Sargon Admits Destiny Wins Morality Debate
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.ค. 2024
- DEBATE: Destiny debates morality on the Sitch and Adam show...
Date: 17 Jul, 2022
▼Follow Destiny▼
►STREAM - www.destiny.gg/bigscreen
►DISCORD - discordapp.com/invite/destiny
►REDDIT - / destiny
►INSTAGRAM - / destiny
►MERCH - shop.destiny.gg/
Check Out My Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/destiny
Buy My Merch: shop.destiny.gg/
00:00 Teaser / Intro
00:41 Destiny debates Adam on morality
09:11 "Destiny just demolished you here" - Sargon
25:18 Kids to drag shows
32:35 Are all drag shows sexual?
44:02 Why not just bring someone who watches drag?
#Destiny
YOU'RE COWARDLY - Destiny Calls Out NuanceBro On Conservative Panel ►th-cam.com/video/Dy2b_QoSas0/w-d-xo.html
This is actually one of the stupidest conversations I’ve ever wasted my time listening to. Thoroughly enjoyed.
lol that read like an Amazon review
😂😂 my feelings exactly
I havent finished watching the video but you should watch the discussion with that other fash guy about morality too, it should top this one
should find it if you search furious far right PHD
I personally had to stop in the middle. Frustrating convo
This entire conversation boils down to "I don't understand why people enjoy this thing so I'm going to assume it just turns them on"
You watch Nascar for the fast cars and wrecks,
I watch Nascar for the hot cussy,
We are not the same.
It would have been easier to just claim drag lends itself to fetish despite not intrinsically being sexualized, like furries. Seemed like semantics dragged this part of the convo way down as a result.
"I just don't get it, so I'm just going to listen to Glen Beck" - Clowns
Damn, I can’t believe Adam really said that Morality turns destiny on.
@@chipotlegourmaise4250 and?
"It's a naturalistic fallacy"
*Destiny explains that it being a fallacy won't matter to someone who's moral system is based on that fallacy*
"But it's a naturalistic fallacy"
*Destiny explains again*
"Uhhh does someone else wanna talk"
Watched him reach the end of the dialog tree in real time. Guy hit an EOF exception.
Soy
"This doesn't compile"
- that dude probably
Adam committed fallacy fallacy
End of file? Lmao
@@spencer.eccles to be more specific, he hit EOA or an EOL (end of argument, or an end of logic)
"There's literally no way people could enjoy drag except for the specific reasons that I assume specifically because my position makes no sense otherwise."
I’ve got friends that are straight women that just like drag make up and glam aesthetic. There’s nothing sexual about it for them. Idk how he couldn’t possibly conceive of other reasons to be into drag.
@@Adam-tu1lk Drag is fundamentally sexual, it's not the same as men dressing as women in pantomime or whatever. Drag is men representing a hypersexual caricature of a woman for adult entertainment while pantomime is a visual comedy gag
@@niceone550 that's your interpretation of drag, that's not what drag is
@@niceone550 L take seethe cope get mad
"I understand what you're saying", proceeds to repeat his flawed view of philosophy
Flawed? What didn't they completely agree at the end ?
Sounds like Adam was just confused af
Yeah. All I kept hearing was I agree but I disagree. It's always frustrating talking to people like him.
@@error_3498 I don't think Stitch knew what he was arguing. If he did he'd realise Destiny was saying the same thing as him. So yeah, "flawed". But they managed to clear up, so it's all good
@@error_3498 if a claim or perspective has faulty or confused steps under it, then I think it’s fair to call the view flawed - at least at that moment. When they clarify everything later, once it’s strong and clear, then it’s a less flawed view
It’s like no one has ever heard a conversation before lol. The vast majority of people aren’t good at expressing their thoughts in clear and concise ways, even if they understand them. What we just watched was someone verbally thinking. If your someone who thinks in pictures and not language, it can be very difficult to express yourself. It doesn’t mean the guy was wrong. The entire purpose of discussions is so we can test and formulate our ideas better and that’s exactly what just happened.
Nothings funnier than sargon going "can you send me drag that is non sexual" looks at nonsexual drag, and retorts basically "this is not drag because its not sexual"
It’s simply because he considers the definition of drag to include sexuality. This is why when he says to present non-sexual drag he’s basically demanding an impossible task to prove a point. The problem is that nobody would ever know what he meant as he never once outlines it.
the only correct answer is that drag cannot be sexual
That video destiny showed him wasn't sexual tho.
It's actually frustrating to listen to someone so devoid of logical reasoning. If he just said at the start that he defines drag by being sexual then at least they could have just argued that instead of wasting time with this "well I've never seen it on the conservative media I consume, so send me some right now or I can't even entertain the hypothetical of non sexual drag"
@@yvanaluz9994 do you have any clue what anyone here said at all?
I’m 7 minutes in and I don’t know that I’ve ever heard anyone understand morality less than Adam, I hope it gets better.
8 minutes in, same thought
Adam has read one book on morality and thinks he knows more than 2000+ years of people writing about it
@@johnkohl762 Specifically, listened to someone read it and he brings that one book up all the time.
It'd be fine if he wasn't so smug about it.
it doesn't
Every time this guy says “you are strawmanning my position” and goes on further, you realize he is not aware of his own position
I realized lot of people who throw out the "you're strawmanning me broo" have no clue what they're even talking about.
Shroedinger’s strawman: it both IS a strawman and yet IS NOT even a position.
As one famous scientist said, “it’s not even wrong.” It’s not even developed enough to be criticized ! Lol 😆
@@frankmarano1118 Or are actively being dishonest. Adam isn't being dishonest though, he's just a brain-fried pothead.
You guys have a rather narcissistic take. Most people aren’t good at speaking so their thoughts are not portrayed correctly is more likely the case.
Everytime someone says "you are strawmanning my position" God curbstomps a kitten.
"Suicide is illegal."
You know, it's pretty hard to punish people that commit suicide.
Like beating a dead horse.
😁
You can punish people who attempt suicide. And those who aid and abet them.
Not all suicide attempts are successful but even then we can punish the relatives.
@@Lewa500 if you try to commit suicide and fail then you are probably just looking for attention. And that is a crime worthy of the death penalty.
I have never understood that law. I get it may give the government some authority to step in if it fails, but when it is successful, it's utterly pointless.
All I got from this debate is that Sargon is uncontrollably turned on by drag
For some reason, it's tradition to have a "Pantomime Dame" AKA a man in drag, to play a comic role in Pantomimes in British Theatre.
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 Yeah but they are usually they look like Robin William in Mrs. Doubtfire or Martin Lawrence in big mama's house, not like what most people think of drag queens. It's a physical and visual comedy gag like in Monty Python or Benny Hill.
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 Yes which is fundamentally different from drag
Drag is fundamentally sexual, it's not the same as men dressing as women in pantomime or whatever. Drag is men representing a hypersexual caricature of a woman for adult entertainment while pantomime is a visual comedy gag
@@bradmiles1984 Great comment, beat me to it
@@niceone550 Men dressing as women in pantomime IS drag. Nothing in drag says it needs to be "hypersexual", you just made that up.
You are making up you own definition for Drag, then reading a sign that says "Drag Queen Signging Competition" and screaming "They must be doing hipersexual stuff! Think of the Children!"
"Is drag difficult?" they asked smugly, inferring it's not
Bruh, I don't even watch drag and I know the people who do it spend years working on their make up skills and making the costumes and learning to dance, sing and do jokes, and a vast range of other related skills. When they said people watch sport to watch people be skillful at something, they unknowingly described drag as well.
Tell me about it. Even regular everyday makeup and curling your hair is insanely time-consuming and difficult enough for a lot of us.
Not to mention its coming from people who's primary "skill" is half-baked online political content from the comfort of their computer/webcam.
This conversation made me want to shoot myself. I've seen so much drag and it takes an insane amount of skill and people do it for a ton of different reasons. They have to be comedians,makeup artists, costum designers, fashion designers, dancers, singers and whatever else to be successful drag queens. That amount of skill is really cool to see to me and inspires some of my own art.
Sargon attempting to do drag is a thing of nightmares.
The comparison with Cosplay is fitting here, I think. There's some people that enjoy making costumes and will spend months and months working on their costume and some will have spent YEARS perfecting the skills needed for their craft. And that effort and skill is impressive to look at.
He wasnt being strawman’d. He would say that he didnt think science cant prescribe morals, but he was using science to prescribe morals whilst saying he didnt think science could prescribe morals.
God it’s so frustrating listening to that convo.
To be fair, what makes arguments with Adam entertaining is that destiny plays the contrarian, and Carl plays very loose with definitions and vague with virtue ethics.
They "were" strawmanning Adams argument. (Adam said his goal was to have philosophical conversations about morals and morality to actually move past the philosophy part and into morality with our society we are a part of compared to other societies around us. Because there's no realistic meaning when we keep the argument about morality in the abstract vacuum of a pretend society. Since we will always make judgements on social experiences. We can't judge experiences we've never had.. etc) that's all what we can make an inference to.
because they were not engaging with what Adam was proposing. Then Carl was gaslighting Adam by taking destiny's side for laughs. At one point Carl was laughing at Destiny who made a wrong argument too. lol.
Adam is simply moving past the logic trap of the is ought issue. And saying once we decide what is moral for a society, then of course we use metrics to determine moral differences. And morals only matter once we are talking about a group of socially bonded people.
Destiny was right when he said it's difficult to "settle moral differences". But at that point Destiny should have understood what the comvo was about.
And going back to argue about the conditions of science and morals was just destiny being contrarian for fun.
@@AKABattousai Let me think on that answer, i will edit in a response later.
@@AKABattousai Yeah, I think the fact that Adam kept talking about morality, even when in his mind he had moved past the is/oughts into what Destiny thinks of as non-moral normative statements, confused Destiny into thinking he was making Scientist arguments. When they asked Adam to clarify what he was talking about the disagreement ended pretty quickly.
But, even after all that, Adam's point still doesn't make sense; Destiny does have a valid reason for asking people to clarify when they're making moral statements, the problem is Adam extends the term morality to include the normative principles downstream from values. I can see how political conversations could be hard/confusing/frustrating for him.
It's hard to tell, but it feels like he is saying that science can inform morality. The information from science can modulate people's morality? It feels like he's getting at the feedback loop between information -> new thoughts -> changed morality... since he was agreeing that science can't tell you what you ought to believe is moral, but by its existence it affects morality just like everything art, world events etc.
Best part, Carl cant stop laughing because destiny is too busy "destroying" adam to say anything to him.
That's called smuckling.
schadenfruede
*Kyle
@@tcritt good old meme
@@smithfrederick2 *Schadenfreude 🤓
Carl is enjoying this so much because just a few days before this, Carl and Adam had a heated conversation about the foundations of beliefs and values, specifically liberalism. This conversation and the former were quite similar.
I've personally enjoyed his critiques and find them interesting considering they may be actual potential flaws (especially the morality portion). I am baffled they just don't want to hear it
@@SupersaiyanChristian I hope to god youre not talking about Sitch because nothing that came out of that guys moth was beyond 5 IQ points. It was such a shallow, stupid understanding of the subject I actually got brain cancer listening to him
It's weird because I think Sargon did very poorly in the liberalism debate, his arguments were pretty shallow and frustrating especially whenever he gets trapped into a logical corner he goes "I DONT CAAAAARE" repeatedly until they move onto the next point.
@@samuelmorkbednarzkepler tbf if it was speaking, that's an unbelievably high iq moth
Carl does still have some of his own idiosyncratic vanities, which in my estimation were exactly the reason for his being quite obtuse for quite some time about the pertinent criticisms and re-evaluations of Liberalism, but all the same i appreciate that - even if saintly patience is sometimes required *and* an (at best) semi-plausible means of chalking ailments up to the French, Germans & Celts - he does value a well founded and intellectually honest case, and holds it to be ideal and practicable and good form to value such, and to strive to live in accord thereto. Which mightn't sound like much, but considering that
Many, and likely Most, who profess Liberalisms' sanctity demonstrate that this is very much not something intrinsic to them, i think it is notable for Carl.
and to be clear, that isn't even necessarily negative, at least not in principle, but it does illustrate what i would assert to be the redundancy, self conceit & self unawareness, of Liberalism as a civilizational animating ideology. When it becomes such, virtue is rendered vice.
the beginning of this conversation is exactly what my philosophy teacher explained in the first month of 101. You shouldn't start the legal solution with a moral justification.
@@egggge4752 because legal systems strive first for being consistent (meaning they fit with previous laws and court decisions, precedents) and for being applied in a fair-minded way (like making sure that a law applies to everyone , making it fair).
The reason legal debates don’t START with morality , is because the process of law-making doesn’t start with ethics. There is overlap with morality, of course, but moralizing is a totally different process from law-making.
As Destiny said, when we are making our morals and our social circles, we are free from the burden of being consistent or fair-minded the way law-makers are. We can start with our moral priorities, and stick to that in our personal lives, without ever worrying about applying it at the level of law makers. This difference is because, that is a different process - socializing and morals and culture VS law-making. We can’t take this personal moral approach and make laws this way, and we can’t approach our social moral sphere with the legalistic rigid and lifeless process.
@@Sprite_525 wouldn’t you say that laws are generalized morality that everyone agrees with and the morality that we think should be right is actually the personal morality that strives from our own personal ideologies and beliefs? I’m saying this to kinda understand your point better 😅
@@Drew-The-Philosopher I agree and they went over that in the beginning at 5:35 when discussing the fact that law is codified morality, and that there is overlap between morality and law. This is true, we don’t make random laws, or have random science. The morality pushes us to start with particular laws and particular scientific questions.
But once it rises to a legal process, the morality is de-prioritized compared to consistency within that legal system. Morality is still SOME priority (like we don’t want a perfectly consistent traffic law if it kills people unnecessarily), but fairness and consistency take a top priority compared to the intuitive ethics.
Similarly, with science, we have human concerns that push us to investigate some things in science while ignoring others. But once it enters a scientific research program, it prioritizes morally neutral stuff like statistics and replicability (aka ‘if the findings can be repeated if you take the scientist’s gear and repeat their exact process).
So there’s always a major overlap. But the key difference between law, science, and morality, is that they’re extremely different processes - on purpose.
If morality was as burdened with being as systematic as legislation or being as rigorous as science, then our personal lives would be suffocating.
That makes perfect logical sense, thank you, but to understand in a way to make it bolt points for me. Law is “morality” for the masses?
@@Drew-The-Philosopher Remember when heresy was a crime ? Remember when oral sex was a crime ?
I'm glad a whole new audience is being exposed to the fact that S-class is best class
A team is ontological better. Just because sitch actually thinks before speaking doesn't mean he's better.
@@osian3854 You’re deontologically and epistemologically deranged, and figuratively suffering from empirical psychosis at the present moment.
"S-class is the best class-ah!" Get it right! heh
@@robinthrush9672 you forgot the sksksks at the end.
@@JohnBender1313 Awe damn, I did!
Debating Adam is like debating a toddler. He's easily confused, distracted, and will lose control of his emotions when frustrated (which is easy to do). I sometimes watch Adam and Sitch, but Adam almost always detracts from a discussion. Granted, it was sometimes enjoyable watching him call out some people who refused to take a solid position and contradict themselves.
Adam is the elephant. Sitch is the rider
I wouldn't say he often loses emotional control, he only really gets like that when talking to incredibly scummy people like Lance.
When doing reviews Adam constantly accidentally makes the oppositions argument for them and it's up to stich to guide him back towards their position. Always funny lol
I enjoy Adam and Sitch, but why I'm there is def split 30/70 respectively
He also brings solid Grug energy sometimes. Like when Sitch was debating Sargon about Ukraine.
Adam is cool but hes not as smart as Destiny and Sargon. Adam is more of a meme guy making jokes. He should stay out of in depth conversations and let sitch handle them
Agreed. If Adam added a little more humility and curiosity into the exchange, it could’ve been a way funnier and interesting discussion, imho.
And limboing under Sargon is quite the feat.
I don't always agree with Adam and Sitch, but I find them to be likable enough.
Yup, especially Sitch.
@@theafflictionvhs17 They have a good dynamic, they work better together IMO.
Sitch is the autistic factor finder, and Adam brings the fire.
Sitch can sometimes get lost in the weeds and be too nice, whereas Adam can lose his cool.
Sitch is consistently logical and level-headed. Almost anytime I disagree with him on something, it's because we differ on some root premise (which ideally is what arguments should be about).
Adam on his own would be a disaster, Sitch pulls that show together and makes even Adam work. As someone who have been watching less than a month of those guys
Coming out the gates with the argument that morality and legality are essentially the same thing was an utterly bonkers and ballsy thing to do.
The root cause of this confusion is that drag and transgenderism aren't the same and can't really be treated the same. Drag is an age old tradition in panto in the UK, and I'm surprised Sargon didn't know of it, since kids going to see panto is a common experience of English childhood. It was also common in the past for female roles in actual theater to be played by men. It seems like drag and transgenderism are going to steadily merge in the minds of people, both because there are so many conservatives who are not cognizant of actual traditions, and because of the kinds of trans activists who view crossdressing as "egg" behavior. I think non-transgender crossdressers might slowly disappear from our cultural memory as so many people who were previously just crossdressers start identifying as a different gender or non-binary, and conservatives conflate the two. On the internet, it's expressed somewhat in how the definition of "trap" has become confused.
What is egg behavior?
@@-47- I think it might originally come from reddit, but it's a word trans activists use to describe someone who is exhibiting pre-trans behavior. Basically the idea is that they are an "egg" that will "hatch" into a trans person.
Of course this can lead to a lot of unwarranted assumptions.
I actually think drag might be in sort of a liminal state too. The original idea was kind of that it was inherently funny to have a man exhibit feminine behaviour or to try to pass off as a woman, but these days that mindset is often considered sort of offensive and regressive to the trans community. I wouldn't be surprised if drag shows eventually are looked upon the way we look at blackface now.
I would say the that because drag shows are not common plays a role in perception. Most people I would hazard a guess would think a man dressing in woman's clothing is sexual because of the fact there is a sexual fetish of it and men stealing women's underwear and bras has always been associated with perverts. That reputation taints drag sadly and other past events.
"I know what you're saying" *immediately demonstrates he doesn't know what he's saying*
It was seriously the next sentence every time
Listening to a group of people who've barely even heard of drag outside of triggered political posts try to suss out what the idea behind drag is while refusing to so much as google it is insanity. The fact that absolutely none of them brought up the performative aspects like standup comedy and celebrity impersonation really makes the "9 times out of 10 it is a fetish.." malarky less surprising
Yep. I’ve passed by a few drag shows living in a big city out on the town. It’s usually a talent show of some kind with men dressed as overly feminine women. That’s about it.
So what’s the difference between stand up comedy and drag, then?
I haven't watched the video yet, I will.
I'm assuming a portion of it is based on drag queens reading stories or having events with kids.
Why do you think teachers and is it safe to say very left wing people are doing this?
Why aren't they promoting voice actors to read the stories? Or maybe get ahold of the original authors or other children's authors?
Why not send young girls to tech summits and young boys to fashion events? Why drag shows? What can be learned at a drag show?
Why are drag queens so glorified and held up as sought after people?
This is like listening to a bunch of boomer conservatives speculating on why anyone would like video games or anime. They've never played or watched it, or spoken to anyone who has. One of them says "well I'm sure some people just find it fun, or challenging, or they think it's emotionally engaging" but the others are 100% convinced it has to be because they're sexual deviants who get sadistic pleasure from watching violence (because all anime and video games are sexual and violent, and if you send me examples that aren't then those just aren't really anime or video games)
@@JobVanDam They aren't being sought out as much as they are volunteering. Entertainers are volunteering to tell stories to kids, libraries who are always short on volunteers accept. there's nothing crazy to it, they usually aren't "sought after" as much as there doing the work. Though I half suspect this is some copy pasta, if it is sincere, ignore this last sentence.
it's kinda wholesome to hear him discuss the meaning of morality, a flashback to simpler times
perceiving the goodness around you might be a form of divine simplification. being able to put that into words is not so simple
@@puppetperception7861 even after my entire belief system changed a number of times, C.S Lewis literary essays did it so well. him and jrr Tolkien understood the archetypes of humanity and good and evil better than anyone. Just that most people don't like when authors use spiritual terms, even if it's about an abstract idea.
@@QuixEnd we don’t like when we hear people use antiquated spiritual terms in a modern form of language. It is impossible to really use them the same as when they were first adopted making it easy to confuse with profanity.
The oldest buildings still in use must undergo maintenance just to look the same everyday. They might have even added a ramp for wheelchairs without having to destroy the whole building. I don’t know what happened to the others
@@puppetperception7861 wow, I'm surprised to hear anyone can recognize that. I've always heard either the totally ambiguous or even dogmatic use of spiritual terms or the complete rejection of them. I find them useful as a linguistic tool, especially when talking to emotional thinkers, which is probably the majority
The only thing we care about in this morality debate is how incredibly fucking immoral it is to claim sequels are better than prequels.
is destiny unironically evil?
ontologically evil take
Still waiting for Mewlblesteiner VS Destiny
True, they are nearly equally garbage
It is odd though, don't you think, that you can watch the same movie more than once and feel the suspense for a character, but frequently, when watching a prequel, you have that feeling in your head that "well, obviously that character will live, he's in the original'?
Destiny could have “won” this argument by merely jangling keys in front of Adam’s face. Dude has the depth of a thimble of warm spit.
damn thats a good one lmao
I have been to Drag shows and it was more like a talent show than anything else. There was a lot of singing and dancing, none of it provocative. I'm sure some are sexualized, but I don't know if it's the norm.
Right? It's crazy to me that this is not common knowledge
Finally some common sense in this accursed comment section.
@@InfiniteDeckhand Yeah Destiny now attracts chuds, they aren't that smart.
Destiny finally obtained Don Soygon blessing.
Who can stand against the Union of the Two Stepfathers?
sargon has been a fan of destiny for a very long time
When Sargon likes you, you've probably fucked up somewhere.
I can't imagine why Destiny burns bridges with everyone on the Left but lets people like Sargon within a 10ft radius. I get it, he hates other Lefties because they're bullies to him and keep calling him short and all. But damn dawg, do you really want someone as stupid as Soygon being friendly with you?
As someone who crossdresses, l think I can clear up some of the confusion.
1. Drag is typically a form of gender expression through performance. Now that's not to say you can't do drag if you're not necessarily performing but that's normally what it consists of. Sometimes it's just the simple act of crossdressing.
2. Drag can be sexual just like anything. We wear breastplates, hip pads, high heels, etc. but that does not mean every drag performance or performer is sexual in all cases nor does it mean we all wear hip pads, breastplates, etc. Some of us don't even pad or put on fake boobs.
3. Drag performance can be a number of things incorporated into one. Some of us sing, dance, perform comedy, and do acrobatics in some cases like handstands, backflips, etc.
4. In some cases we compete in pageants, celebrity impersonations, and more.
5. As far as the question of why we do it, I can only speak for myself. For me, it's something fun to do. I like doing makeup, sewing, fashion, and other things. It's never going to be a one size fits all answer. Not everyone has to do the same thing. People do things for a plethora of reasons. Just because someone doesn't understand the reason doesn't make that reason invalid or wrong. I'll never do gymnastics because I have no interest also I sometimes find it pointless but at the same time I respect it and understand that it takes a lot of work and dedication. The same goes for sports, racing, etc. I enjoy creating new looks to wear and new makeup designs. Plus there's usually more freedom as far as fashion goes with regards to clothing and makeup versus men. Not saying it can't be done as there are many a drag king not just queens who can come up with amazing and creative looks.
6. When it comes to difficulty, oh trust me. It is far from easy. Like I said before, there are pads, tights, tucking, wigs, heels (6 inches and higher a lot of the time), bras, jewelry, intricate garments, etc. Keep in mind, that we also perform while wearing all of this, not to mention the amount of time it takes to do our makeup which can take up to two hours.
7. This is in regards to kids, most drag performances take place in bar settings where kids normally aren't and shouldn't be allowed to be present. The drag story time aspect shouldn't be an issue as long as the style of dress isn't inappropriate, whatever that entails. You can wear fancy clothing that isn't sexual while keeping it in the spirit of drag and not inappropriate. Also if you don't want your kids involved in this, don't take them to participate. Don't take them to drag shows. I mean I also wouldn't necessarily consider horror movies with violence and murder to be appropriate for kids either, despite seeing Texas Chainsaw Massacre when I was in elementary school, but I don't see an uprising in the political discourse about getting rid of horror movies or the genre altogether. If you don't like a drag, don't want your kids around drag, then don't go see it, don't go watch it, etc. By the way, I'm not saying you can't have an opinion, that's fine. Drag isn't for everyone. But when you try to force that opinion on others or try to label people who do drag as immoral or over-sexual or trying to sexualize kids, that is a problem. Not every drag performer or gay person is the same, don't act like we are. I don't think every straight person is the same, but people are gonna talk no matter what.
8. Finally, at the end of the day it really isn't that deep, at least for me. Just shedding some light on the topic. I'm just a dude in a dress who enjoys playing a little dress-up now and then. If you don't understand it, then maybe it isn't for you to understand.
Thank you!
As a fellow crossdresser, I agree with your points.
Steve: Conservatives will have hardline moral stances about LGBT issues
Carl: that's a very extreme position, even for conservatives
Coping or lying?
it's hard to say, especially when the next guy LITERALLY agrees with the position that carl thinks is the extreme position -_-
In Britain during the pride month, both Labour and Tories accounts of Twitter displayed pro LGBT messages.The only difference was that the Labour ones had the current LGBTQI(...) flags in avatars and the conservatives had the classic ones (the "conservative" pride flags 🙃)
Considering that modern politics has shifted the Overton window so quickly, yeah, tons of people falling into conservative-by-default positions that were moderates a couple years ago don't care that much about pro or anti LGBT issues.
You forgot to add or telling the truth. I'm conservative but I don't have many hardline moral stances about LGBT issues, my stance comes down what I feel a large portion of people feel which is do what you want as long as you aren't infringing on other peoples rights. What you do in your bedroom is between you and your partner. If you want change your name and what you identify as go ahead. Only real hardline most have is when it comes to kids because they can be easily influenced and your brain isn't fully developed till your in your mid twenties so your view and how you feel very likely will shift multiple times up till that period so in terms of medical procedures or hormones hold off till 18 and at that point you are legally an adult so do what you want but just make sure you're informed on side effects or what can go wrong but that's common sense for any medication or procedure no matter what it is for.
@@bradmiles1984 There's still hoards of conservatives in the US at least who don't think gay and bi people should marry, have kids, teach, or exist. They didn't just evaporate once the Obergefell ruling happened.
This was my favorite episode of Sitch and Adam. Thanks for the fun Destiny!
29:10 you know, for a Brit, Carl is completely unaware of the role of drag in British comedy for decades. Two Ronnies, Monty Python, Little Britain, Mrs Browns Boys, Harry Enfield and Chums. I could go on.
Umm, didn't you hear him? He made up a new definition which is that its not drag unless its a sex thing.
@@krombopulos_michael So because there's so many examples of drag that aren't sexual, he just decided to arbitrarily change the definition of drag to fit his incorrect worldview?
I’m a security guard that works at a venue with a ton of drag shows, and I can say there’s certainly a spectrum, some are very artsy and fairly asexual that usually emphasize some sort of fashion or dance performance and some are basically just stripping with extra steps. That being said every single drag event we have ever had has been 18+ and theirs usually a lot of drinking and flirting in the crowd so it’s a pretty inappropriate place for children. But any child seen at a drag show is an edge case of an edge case.
TLDR: Drag is like any other form of performance art, there’s PG drag, PG-13 drag, and R-Rated drag.
I actually just talked to a buddy of mine about this. He's been out since like 8th grade and we used to go to drag shows in high school. But he said recently there was a show and they had a 10ish year old there and he was fucking blown away. Like never in 20 years has that been the norm. The club had always been 18+ before.
Listening to this conversation was silly. It’s absurd to pretend that drag isn’t inherently sexual. It’s baked right into what it is: Men dressing as woman (sexual). You can’t escape that, at all. It’s entire purpose and the whole reason it’s being talked about and/or promoted, is to break down difference in men and woman. This is inherently sexual.
It’s funny, everyone on the panel knows this, even Destiny. They all agreed that “if” it is sexual, it’s bad, which means they would have to say drag shows are bad for kids but he’s not willing to do that. It would hurt his politics position too much. He’s just waiting to see if the culture rejects or accepts this drag garbage before he jumps in feet first
@@mrmr2488 how is men dressing as women inherently sexual?
@@mrmr2488 you are mixing prescripyive statements with descriptive ones based on personal anecdotes dude... lol
@@mrmr2488 what???? If I put on a dress and makeup and go bar hopping with friends that's drag. If a woman puts a suit on and paints on facial hair that's also drag. What is sexual about that???
Why do people who have the flimsiest positions have to constantly accuse their opposition of straw manning?
Because if you accurately restate thier position they get worried that you are about to knock it down.
In this case Adam was correct that they were strawmanning him.
The second they try to attack scientism, or state the Is Ought problem with values. They were attacking a false position. And saying it was Adams issue.
Adam has a tendency to say the debate bro terms to attempt to get people to go back and rethink what's being talked about. But it usually leads to the people defending themselves once they've been accused of doing something like a strawman, etc.
Adam would have been better off instead of saying you are strawmanning me. He should have just continued on to his next point saying science is what we use to describe the physical conditions of the society "we live in" and we make judgements based on outcomes of experiences.
Destiny correctly states that settling moral differences is a difficulty. But he was saying it in a way that he thought he was proving something to Adam. And that was Adams point already.
They believe they are being misunderstood because they believe themselves to be correct.
It's because they don't actually know what their own position is. You summarizing their position to them is probably the first time they've been able to get a good look at their own understanding of things. But since they rarely think about things to that lvl it's not familiar to them, they don't recognize it and only get confused.
It's like a dog looking in a mirror and being like "Holy shit it's another dog!( aka another opinion/strawaman)"
I’m a big fan of Adam and Sitch, but Destiny definitely won this exchange. Thanks for coming on #200 it was a lot of fun, Destiny!
Adam meant “appeal to nature fallacy” NOT naturalistic fallacy. These are two different things. Appeal to nature is what Adam meant and it’s an informal fallacy.
True, I think when we get caught up in jargon it’s always the best strategy to step back and try and explain ourselves with simpler words & simple examples from normal life
I’ve almost missed the sound of carls smug chuckles, glad to see it hasn’t changed one iota.
Hearing it when I don't like him anymore makes it less fun to listen to.
I graduated in philosophy and love science. But there is nothing scarier than hearing "science is the moral compass". This is scientism and can be used to justify most inhumame acts.
For exemple, thinking like this a hospital could kill one healthy patient to give his organs and save ten person if there was a deficit and justify it by saying "10 lives is more than 1". That's why we need morals to say "the greater good should not override the individual basic rights".
At 5:20 when Destiny says "fundamentally" really fast ... I felt that
I came across this at the exact moment he said it. Fvck3d me up hard. Lmao
It's very musical
Based Sargon character development
Dude is still racist/sexist asf though.
Eh. I see what you're talking about but idk if it's character development vs he's always been like this we just didn't see it. Like I'm sure if they got more into the drag debate we would've seen him back to his old ways. Though maybe the development is that he's not so quick to jump to those old ways
@@unknownknowable not very rw?
I don't keep up with Sargon. In what way would you say he's changed?
I liked listening to Sargon trying to do mental backflips to not call a drag performance drag
Me: mom can I debate Sam Harris?
Mom: we have Sam Harris at home
Same Harris at home:
Very underrated comment
Feels like Destiny was just combining drag shows and crossdressing into one category. A dude crossdressing usually isn't meant to be sexual but I don't believe I've ever seen or heard of a drag show that wasn't meant to be sexual in nature. Thought that was the whole point. I could easily be wrong because its not like I've see a lot of drag shows, but I thought drag shows were all about men dressing up in like women's lingerie or something. Like if there was a show with men just wearing women's dresses, I wouldn't really consider that drag. I sure as shit wouldn't consider that America's Got Talent example that Destiny provided to be an example of drag.
Then you just don't know what drag means. Drag literally is just men dressing as women. That's been a definition going back decades. John Lennon joked in the 60s that he and Yoko Ono looked like "gurus in drag". Monty Python regularly used drag in their sketches. Mrs Doubtfire and Tootise both feature men in drag. Drag is far more tied to comedy than anything sexual or titillating (even if that comedy can be pretty vulgar itself).
You're taking a subset of modern day drag performances and saying that everything else isn't drag.
You are still quite wrong about the last jedi
he sure is
@@neropunkt i do hope he would have a deeper discussion with mauler but i dont think destiny cares enough to rewatch and debate it
why? I thought Destiny said it was dogshit
@@raulramirez1622 hope so too... i honestly just want more destiny/mauler content, i enjoy that
@@minhocho5487 well he argued that it made sense that luke tried to kill his nephew in his sleep and that he was acting accoring his character and i think he went debato bro mode with mauler but in his defence there were like 5 guys on him so i understand him being more agresive, but i would enjoy any debate with mauler maybe interstellar or maybe avatar the last aurbender mauler gave it a 6 or 5 witch reallyvdivided the fandom of efap
Adam is more of the “I’m just a guy” type and Sitch is the brains on that show. This outcome was almost inevitable.
Also, this debate between Destiny and Adam was funny to me because it was basically about Adam asking a question to understand why Destiny does something and Adam having a morality debate with Destiny then Adam, Destiny, Sitch, and Carl all kind of ending up on the same page at the end of it. Actually, it seems like Sitch and Carl were already on the same page with Destiny, Adam was just confused and needed to get to where everybody else was lol.
"I can't understand why anyone watches drag - I mean there are literally no crashes in it".
XD
Heared that guy twice on this channel now. It's enough, please.
I wish someone would have examine his claim that "well obviously people like NASCAR because they might see a crash". If liking drag has to be about being a pervert who gets off, why not argue that wanting to see a crash makes you a violent maniac who get off on injuries and destruction?
@@krombopulos_michael
excellent point.
@@aiyeeeeeeyia8337
you're lucky, I've seen him on other channels talking absolute BS and claiming that everyone else just doesn't get it. Hearing him only twice means you're more fortunate than most.
their power levels are so mismatched that if this were a physical fight, it'd be like destiny accidentally farting and knocking adam out cold.
If your best friend (who you know is a very nice and caring person) kidnapped his child from his abusive mother (his ex-wife) and tells you about it what do you do in that situation? :
a) Help him / let him be for the sake of the child
b) Call the police and return the child to its abusive mother sending your friend to jail
Morality vs Legality
If you can prove abuse, you can make a legal case, and wouldn't guarantee the "b" scenario happens.
You can approach the morality of it from a legal standpoint, because they tend to intersect with each other.
I can't stand it when people "rephrase" their statement in a way that agrees with you and then claims they've been trying to say this the entire time. Adam is definitely a redditor.
Adam was linking legal actions to morality because society makes laws based on what they determine to be moral. So that the baseline morality can be established as what's bad in society. Then you work up from there to have a moral progression of rewards and incentives to promote better behaviors. The Legal aspect is an Authority within society. Where the people give that authority to a chosen entity.
Adams argument is one step past the is ought once all societies decide its meaningful to make laws and there's utility in working as a group to have group benefits. Something science does show us when we do threat assessments. And stay in trusted bonded groups with similar goals.
With destiny being stuck at saying science doesn't give us the ought of morality. He was technically strawmanning Adam. And Adam would agree with destiny on a very basic level of empty philosophy.
Adam never was saying that science is what we use to tell us what is the good behaviors to do. He said we can use science to tell us what bad is. Because science does allow us to determine causes of pain, and causes of discomforts. Based on the observations and questions we Hypothesize.
We are humans so we are going to hypothesize human environmental questions by default. And the scientific method is a way to record information to test speculations with other cultures speculations.
You can see this played out when Adam was immediately saying he knew what argument destiny was making by saying thanks Hume. As in he knew destiny was making the is ought argument which is meaningless to a legal argument.
Adam saying suicide is illegal was Adam also trolling the conversation.
I've been to a fair share of Drag Shows in multiple states and I have never not been impressed by the performances I've seen. It's absolutely a skill to be able to land a split after a high kick in 6in platform heels. The makeup is always stellar and the costumes on point. These are timed choreographed performances, usually multiple songs each with their own outfits and choreography. As a woman, it's impressive as hell.
Isn't drag basically a black face, but instead of mocking black people, the men in drag are mocking women?
@@DjMaxi005 what part of it is a mockery?
Sargon seems super ignorant and only interacting with drag through conservative Twitter sphere
Fuck i miss liberal Sargon
The title is a little misleading. I was preparing myself for destiny to poke holes in a moral arguement that Sargon made. I tend to agree more with Sargon, and would have wanted a more nuanced conversation, but there seemed to be too many misunderstandings between Destiny and Adam.
Just wanted to let you know that there are lots of drag queens and drag performances that are entirely non sexual. There are queens who dress up and do comedy, queens who are purely into fashion, queens who are all about dancing and make up. Drag as an art form is a very diverse thing and you probably shouldn't comment on it if you dont know about it. Watch like two random episodes and Ru Paul's Drag Race and you'll see how different each queens style and performance is.
Yes thank you!
An even easier thing would be to look at the winners of each season. Bianca Del Rio won purely because of how funny she is.
God I don't understand who can enjoy someone like Adam, he embodies the idea of someone who took philosophy 1, learned the word fallacy and basically stopped learning anything. He has such surface level "understanding" of philosophy that it legitimately scares me that people care about him.
Even if I find people like Sargon disgusting, he at least has an understanding of how he comes to his conclusion.
Adam is one of the few among society who has taken an interest and invested time to understand it. Even if he is entirely wrong, those who are like him will make use of their motivation but they will find few friends.
Also god it's brutal listening to these three talk about drag when none of them know anything about it or have even seen a drag show. At least Destiny acknowledges that.
Honestly, from my own experience as a regular straight white guy who has seen a drag show and watched a few seasons of Drag Race, drag performances are usually pretty racy. Drag itself is not inherently sexual but the content of the performances and the character of the queen themselves tends to have at least some sexual element. That said, I don't think queens that go and do drag queen story hour are gonna be talking about cock and balls to them. Drag is a performance. It's theatre. It can be adapted to an audience and traditionally that audience is adult, but it doesn't always have to be.
I mostly agree, but all the drag queens I know specifically don't do it around children
@@johannesstephanusroos4969 Because most have enough sense to think it's inappropriate and it could be confusing to the children. I don't see the incentive to introduce kids to such things especially when they are young. It just seems very odd and doesn't have a point. I have no problem with adults doing what they want around other adults.
This was pain, god bless you and your patience, Destiny.
I've been to drag show bingo which was lit, and while it had a lot of adult comedy in it (and possibly sexually themed jokes), it wasn't sexual in nature, just as a typical standup routine with sexual jokes I wouldn't call sexual.
I've also seen drag shows in a club where they're dancing in a provocative manner on stage. Not many clubs letting kids in though.
I've only seen Drag (excluding Pantos, which I only realised was a form of Drag about 2 minutes ago) in a sexual context. I'd assumed that was what drag usually was, especially considering it came out of the Queer community, to the best of my knowledge.
Drag itself may not be inherently sexual. But Drag Shows are usually incredibly vulgar. That's like 99% of the jokes and art of Drag. I've been to Drag shows, they ratchet everything to 11. Anyone arguing against that is either being dishonest, or haven't been to a Drag Show.
or you are the one who has not gone to multiple types of drag shows 😉
@@Sesshounamaru7
That could be. But I doubt it.
@@legin777 bruh.
They often are, but it's not an intrinsic part of the experience. Most stand up comedy is pretty vulgar, but you can also have family-friendly stand-up acts that aren't.
Fair most shows are probably 18+ because thats what is more entertaining for adults. You could take a kid to like a drag queen story time or a show more targeted to children though.
Destiny’s patience once again exceeds my own here. I don’t know how the fuck he keeps his cool in these conversations.
I like how the entire back half is an argument on the morality of different levels of sexuality and no one seemed to see that
To this day I absolutely can't stand Sargon, I know he wasn't even the focus of this video but just the way he talks in most of these conversations he's just trying his best to triangulate what the other person is saying until he can trap them or pivot out of stupid shit that he said previously, its the polar opposite to how Destiny and most of the others conducted themselves for better or worse. Really can't stand this twerp.
This was so frustrating to watch. Is this what straight people think of drag?????
Is drag difficult????
I don’t even like drag but I can appreciate the skill involved in the clothing, makeup, singing, dancing and comedy in a drag show.
Adam is the primary reason I stopped watching he and sitch’s show. He rarely understands an argument on anything.
awesome stuff!
Why does Destiny have to prove Drag is usually guys dressing up and having just a show with no sexual content? Wouldn't the guy making the accusation have the proof to send to Destiny? I really hate that. If your gonna make an argument, then come with the receipts.
Even after you decide on values, science can’t necessarily finish the job. Once principles come into conflict, you have to make a value judgement.
Adam: destiny you're completely straw-manning my position.. Carl want to jump in here?
Carl: *talks for 5 seconds*
Adam: you're completely straw-manning my position, Kermit the frog can you jump in please?
Mario, can you jump in here?
4 people who admittedly have never been to a drag show, don’t understand what drag is or why people do it, all have extremely strong opinions on drag….
This is the pinnacle of
A: x derives from y
B: well that's not right, x derives from z
A: that's what I said.
In summary, there is most probably a style of drag that fits in an all-ages variety show just fine being no more sexual than your average dance group performance.
Ofc this doesn't justify the extreme examples Sargon sees in his social media feed. But it's a bit of dog whistle if you're acting way more concerned about the sexual nature of drag than kids' exposure to the loads and loads of *extremely explicit* music videos, lyrics and dances all over Tiktok and YT.
For sure. He should get mad about corporate propaganda that actually harms children than some rare drag shows.
To my knowledge Sargon monitors his child internet activity including time he is allowed to be on it. He mentioned also that his kid was currently (at the time he made remark) prohibited from using internet because kid did something bad.
After listening to this conversation I’m convinced that acting in bad faith is the default conservative reaction
A better counter example Destiny could have used would have been body building. Loads of dudes are into body building and follow the "sport" but it's pure an aesthetic thing. Sure, body builders are "strong" but they're not the strongest. They're trying to accomplish a specific form, and the audience enjoys seeing the results of their hard work. Drag is pretty much the same.
I'm baffled that Adam has read all of thee books about behaviour and ethics and makes these strong claims about law and morality.
And he never even stumbled over Humes Guillotine. What is he reading??
To be fair, most descriptions of it online are pretty shit. I used to make the same arguments as Adam, knowing "you can't derive an ought from an is". But I didn't know what it meant. I'd just memorised the phrase.
A lot of people do that with a lot of things.
Having listened to a lot of Adam and Sitch, I've heard this argument from Adam before. He probably did the worst job here of laying the groundwork of the concept.
Normally he is trying to argue that moral systems can be objectively rated. That these systems can be measured and that we can compare the mor systems of societies to determine which is a better society.
He got so hung up on the idea that moral systems are all about how people feel or not that he completely got derailed.
that is usually his go-to, and I too wish he could articulate it, if only so Destiny could explain to Adam how wrong *that* position is as well. There is no "objective" standpoint from which to judgement other moral systems. The very notion of judging, implies a moral system from which to judge from. All you can do is is show that X, Y, and Z metrics are higher or lower in different societies, you can't show "objectively" that having a higher or lower metric in some area is a better moral system.
@@Google_Censored_Commenter right, you can learn from other societies to determine if they had moral systems that were better at achieving our moral goals, but there is no perfectly object system by which all systems can be measured.
The standard by which you “objectively rate” a moral system is in it of itself subjective.
@@Adam-tu1lk yeah, nothing is truly objective. Choosing what to measure is subjective.
However, once that decision has been made you can be objective about the rating - to a degree.
They can’t be measured though. That’s the problem. Morality is complete different with every person you speak to because it’s a subjective thing.
If you say less death is more moral, therefor a society with less death is more moral, that’s just subjective. Someone else’s morality could include death as a good thing.
Who's this Adam guy and how many 101 Ethics classes did he fail before walking into this argument?
I like Destiny and I like Adam and Sitch, so this is epic. Based content.
Adam and sitch are braindead
Can anyone tell me what “based” means? I urban dictionary it and still don’t get it lol
@@ll2323 i just use it as a surrogate for “cool”
@@ll2323 Depends, based could either mean trans rights and based could mean lead them to the camps. Depends on which company you keep.
@@seventeenseventythirteen7465 an excellent shorthand for the entire debate imho
Ah yes! The "no true drag queen" fallacy in full effect.
Destiny showed something that was very clearly not drag though
@@Star-Bubbles123 Destiny showed something that was very clearly drag. The idea that a man can wear a ballroom gown and have it not called drag is insane. Just because you say a thing doesn't make it true.
@@hoboryan3455 The man in the clip was wearing male clothing from the 17th century.
That was objectively not drag
@@Star-Bubbles123 That is also not the only example he gave. Rewatch the video and try again, little man.
@@Star-Bubbles123 Like this is so boring. Is a man wearing a females ballroom gown sexual?
Amazing that someone could claim to be in a position to authoritatively argue about ethics and not have ever understood the is/ought gap
"They are different things because we are using different words to refer to them" - Destiny
Transwomen aren't women.
Women is in the name
You literally self owned lil buddy
@@cracktoon_powerscaling you missed the point. There's a reason why there's 2 terms. I'm just using Destiny's point logically in a different situation.
Do you really think policewomen are the same as women? Maybe that example makes it clearer for you since it's not politically charged.
@@MicahMadru ...but policewomen are women.
Hello August!
Sargon is from the UK and he's old enough to remember Lily Savage.
Damn that morality/ legality part was rough. "I understand what you're saying" followed by him demonstrating he does not in fact understand at all.
Also UK pantomime 100% has non sexual drag in it. Carl is being disingenuous about that. Every school kid in the UK went on at least 1 school trip to the pantomime and saw a man dressed up as a woman making jokes. But to be fair the tone of panto drag is very different to the current trendy Ru Paul type drag. Panto drag is a man dressed up like an old mother type character, usually portrayed as being plump and ugly with outrageous outfits, its a visual joke basically. Ru Paul drag is much more focused on drag queens trying to look good and fierce and frankly.. sexy. Emphasising femininity in a way panto drag just doesn't.
I refuse to believe that Carl, as a British man, hasn't seen comedy shows where men dress in ladies clothing. He's just dumb with a British accent.
Thats because like you said pantomime is more Mrs. Doubtfire while most drag that is pushed is more Ru Paul. Those are two wildly different things. At least that is what i'm taking from your statement.
@@bradmiles1984 Pretty much... but they're both drag and hemming and hawing over whether or not to call the cross dressing that happens in panto "drag" is disengenuous because it is 100% drag.
The only reason he waffled on it was because he didn't want to concede that it is theoretically possible to have non sexual drag thats appropriate for kids/ families.
I think it's funny that Destiny has pretty reasonable takes on pride and drag and children's presence there, even if his twitter is filled with pretty spicy ways of wording those takes.
@8:56 exactly, you can't jump from a descriptive statement to a prescription.
30:42 THAT right there is the problem. I was actually agreeing with Sargon before i started googling. But it seems like a very common assumption is that a drag show IS inherently sexual. As in, even though there are performances called drag shows that are not inherently sexual, the common assumption means that most people are unaware that nonsexual drag shows are a thing. Before learning about nonsexual drag shows i would have made the claim that nonsexual drag shows are just cross-dressing. But that was just an attempt to accommodate my earlier assumption. Its like assuming all jews don’t eat pork for religious reasons so when you see a jew eating pork you go “Must not be a real jew” rather than, “oh i guess not all jews refrain from pork”.
While yes, you could be engaging in confirmation bias with this sort of topic, I don't think Sargon is. Destiny failed to show him any actual non-sexual drag shows. If drag shows are (and I think Sargon is correct here) inherently sexual, you can't simply strip sexuality away from it. Then it stops being a drag show. It's a bit like arguing there are "non-sexual" strip shows, called pole dancing. Why would I accept this line of argument, if at the end of it I risk getting children involved with strip shows? If the line between strip shows and pole dancing is so damn blurry, even if there was such a thing as child-friendly pole dancing, why would I risk it? Why would I assume that every time i go to a pole dancing show, the performers used a hyper-accurate philosophically based definition of pole dancing whenever they sell tickets to it? That's ridiculous. Nip the problem in the butt and don't take kids to any shows involving pole dancing.
In what world is caking yourself in makeup not inherently sexual?
@@etrs So all clowns are sexy clowns? Why are we letting them near our kids for birthdays?! Did we learn nothing from John Wayne Gacy?
@@dieselbaby I think i mostly agree with you. Maybe u missed my point? You said “most” are sexual, meaning you concede that not all of them are. Meaning they are not inherently sexual. Thats the only point i was trying to make. I’m happy to say kids shouldn’t attend drag, because i don’t think you can trust people putting on the show to always be honest about how inappropriate it might be. That being said, i still think its a mistake to essentialize them all as sexual.
@@Google_Censored_Commenter You don’t have to risk anything by following that line of logic. I’m just trying to be precise when thinking about what constitutes a drag show. Just because i think drag isn’t inherently sexual, doesn’t mean i would let kids near it. You should NOT be taking your kids to drag shows. Even the ones that advertise as “family-friendly”, because you shouldn’t trust others that something is safe for your kid till you’ve seen it for yourself. More often than not it IS sexual and that’s not a risk you should take with your kid. But if someone tried telling me drinking is inherent to frat houses they’d be wrong. It’d be dumb to pretend that the vast majority aren’t getting lit every chance they get, but dry frat houses do exist so its not “technically” essential/inherent. You’de be dumb to let your kid join a frat and expect them not to drink. You’de be just as dumb for taking a child to a drag show and expecting them not to see or hear anything inappropriate.
I love sitch and Adam…but Adam is the farthest thing from a good debater
Being a regular viewer of sitch and Adam, 1) yes destiny annihilated adam, 2) I expect no less, s class for life
How could you be a regular viewer
15:55 this is like me saying "we need to to force police officers to wear blue because blue is the color of the sky and this symbolizes faith and loyalty." And then Adam comes along and says "that's a naturalistic fallacy."
This is not a logical fallacy. It's subjective taste, as symbolism itself is open to interpretation.
The only thing I semi agree with in terms of scientifically measuring morality, is maybe the idea that when we are in the process of picking what we consider moral we might base that selection on looking back which morals led to prosperous societies in the past
But that is not what Adam was argueing at all, or at least I don't think so
That selection of what is "prosperous" is still some kind of subjective choice. What do you mean when you say prosperous? They produced the most wealth? They had the tallest buildings? They mined the most copper? They ate the most tortillas?
@@emeryboehnke4259 I like tacos so the last one
I've been a TH-cam addict for over 10 years now. Destiny is truly the GOAT and it awesome seeing him in conversation with more and more of the other talking heads
amen to that
So hard to listen to Adam’s brain just bounce off this idea over and over again.
adam kinda has the argumental tone of a 12 year old in trouble
If destiny thinks crossdressing isn't sexual then just lol
hoping the star wars debate will be uploaded as well
@@marfin4325 true, even though mauler didn't get to speak for like half of it
@@neropunkt in my mind i was like "dont u fucking challenge mauler he will turn you inside out with star wars", but then he couldnt even fucking talk lol
I'd pay cash money to watch Mauler V Destiny on Star Wars
@@2wenty256 too many other idiots who tried to argue some weird political shit and wouldn't let mauler speak
@@the_inquisitive_inquisitor hell yeah
Sitch & Adam are good lads.
Adam's not being malicious, he's still figuring this stuff out for himself.
It's great to hear Carl laugh, there's a few times these past two years where he comes off as a little too black-pilled.
>Adam is still figuring this stuff out for himself
I swear I see this comment for like 5 years now whenever the dude is mentioned. The guy should just give up on this if he is this clueless after so long. His discussion with Econoboi about MMT was very impressive, he should stick to economics.
@@dontyoufuckinguwume8201 TBF Adam was heatedly defending Trump to Destiny over the insurrection, and even he backed off after watching some of the trial coverages.
I think Adam is just a normie like most of us don't want to admit and Sitch is a little more aware and able to reel him back from falling down rabbit holes.
Adam is like a golden retriever. Not the brightest but has a sunny disposition that you can't be mad at
@@airplanetowardsthesky3265 except a golden retriever is one of the smartest breeds
Looking at Britain, its not that hard to get black pilled.
I wonder what people would think if they just saw Steven playing minecraft, and the conversation was muted, lol.
@14:24 debatable Adam, even Haidt's work showed that the gut or our moral intuition is better for deciding moral questions, rather than our moral reasoning. Reason and logic are tools we use for science and feelings and intuitions are more effective tools in the realm of morality. That doesn't mean you only listen to your feelings when it comes to moral questions. But it is the better tool because we use intuition to interpret other people's subjective agency.
Sargon would know a lot about getting demolished by Destiny.
And vaush. He didn't know the difference between race and ethnicity in their second debate, it was funny not because he didn't know the difference but because he pretended he did and tried to make out vaush was the one who didn't haha
@@makefoxhoundgreatagain842 Nah, we hate Vaush here. Hate him so much that we're going to say that Sargon is smarter, something that we all totally mean.
@@seventeenseventythirteen7465 going off that second debate with sargon vaush is objectively smarter. It was actually ridiculous.
@@seventeenseventythirteen7465 why do you hate vaush though? He has some good and bad takes in my opinion, I prefer destiny though without a doubt
@@makefoxhoundgreatagain842 I'm joking, it's sarcasm. The people here are totally unreasonable. Vaush is clearly a smart guy it's just that he pissed off Destiny and whoever Destiny dislikes is a bad person who's very bad and dumb and dumb and bad.
It's clear that Vaush is much smarter than Sargon. But people are willing to just ignore reality to shit on Vaush. I'm certain if Vaush suggested the sky was blue they'd disagree and call him an idiot.
I've been to many drag shows. They are burlesque in nature and therefore sexual by intent. This is one of Destiny's fundamental problems in debating wherein he pontificates about things even he admits he is ignorant on, fueled entirely on possibilities in his fantasy world he's invented rather than the high probabilities of the real world we live in.
Yeah, nah. What you're saying about drag shows is highly incorrect.
@@InfiniteDeckhand tell me it's not gonna lick itself without telling me it's not gonna lick itself, groomer.
@@YesIAmDwight Ice cream is now considered grooming? Are you, like, r*tarded or something?
Hey I've gone to strip clubs where strippers surprisingly don't strip. That must mean that all strippers don't take their clothes off as personally I've never seen them do that.
Is a game having rules not inherently moral because the whole purpose is to stop people from acting in unfair / "immoral" ways?
Adam clarified in a recent stream that his point was, that morality is based on our values but when our morals are implemented on the real world we can see what works and what doesn't, and from there we can come up with some sort of moral fact. The best analogy, would be communism and capitalism are both economic systems base on are values(communism values equality, and capitalism values freedom) but when we implement these economic systems into the real world we can see what works and what doesn't and from there come up with economic facts.
BTW I still don't agree with Adam just though I should clarify his position.
The way in which you determine what works and what doesn't still depends on moral presuppositions. I guess it comes down to how you intepret "moral fact". If you interpret it as the moral claim being factual or objective, it doesn't make sense, but if you interpret it as a factual claim relating to morality or within its paradigm, it does make sense. But in the case of the latter I think "moral fact" would just be a poor choice of words. I hope I conveyed my thoughts well enough.
@@-47- ah in the same stream, he defines what works and doesn't, as in does the implementation of your moral values collapse society or not. I guess, and I could be wrong, he views morals as a collective rather then an individual, because you don't need morals when alone, you only need them in a society. Again I don't agree with Adam I'm just trying to understand his position, also that's a really weird way of viewing morals, one which I never heard before