of happiness in our world has more to do with the effects of the emergence of social media, online retail and the reliance of our markets on mass consumerism than anything else.
What is this? Is debatestiny back?
Popped up right in my fucking feed as I was watching him debate Britanny Venti.
Haha that was gold
I rewatch that 6 hour video every once in a while lmao, good times
This guy debating destiny is going into levels of semantics I never thought were possible
This is why I subscribe. Cause Destiny is the boi. If he ever runs, I’ll vote for him.
To avoid the false dichotomy between happiness/suffering, I think the one with the girl's name should use the concept of "achieving of the want"
bruh hearing this shit makes me feel like I'm in 2016 again... ohh the nostalgia?
Glad I kept watching your content. Really liked this debate and appreciated the demeaner of everyone.
I like how they bring out spider as if he's an anime boss lol
Moron: Beauty objectively exists
Destiny: Let's do a thought experiment
Moron: Well we have to set a definition of beauty
That first guy: The reason people are sad and not happy is because they dont structure society how I say and I have studies to prove it!
*later*
Same guy: Oh how are we supposed to study what's happy and what's sad? How do I measure how much someone enjoys a cheeseburger, come on!
why do these types always refute themselves so quick?
They’re college republicans. NPCs. They’ve been led to believe it’s not possible for their dogma to be argued against so they fall apart
@@roachofdoom1234 holy shit you’re so right.
the fundamental beauty thing was incredibly enlightening, don't think I've ever heard someone explain why conservatives cared so much about modern art like that before and I never understood it.
Yeah, as soon as there aren't clear standards to conform to or confine others with, they seem to get nervous
Destiny is engaging with the conservatives in a very respectful manner, not immediately demonizing them, which is something I respect.
They were respectful too. Made the whole conversation much more enjoyable 🙂
1:46:53
"Golf: tl;dr everyone should do shrooms."
Truest statement ever uttered by chat.
This is unironically a good debate.
Thank you, please do more of these.
The amount of times his argument boils down to "attack helicopter" on transgender people is hilarious.
If your moral framework is based on your BELIEF that a transcendent mind exist, without knowledge of one existing you have already lost.
My skin color is white.
But I don't use white as part of my identity.
My view on my own identity is more than just a skin color.
I say that LCTR fan should be replaced on all debate panels with the first guy Destiny had an exchange with here. It was actually honest, and although I reject his presuppositions, I appreciated the lack of memeing and declarations of winning despite all evidence to the contrary. For all I know he is already on the debate lord circuit, but if not, Dylan, put him on.
The “Dr. Seuss” family is who asked for the cancellation of six books. Canceling as in stopping publications on further books not taking them out of libraries or having a good old fashion book burning.
These books still exist, you can read them online. It's just not being published anymore due to some people considering them problematic. I wouldn't say this is akin to book burning.
@@il967
Yea, that’s what I said 👍
"youre basing this on the assumption that happiness is good"
"but its bad cause it leads to purposelessness in the youth today because gender has no meaning"
so we can agree hapiness is good. We can assume that and move on.
What is the point of questioning this fundamental assumption if you're gonna make the same assumptions in your argument?
Why are you only questioning the worth of happiness when its the other side's argument and assuming that happiness is in fact desirable and suffering less desirable when it supports your own argument?
People with inherently illogical systems need to move further and further from their prescriptive statements to justify it and usually end up doing so by finding some perceived flaw in any oppositional statements.
Destiny debating conservatives? Time to watch 🍿🍿🍿
Bless that dude at 59:00 keepin it real
Right in my feeeeeed
“Symmetry is beauty ! “ I guess the two thirds rule in photography and cinematography is bs then.
Yes
Dada and minimalist art have greatly expanded my view of beauty
fucking hell i suggested destiny to use "analysis and synthesis" instead of "deconstruction" because I thought the latter was a more loaded term with the idea of deconstructionism. also mathematics uses Fourier analysis and synthesis to break functions down for a better understanding before putting them back. but instead now people are thinking he's referring to Hegel's thesis-antithesis-synthesis. you can't fucking escape the grip of philosophy fuck
I love my timezone since whenever I wake up there's more memes beholding me
Nice timestap.
I don't agree with most republican views but at least they're polite, respectful, and patient unlike a majority of the liberals destiny debates.
You must be new here. 90% of the conservatives Destiny debated are total shit slingers.
20:20 when he finished answering tommy and the ad played I was like, "Damn I do need an ad break after that"
My gf brought up a good point Destiny missed around 1:39:00. Women aren't only unhappy presently because they are getting education and careers, it's because they have the expectation to do that IN ADDITION to the expectation from conservatives to have a family, take care of the house, etc.
Destiny somehow found the single living good-faith trad-con interlocutor.
I appreciate how the first guy got down to the fundamental philosophical disagreement instead of wasting time on things that are derived from it
I was so confused. I was waiting for him to start going on about scrupture and the "condemnation of god" but instead it was the fastest disagreement I've ever seen between an atheist and a theist. They must have set the world record.
Do you have the timestamp?
Timestamp?
@@downsjmmyjones101 Kinda felt like it was just a recitation (with a few additions) of Jordan Peterson talking to Sam What's His Name.
@@Alic4444 that discussion and this one are precursors to any real discussion of politics and very meaningfull
I love how Destiny is introduced like an absolute unit of a raid boss.
Him opening up the notepad is the equivalent of a party wipe pepelaugh
The final boss of Internet leftists.
Furry
@@dimthecat9418 yrruf
@@EkkyPlaysGames ÛwÛ
hilarious that he mentioned the preference for the colour blue as an innate preference... only a few hundred years ago pink was the colour for men and blue the colour for women. simply completely arbitrary
I don't think he said it was innate. he was saying there are innate thing and non-innate things and I believed he used liking blue as a non-innate one.
@@hoominbeeing he was saying blue is innate.
I think a far better example would be tendency for aggression. Both sexes have it but the male sex is far more predisposed to it biologically. This is a basis for a lot of gender stereotypes (if we take gender to be the societal representation of sex characteristics) that may not hold true on an individual level but hold true on a population level. Or the biological difference in reproductive systems, resulting in a lot more hygiene problems for women than men historically speaking.
@@Nathan-ok1dq yeah that would certainly be a better example
@@tarfielarchelone2674 Point to the timestamp. I might have misinterpreted him.
I missed when we got to see the notepad.exe when he would argue against someone.
Notepad.exe - literally a notepad execution lol
Half the time I’ve seen him pull it out recently it was left blank or he deletes it because an entire truckload of horse white just got unloaded
The one where the guy is talking about the Democrats and Hillary and his notepad just said, "'zzzzzzzzzzzzz"
I think Booksmarts advised him not to have it open on screen because people get distracted or influenced by it.
“Why is so mad????????????????” 😂
The moment when Destiny decided not to say anything when that guy accidentally said "rich people" vs "black people" is the most willpower I've ever seen a human being muster.
Our president made that same mistake.
To be fair that’s pretty much how society in general has primed people to think, regardless of partisanship
Whites are privileged and blacks are downtrodden.
I think that was a good faith move on part of destiny. The other guy was clearly making the point that black people were historically discriminated against (which includes keeping them poor). So even if right to free speech is the same, a rich people can get it heard over a black person who is presumably not rich.
@@iamhereblossom1588 *asians would like a word*
@@iamhereblossom1588 heritage, sure, but the way your country group each other its asian, black, hispanic and white.
mongolian, burmese and bangladeshi people all pick "asian" when filling out a form, and asians on average in the US do better than pretty much every other POC.
Who did it better?
Chair boozle? Or Alden’s number?
heehee
Alden's Number was a classic
alden
Alden’s Boozle
Time stamp?
"I don't know how you can measure happiness."
"Beauty is objective."
Also:
"What is a thing experienced infinite (measurable) happiness by reducing everyone else's happiness to 0?"
"You can't measure happiness."
That guy was also constantly declaring what he thought and assumed Destiny’s views on topics were, because without that strawman his own views looked more ridiculous
Destiny sounds like the name and path God gave to you and your future.
Isn’t destiny a girl’s name though?
Manifest deez nuts
Kierkegaard GODSTINY
@@94est.43 GOT EM
BEYTAH
Was just laying in bed scratching my sack when this showed up. Right in my Feeeeed.
What's in the sack
I’m cackling 😂
Did the itch subside? Or you gonna get checked?
when he said feeeeeeeed
i felt that
@@Alic4444 two teeny tiny little peas
Guy: "supporting transgender ideas is bad because it's destroying human happiness"
That same guy 5 minutes later: "why are you assuming happiness is good?"
*embrace pain*
? He was asking why destiny thinks happiness is good... he consistently thinks happiness is good because he's religious
@@Blanksmithy123 Yeah honestly the op is being disingenous af
@@Blanksmithy123 I think his point is that he's questioning why destiny is assuming happiness is good but he clearly thinks happiness is good so why would he question destiny on that if he's not also questioning himself?
@@zacksmith9864 yeah because he has a reason, it's dumb but it's a reason whereas destiny didn't seem to have it...
1:31:36 is just something else...
Huh, K&G. Battle map of online debates when?
people say the same thing when they talk about Germany winning WW2 and how we would be speaking German if they did lmao
Shut up nerds. I'll go watch baz battles instead where they aren't cringe like you
Not in a million years, would I have thought to find this channel here!
keep up with the great work, learned alot from you!
Woe big up K&G!!!! Love your channel cool to see you in the comments.
When Destiny mentioned schools in rich areas having better resources & the guy asks him to expand & he gives a super expansive answer with like 4 examples, that's why he's the champ
It depresses me that he had to explain it though. I mean, I bet (without having looked into it myself) that the study he cited will likely show that the spending which favors people of color actually only relates to government spending, and not the amount spent per pupil total. What that means is that while the government spends more on black people, far less is actually spent on those populations.
@@joeymac4302 if i interpreted your response correctly, in a lot of lower income areas, ghettos, actually have very high per student spenditure. Thousands per child, but are still very poor in academic achievement, some of this in my belief is due to government opportunities for college that is provided to them due to thier lack of success, and poor management of spending.
Edit: i reread your response, and mine is not based of the study in the video.
Private schools are not public schools
every time someone says "systematic" when they mean "systemic", I crush a puppy to death in a video game.
...what's the difference
@@ElNoobWithinV5321 Systematic is done through a methodical fixed plan, Systemic is relating to the system rather than any one part.
Thanks, @@SesameSamurai
Damn that's harsh. I had a hard time killing dogs in Last of Us 2.
@@phanatic215 I had a hard time playing TLoU2 because it was so ass.
Destiny? Damn, that’s a beautiful thing
For as much as conservatives decry “collectivism,” it sure seems like they derive all their meaning and purpose from it. The first guy basically admitted that in order for life to have meaning, he needs everyone to believe the exact same thing that he does.
Also him saying that conformity has to be enforced to keep his group members from copying deviant behavior
That's a strawman. There's no way his position is "my life doesn't have meaning unless everyone believes the same thing I do".
Because clearly he already believes his life has meaning since he's a christian. And clearly he recognizes that not everyone agrees with him or else he wouldn't be debating Destiny.
That would be like saying "in order for christianity to be true everyone has to believe that christianity is true". Which is clearly false since most christians believe that christianity is true while simultaneously recognizing that not everyone is a christian.
Maybe you misspoke.
So yeah I don't think there is a single person on the planet who believes that there life is meaningless unless everyone agrees with them.
Dude, your profile pic brought back NCS-esq dub-shit memories. Whole different life then, shit
@@1999_reborn you thinking it doesn’t mean it’s true lol
52:10 to skip the argument on beauty, guy spends the whole time using synonyms for "subjective" cause he knows he's donezo if he uses that word
That hurt a bit lol. He seems alright though.
Unless he was the same guy fawning over orban in hungary.
@@rebirthoflegend4797 he was the same guy.
@@grnarrow7695 he ain't aright then
“Beauty is implicit.” This guy is so far up his own ass.
Just waffling on. Literally scouring his brain in real time
Why can't the guy talking about objective beauty tell the truth?
"Objective beauty is what I find beautiful."
He kept saying that people have a generally consistency between their faculties that lead to things that we universally find beautiful, like sunsets. And I can feel like I can see how that's something that could be seen as a good point, but then that leads me to question if that means that things that people don't find beautiful consistency across culture are an example of some kind of "false beauty" to them. Say for example a kind of music that is generally agreed upon within a culture that is beautiful, that when a person outside that culture is newly exposed to finds abrasive and unpleasant. Would that person bite the bullet and admit that all the things they find beautiful that don't fit that thin definition of universal beauty are "false beauty"? Probably not, I suppose.
edit: And I suppose this is me interpreting what they were saying as differentiating between there being a difference between objective beauty, and subjective beauty. That these are two different things. But they had multiple opportunities to establish that, and they didn't. I just don't know how a person could operate their logic without that being the case.
@@joej.3848 That's the thing though, there are no things that are universally beautiful to people. There's a famous saying: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
And it's pretty straight forward. There are things that are "generally" considered beautiful because alot of people find it beautiful. A sunset may be a good example of that. On the other hand there are people who don't find anything special about a sunset, I'd be one of those persons. I would never say that a sunset is "ugly", it's just a non factor to me. I find an absence of sunlight much more aesthetically pleasing than actual sunlight, meaning nighttime of course as it exposes celestial objects.
Value in beauty is not derived from objectivity but from nurture and evolutionary factors. Certain types of music aren't inherently beautiful. We are TAUGHT that they are beautiful by being exposed to them and adhering certain feeling towards them. Does the minor scale objectively sound more sad and beautiful? To our ears possibly because we are trained to garner those feelings when we hear that scale. Does a diminished scale objectively sound chaotic and dysphoric? To most western ears yes, because they aren't used to hearing those frequencies played together in those intervals. In classical music you often used diminished scales to display discomfort, dysphoria or an unpleasent sound. In metal music diminished chords are often used to sound "beautiful".
Same goes for anything in this world. Some people in this world certainly find the element of "death" and crimson color of blood beautiful while most people probably find it repulsive.
To reitterate. I don't think we have an inherit sense of what beauty is. What we find beautiful is based on our upbringing and is somewhat based on evolutionary elements like sexual drive. This is the primary reason why what's considered beautiful is different amongst different cultures in the world. Another primary drive behind beauty is volume of exposure. The more "rare" or less occuring something is to you, generally, the more beautiful it may tend to be observing it. A certain piece of music may sound beautiful to you, but if you listen to it long enough it may actually turn to torment for you. Lets use an extreme example. Say that you're locked inside a whiteroom in a straightjacket and you're played a "objectively" beautiful piece of music for days on end. I'm pretty certain most people wouldn't associate that piece of music with beauty in the end but with torture.
this literally ALL the objective shit boils down to moralety taste they literally point to animalistic intuition and personal taste vapid human beings
Toilet bad
@@henrikswanstrom9218 very good illustration of what the arguement of subjectivity versus objective morals boils down to.
Everything is subjective after the nervous system responses.
A knee jerk isn't subjective.
However whether we think it is good or bad to have a knee jerk reaction is entirely subjective.
Feeling threatened can be objective - fight and flight responses. However what we see as threatening is mostly subjective.
A messy topic. Which is why I think it's so naive for anyone to speak of objective morality like it's even remotely plausible.
I'd choose this over the recent lefty debates any day of the week
Those weren't really debates (I assume you are talking about the Omaha people), it was more some crazy idpol people, this was better but it just was conservatives dancing around to avoid trans people, still watched both though
@@evolution__snow6784 right, but they were atleast more good faith, and while the peanut thing was weird, they weren't outright attacking him for shit or calling him hasans bitch boy. Like they were just normal (who knows what they have in their heads) so it was noce
@@evolution__snow6784 dude I would rather listen to conservatives dance around not wanting to say they aren’t comfortable around lgbtq then anything like those Omaha people
Човек на културата
Eh, this felt empty. Destiny barely pushed back even when the guy was advocating for inferior genetics on black people. This felt...weird to watch
You already know this will be fun when you hear "Morally Objective"
you already know this will be fun when you hear "chairboozle"
@Sneed Central that's your opinion ;) therefore even whether morality is objective is subjective...
@Sneed Central how do you prove that?
@Sneed Central "Denying that a theory’s ill-fit with our intuitions is[n't] a reason for doubting its truth. Consider the thesis that we have a common ancestors with apes, or that time flows slower when travelling at high speeds, or that a particle can exist in a superposition between distinct locations; all of these theses are highly counter-intuitive, but this gives us little or no reason to think them false."
@Sneed Central "Proof by intuition" is the fallacy I try to demonstrate.
wasnt expecting a debate on the universality of aesthetics when i clicked on a video about college republicans
lmao
I’m sorry as an artist it was hard to listen to
I liked this segment a lot. Both parties seemed relatively respectful of each other and I appreciate everyone’s ability to not explicitly be an asshole. Discussions like this actually have the ability to change peoples mindsets and get them to work together. 10/10 content
100 percent agree. The level of maturity of both sides was refreshing.
I prefer this debate to most debates that Vivian participates in
Destiny’s main opponent here gives off strong “douche guy from good will hunting” vibes
@@widukindgaladh949 That is just confirmation bias on your part. Making definitive statements about a person with just one example is idiotic.
@@RanEncounter this is confirmation bias, you have no idea if he’s only seen one example
@@TEHSOULREAPER Can you show me the evidence that I have not reviewed other possibilities and not gathered information about this individual to the point that I can reasonably claim my statement is correct? Because now you are just assuming I have not done that.
@@RanEncounter yes
Will give props to the guy thus far for at least acknowledging holes/faults with his argument if taken in a certain direction.
It’s definitely a breath of fresh air. Good ole civility
after the other recent omaha debates my standards are so low
can't believe I'm saying this but man made infinitely more sense than the lefties in the previous 2 videos...
@@cozytown5540 when you have to evoke god or some other unprovable concept as an answer you are begging the question and destroy only yourself.
@@cozytown5540 he used the word intuitive a lot for someone who's arguing on the side of an objective truth.
Honestly this debate was refreshing. All of them were willing to engage in more abstract ideas and actually listened to each other
The people who own the Dr Seuss books are deciding for themselves to stop production of a handful of books. It wasn't because of cancel culture
AMAZIN
@Aluminum Marsupial Disney decided to do this themselves. That isnt cancel culture. And, adults with Disney+ accounts can still access the films.
@@RunFreeRyan If the people who work at Disney decide to pull shows for one reason or another. That would still be cancelling a program. Cancel Culture doesn't have to be an external experience.
@@jonathanblount6437 uhh... that isnt what cancel culture means at all lol.
@@RunFreeRyan In you non analytical mind im sure it doesn't.
"A rich person can make their voice more heard than a black person" - majestic.
But for real, that guy was polite and seemed to engage in good faith.
POV: Joe Biden
You could see Destiny cringe hard at that moment
Potentially good faith with cognitive dissonance lol
He was flopping between rich/poor and white/black making the comparison of more white people are richer than black people and thus can make their voices heard easier/have more societal impact. It was a small slip of the tongue but it wasn't Freudian or anything, he was using all four terms to make a point. It's cute to poke fun at him for it but let's not think he made some huge faux pas
@@autumneagle exactly. It made sense in context imo.
I am very socially conservative but I love destiny bc he is so well spoken and logical. Subbed and watch his videos often.
He's better than his fanbase, that's for sure. The complaints are warranted
@@mypartyisprivate8693 the main core of the fan base is pretty good, the subreddit and d.gg are both very well behaved. It’s mostly the TH-cam/twitch audience that are bad
So what's wrong with his fanbase?
@@ivcorr femboys are...something
@@ivcorr I love how that's your go-to question
In ye olden times pink/red were male colors and blue a female color
@@coreyander286 but pink and red are blood colored? How would that be a wrong Assosciation?
@@coreyander286 If we allow blue to be a female color next thing you know people will be marrying their dogs!
When the one dude is so disillusioned he argues Destiny's same points back and still thinks he's a conservative
A lot of people are mainly in the conservative camp due to their social views.
That's a very short-minded take on what a conservative is... Do you lump all people on the "right" together? I'm a conservative ish and I enjoy destiny's content for the most part. That doesn't mean that there isn't a lot I disagree with him about.
@@512TURNER Most of the comments I've seen from new conservatives is (the far left is crazy I will now vote right). Typically thats not how beliefs evolve even if I was a conservative I wouldn't stop being a conservative just because Nick Fuentes became popular or another extreme right wing group became vocal.
Not saying all conservatives are like this hell... if there are mental variances that make some men like things that some women like why wouldn't there be ones that make us more likely to naturally lean a certain way politically?
@@Anthropomorphic that’s me I’m economically left and socially right
You have to be chronically white to think all conservative opinions are just "black ppl bad no welfare state or immigrants hurdur"
"Can we get an N in chat for peanuts"
Totally understandable slip up.
I don't see the problem... I've spent years driving around with "N" pressed against my car's rear window in order to make those behind me look at it... It's a completely normal letter and there's nothing wrong with it...
@@RealmRabbit idk if Americans will get this joke lmao
@@deathgang2017 Please explain for said Americans
@@benbowland in some provinces in Canada, drivers need to get their N (new driver) which is a magnet that goes on the back of your car for 2 years, before being able to take another test to get you your full license. The N makes you only allowed to have 1 passenger and you can't have any alcohol in your system when driving.
Being a conservative is antithetical to the idea of going to college and learning things.
"Would you say that you're similar to this guy Vaush?"
"No, he's more of a socialist, and I wouldn't cross that line"
"oh, so you're not the average liberal"
fucking kill me.
the political engagement of the conservative movement is so far gone in the cytoplasm of their cells that I feel that there is just 1 line in the sand for all political ideas that they work with. On one end for them, it is the “truth/conservatism” end and on the other end it is “leftist/leftist in the closet” end. There is just no in-between, and because of that you get amazing conversations like the one u just mentioned lol. They cannot procreate an idea outside of this spectrum, because if they do it completely destroys their political framework.
Yall need to go outside. (both of you)
No its actually conservative to learn new things. You're taking the conservative word too literally.
Thats like saying you're not a Liberal because you think murder is wrong.
Why?
@@coryc8819 ..........what
"Destiny challenges conservatives..."
Just stop right there
I'm in
The guy debating Destiny is illogical at times, but he's definitely intelligent. I like that, feels very human on both sides.
I think that's an important point because it means you can be smart but still very wrong on some issues or even just one aspect of an issue. Everyone has blind spots no matter how smart they are. Even if you are the world's best heart surgeon, it doesn't mean you have anything worthwhile to contribute about leg prosthetics and you couldn't design a bionic leg that actually worked. At least not without years more training and experience.
@@Isvoor I think you've misunderstood the situation with your analogy a little there, you're accusing him of having no worthy input to philosophy when he very clearly knew (from a definition and semi-deductive standpoint) what he was talking about. Something more analogous might be a Heart surgeon in training being put into a room with another surgeon and asked to perform Heart surgery.
@@italianwaffle5592 True, I was exaggerating.
@@Isvoor All in good faith, my friend.
I think there is a legitimate phenomenon where lefties both feel more self righteous in their beliefs and feel social pressure from other lefties to treat their beliefs in a super moralized super righteous way than typical republicans. To be fair alot of trump fans fall into this trap too but your average college Republican seems way more willing to engage with disagreement in a healthy way than the average college lefty
It's crazy to me that these guys will state something objectively true and then immediately go off the deep end with their conclusion.
@@Daniel-ih4zh stating "beauty is objective" while not being able to substantiate that claim with anything other than "because God is real and beauty is that which makes you want to do good/spurs you toward God".
If you reject the presumption that God is either real or inherently good (I would argue the deity worshipped by the cults of Yahweh and Jesus would be evil if it were indeed real but that's another argument altogether) then the conclusion makes zero sense.
22:00 the law of non-contradiction doesn't apply to a set of traits unless they are exclusionary. ie, the definition of the set of A *includes* the fact that the set excludes everything that is NOT A. So he right there admitted that being a man is essentially defined as not being a woman.
I really enjoyed his debate. He did piss me off a little because they were both saying really simple things with way too many words. It was also kinda weird the direction he kept taking it. Half baked and kinda brain smoothing, but I'm excited philosophy is getting pushed to a wider audience.
@@hatiroth7919 really simple things with way too many words: philosophy
@@aydenr5467 Right? It deviates between mind numbingly simple and unbearably complex. The simplicity is achieved by strong conceptual understanding. (Not to imply my brain isn't smooth, I'm just speaking generally.)
That objection came immediately to me to. Step 1) Commit black and white fallacy. Step 2) Apply the law of non-contradiction to the concept you used the fallacy on.
This dude is arguing for objective beauty because humanity as a whole tends to gravitate toward certain standards of beauty, ignoring the fact that each person still has a unique subjective interpretation of those standards. He argued the complete opposite when it comes to the collective standard of morality: because it is possible for people to have a subjective take on the semi-universal moral standards human societies have adopted, then morality is meaningless (when he argues against secular moral systems). So on one hand, beauty is all-important, its objectivity proven by humans’ subjective tendencies. On the other hand, morality is rendered meaningless by humans’ subjective tendencies. This discussion proves that political discussions are POINTLESS. The only useful discussion to have is the one that addresses the root of the issue: subscription/devotion to metaphysical truths.
It would also help if he understood the Aristotelianism he was trying to invoke
I think fetishes are proof that beauty is subjective, in a way. I will say that there are beauty standards humans tend to be drawn towards, but there's no definitive rule for what people will be attracted to.
@@TheBetweenSkill actually, with regards to heterosexual men's preferences there are trends that can be observed cross culturally. Men tend to like a good hip to waist ratio, healthy fertility markers (clear skin, large breasts) and neotonous facial features. So, obviously there are some deviations from this that differ on an individual basis, but these are trends that can be observed across the globe. I will say that a trend doesn't mean it is a rule though, and humans have a wide array of sexual preferences.
You can't really argue beauty has something to do with God when you can't demonstrate God exists. Without demonstrating God actually exists it is meaningless.
@@coreyander286 yeah that's another unsubstantiated claim, very frustrating. It was interesting to hear them admit that their views were all based on a belief in something they can't even demonstrate is real though. At least that was honest.
@@drummingtildeath Cosmological argument
@@CR33SIVE that was a seriously low effort response.
@@drummingtildeath i know
i am god
It's 4:07 AM, I turn on my laptop even though I know I should just go to bed only to find a 2 hour destiny video waiting for me... lol.
me too. i suddenly jolted awake, and i see why now
oh god why i want to sleep
Facts
Do it (Sith Voice)
lmfao
>Beauty is an acquired taste that one must learn to appreciate
>Beauty is purely intuitive and trying to think about it ruins it.
Pick one
Yeah I was super confused by that little conversation
On one hand beauty is whatever spurs you to god ( whatever that means)
But it’s also a intuitive feeling that we like
But also it must be learned to appreciate
That's what I thought as well xD
I feel like some things are universal accepted as being beautiful while other things are very subjective in nature when it comes down to it.
The first guy that spoke sounds like he unironically basis all his political opinions on ben Shapiro destroys SJW's with facts and logic videos.
unrelated but you have an amazingly baded profile picture
Unironically, that’s the impression I get of a lot of right wingers, especially online. It’s like they get there whole world view off of /pol/ shitposting.
@@J0sh_395 that's funny because I get the impression that leftists find and practice their views from Destiny comment sections.
@@bingbung yes all leftists get their views from the comment section of a dude with 300k subs
@@bingbung Even then, at least it'll be more correct than whatever anecdotal and trash analysis you'll find on Anti-SJW videos and pol postings
You know it’s a philosophy debate when the two debaters literally gain zero ground or greater understanding of each other’s arguments.