28:00 Fatal flaw and the outcome of fatal debates requiring character refinement
Debaters are ideological warriors.
I am an ideological warrior with a more refined character than Jen.
48:00 Jen's new clothes
54:00 Doooovid introduces me and mentions Amy Newman kicking me off
I suggest that the reason why I was told I was no longer welcome at Amy Newman was because I have been asking Christians there how and why Christianity is not idolatry and how and why Jesus is God, rather than any of the official reasons.
56:00 Anti-Chinese sentiment being suggested by Dooovid for my being banned from the Amy Newman channel
57:00 I point out that Christians deep down know that the Trinity is morally and intellectually indefensible but their Deadly Sin of Pride as well as their atheism prevents them from acknowledging this.
58:00 I suggest that the Calvinist Will Stewart may have been one of the Christians who wanted me banned because he agreed to debate me and must have regretted it immediately. Mark Reid was present and I tagged them both in the chat as evidence that this occurred but have since been removed from the Amy Newman Discord server.
59:00 Pat Lowinger
1:01:00 WHY I AM QUEEN OF FREE SPEECH PERFORMING A SERVICE FOR JEWS AND MUSLIMS TOO AFRIAD OF THEIR CHRISTIAN OVERLORDS TO CHALLENGE THE IDOLATRY AND BLASPHEMY OF THE TRINITY
I am Queen of Free Speech and am gunning for the Trinity on behalf of Jews who are supposed to properly teach the Noahide laws to gentiles and also for Muslims who have not been obeying quran.com/18/4
Jen's ethical defect
Doooovid said I won because TJump rage quit his own stream after debating with me.
1:02:00 TJump's tactics
1:03:00 Doooovid comments on Jen's alleged Sinophobia.
1:05:00 How I could have done better in the TJump debate
1:06:00 TJump's tactics
1:07:00 Secular Koranism
1:08:00 My point was that the Abrahamic God has moral and legal political systems to keep Jews and Muslims in existence and apart from others. TJump's analogy about spears being inferior to guns was a completely non sequitur. The purpose of religion is to keep the group in existence and apart from others, the nature and purpose of a spear as a weapon. The effectiveness of a religion can be measured objectively by how long it has kept a group in existence and apart from others. Jews have outlived ancient and modern empires. The effectiveness of a spear as a weapon is measured by how effective it is as a weapon of offence.
1:09:00 Doooovid says I had the better argument.
1:10:00 Thomas Jefferson
1:12:00 I point out that my proposition was "Objective morality is public morality backed by divine law."
Because it was a truism that was difficult for him to deny, TJump adopted the tactic of pretending that I did not know the meaning of objective.
When I pointed out that being objective meant being impartial, he accused me of equivocation fallacy.
1:14:00 TJump's unorthodox definition of objective
Karlos
How do you think your debate with Tom went (substance wise)
ClaireKhaw
He didn't seem to want to explain his idea objective morality, which surprised me, even after I particularly requested it.
I think I already made my point as soon as I stated "Objective morality is public morality backed by divine law."
His tactic was to question my understanding of objective to derail the discussion and this made him go out on a limb.
So he found himself saying that his system of morality was objective and that it was like the law of physics. But when I asked him how, he wouldn't explain.
Karlos
I think in order to have a meaningful discussion you need to agree on terms/definitions
ClaireKhaw
Then he said that God's opinion is just another opinion.
Even if God actually existed.
Karlos
I don’t think you understand objectivity
ClaireKhaw
And, most ridiculous of all, he said Neanderthals were secular!
ClaireKhaw
To be objective is to be impartial.
Karlos
Objective means independent of mind. Agreed?
Subjective means mind dependent
ClaireKhaw
Please tell me why you think I do not understand objectivity.
Karlos
You demonstrated it throughout the debate in your arguments (I’m just being honest not combative).
Objective means independent of mind. Agreed?
ClaireKhaw
Sure. Something could be true even if we don't think it is.
Karlos
Agreed. Like a law of nature.
Gravity exists independent of mind or opinion
Therefore gravity is objective
Are we agreed so far?
Ok so other laws that are dependent on mind only are subjective. Like abortion being legal/illegal
Agreed?
ClaireKhaw
We all have our own opinions about what is moral, but if the perfectly moral and supreme Abrahamic God exists, His view would prevail.
Karlos
At this point you are now avoiding my question and not following the argument between objective and subjective
ClaireKhaw
I agree.
Karlos
Right so now that we agree on the definition of objective & subjective, the point of the debate is that the laws/morality you subscribe to, are by definition NOT objective, even though you claimed it was objective. You failed to present an objective model at any point, only subjective models.
ClaireKhaw
I said if the Abrahamic God exists, then His view of morality would prevail.
Karlos
If you fail to present any objective model of morality then you lose the debate
ClaireKhaw
I have presented a hypothetical objective model of morality and explained it. TJump never even explained his.
Ultimately, all we can do is say "God says X and I agree."
TJump is saying "Here is my objective morality."
The rest of the world "But that is only your opinion of objective morality."
Karlos
We’ve already agreed on what would be objective (above) and your hypothetical objective is contradictory by definition. Just admit you don’t have an objective model only a purely subjective one.
Tom did actually present an objective model. His model grounds morality in nature and says it’s a law of nature, the same kind we already agreed would be objective. Your morality is grounded in a mind making it subjective.
ClaireKhaw
I have presented an objective model if the Abrahamic God exists. I know I cannot prove that God exists, but it is still better than TJump's objective morality which nobody has heard of and which he doesn't particularly want to explain or discuss because he knows it will be debunked.
How is his morality objective though?
It's just his opinion that it is objective.
In fact, he has never explained it properly and doesn't want to answer questions about it.
Karlos
Even if I grant you that God exists, that wouldn’t make morality any more objective. God is a mind. Subjectivity is mind dependent.
Karlos
If it was a law of nature (like gravity) it would be objective. We already agreed terms (above).
ClaireKhaw
But how is his system a law of nature?
If there were no people around, his idea would just be gone like all other ideas.
Karlos
Ask the same question about gravity
ClaireKhaw
Ideas cannot exist without minds to conceive them.
Karlos
Sure but if morality is a law of nature it would exist whether minds exist or not
If you just treat morality like gravity in the sense both being objective laws of nature then this shouldn’t be hard to grasp
ClaireKhaw
Law of nature = law of physics?
Are you talking about cause and effect then?
Karlos
In a sense yes
ClaireKhaw
If there are no minds in the universe to conceive of morality, then morality would not exist.
If you had software but no hardware to run it on, you don't have a computer.
Karlos
Something true about reality can be true regardless of a mind’s ability to know it or conceive it
That’s what objectivity is
ClaireKhaw
It is true that if there were no minds to conceive of ideas, ideas wouldn't exist.
Karlos
Your idea about gravity would cease to exist but that doesn’t affect gravity itself
ClaireKhaw
Ideas cannot exist independently of minds to conceive them.
No minds, no ideas, and therefore no morality to be conceived of.
Karlos
I don’t know why you keep jumping to ideas? Ideas are subjective. We were talking about objective morality, not ideas about morality.
ClaireKhaw
Objective morality is an idea.
Karlos
No
ClaireKhaw
What is objective morality if not an idea?
Karlos
Gravity exists and ideas about gravity also exist
These are two distinct things
Map & Territory
ClaireKhaw
So?
Karlos
One is objective one is subjective
Morality can exist objectively and ideas about objective morality can also exist
Map & Territory
ClaireKhaw
So what?
Karlos
So you lose if you have no objective morality
ClaireKhaw
But God's existence has not been disproven.
Karlos
Your subjective model is irrelevant. Sorry.
ClaireKhaw
But if God exists, my model would be objective.
Karlos
But we already agreed subjectivity is mind dependent?Hopefully we would both agree that God has a mind too.
So that’s false.
ClaireKhaw
What has God's mind got to do with anything?
Karlos
Subjectivity is mind dependent
ClaireKhaw
Opinions can only be formed in minds.
Karlos
The same is true about your model of morality. You just need to accept it.
ClaireKhaw
I accept that my opinion is just my opinion, unless it is supported by God if He exists.
Karlos
Not your opinion, your model.
Your model is based on an opinion, God’s opinion (subjectivity).
ClaireKhaw
If God if He exists supports my opinion, then I am right.
Karlos
Now you’re just trolling Claire
ClaireKhaw
You are the one who cannot conceive of the hypothetical situation in which God might exist and are obviously refusing to do so.
Karlos
I already granted that earlier, and demonstrated how that would still be a subjective model and you avoided it.
God has a mind. So morality based on God is subjective not objective (based on our agreed terms). Your argument fails to demonstrate any grounds in objectivity.
ClaireKhaw
Are you saying God has a brain?
Karlos
Where did that come from? We’re talking about subjectivity and you’re avoiding the very obvious truth. Just like you did with Tom.
ClaireKhaw
It came from your claim "God has a mind."
Karlos
Well if you want to deflect from the argument because you can’t address it then go ahead and straw man. I thought you were better than that.
ClaireKhaw
I am not deflecting from anything. You said God has a mind. Theists are told very firmly not to conceive of God as anything like anything they have ever been able to conceive. That would be the Third Principle of Judaism.
We are talking about the Abrahamic God, are we not?
Muslims would agree with this definition, by the way.
The best way to conceive of the Abraham God is as, having created the Universe, now existing outside it as pure spirit.
You are the one who is not getting it, thinking of God as some guy with a view that you don't agree with.
Perhaps, being formerly Christian, you still think of God as some Jew on a stick with a beard?
If God exists, He would be the Supreme Authority, the know all and end all of things.
I know you don't think He exists, but the point remains is that His existence has not been falsified. This being so, I am allowed to entertain the idea that He exists which I think is more likely than the possibility that TJump's objective morality being accepted as such.
However, that is only my opinion.
But if I am correct in my opinion that God could exist and God indeed does exist, my model is not only valid, it is useful.
Karlos
So God possess a mind?
Or not?
ClaireKhaw
You said it, not me.
It is just bizarre to extend your leftist egalitarianism to the Creator of the Universe.
Do you really still think of God as Jesus, some guy with a beard with views you do not quite agree with?
If God has a mind, then does He have a brain?
Karlos
Does God possess a mind or not?
ClaireKhaw
If He has a brain, does He have a skull?
How would I know whether God has a mind or not?
Karlos
Can God think?
ClaireKhaw
All I know is that we are required not to think of God as some guy with a beard on a stick.
We are not to think of God as some guy with views we do not quite agree with. You and TJump seem to have this problem.
Karlos
It’s a simple question about your belief not mine
Can God think?
ClaireKhaw
What do you think the Third Principle is for?
Can God think, you ask me. Next you will be asking me if He pisses or shits.
Does He cough, sneeze and can He catch Covid? Will that be your next question?
If it is, I refer you to the Third Principle.
If you are going to ask me if He fucks, comes or eats, I will again refer you to the Third Principle.
Karlos
Simple yes or no?
ClaireKhaw
We are not to think of God as some guy with a brain having a mind to think or form opinions.
We are to think of God as an ineffable being who has given us laws to obey.
If He is indeed perfectly moral, then those laws rule.
Karlos
So God cannot think is your answer?
ClaireKhaw
We are not to think of God as thinking, like that Rodin statue.
Karlos
Either God can think or God can’t
P or not P
Simple logic
ClaireKhaw
If it is the case that God has given us laws to obey, then His laws rule.
Karlos
Have you ever seen that film The Matrix where Neo dodges all those bullets?
ClaireKhaw
There is nothing illogical in supposing that the being who created the Universe is nothing like us.
A long time ago so I don't remember. What about it?
Karlos
You are honestly going to wear yourself out with all the mental gymnastics
ClaireKhaw
No mental gymnastics are required to refer you to the Third Principle of Judaism.
It was Maimonides, not I who codified the 13 Principles.
It is not mental gymnastics to remind you that God is not some Jew on a stick with an opinion that you don't agree with.
Bearing in mind that the Third Principle deals with the attempt to conceive of God as a guy on a stick with views you disagree with, it is pretty obvious that people in times past asked the same question and made the same point made by Euthyphro: God's opinion is just another opinion that may not be quite right.
1:15:00 JF's nihilism
1:17:00 Ancient atheist Aryan kings
1:18:00 Doooovid declares that I beat TJump.
1:19:00 From many gods to none
1:20:00 Quoting Shakespeare
1:22:00 There is a rule to every exception.
1:23:00 TJump's attempt to expose me as a fraud.
1:24:00 Objective is an important concept to understand.
1:26:00 The Tragedy of Hamlet
1:28:00 The ahimsa principle is minimising pain.
1:30:00 Secular Koranism would minimise pain.
1:33:00 Your political manifesto would be about changing the laws.
Utilitarianism
1:35:00 Why TJump deliberately derailed the discussion on the definition of objective
1:36:00 TJump's objective morality
1:37:00 Hazing at the Fox and Hounds
1:39:00 Richard Spencer
1:40:00 Blackballed from a debating society
1:43:00 TJump's depression
1:44:00 TJump's mind is full of Jen.
1:45:00 Judaism is like spears, according to TJump.
1:48:00 Jen is called "Punished Jen" on the TJump Discord server.
1:50:00 TJump and Mohammed Hijab
Claire Khaw > Mohammed Hijab
1:51:00 Alison Chabloz
1:58:00 Britain now
2:39:00 Unflattering comments about Jen's performance in her debate with Mark Reid when she denied evolution
2:43:00 Poe
2:54:00 Martyrdom and Kiddush Hashem
3:10:00 William Parry
3:12:00 Jen's suffering
3:13:00 Jen's poor character for refusing to quote sources
3:16:00 Revulsion at poor character
3:24:00 Martyrdom
3:27:00 Violence
3:29:00 Bad karma
3:32:00 Yom Kippur
3:35:00 Being associated with Jen's bad character violating the ahimsa principle
3:43:00 Outcome of survey on Jen's bad character
3:49:00 Gandalf
3:50:00 Having bad character is its own punishment.
3:57:00 Autistic
3:59:00 TJump's objective morality
4:00:00 The mods at TJump who hate me
4:02:00 Sun Flower
JASON joins.
4:04:00 Jews and Judaism
4:10:00 Doooovid on Judaism maintaining the existence of Jews
4:11:00 Bar Mitzvah and Secular Koranism
4:14:00 Doooovid's parentage
4:17:00 Secular Koranism
4:21:00 Autism
4:23:00 Sun Flower on TJump
4:26:00 e-celeb and future POTUS
4:31:00 TJump's bad temper and bitterness
Sociopath
4:32:00 TJump hates talking to people.
4:36:00 Generation X
4:44:00 Personality type
4:48:00 Richard Spencer
5:01:00 Rambling
5:09:00 Comment in my support about my TJump exchange
5:15:00 I am a victim.
5:16:00 Banned from Amy Newman
5:17:00 Jen's alleged Sinophobia
5:18:00 Gunning for the Trinity and Jen's aggression
5:19:00 Jen says I am jealous of her.
5:20:00 Mistreated Chinese people
5:23:00 I assure Jen that I am not accusing her of racism.
5:24:00
James W — 09/03/2021
So we've been discussing it among ourselves, the subscribers, patrons, mods. While you have always been polite to us, it's our viewers and those who support the show financially who make it all possible.
The sordid articles and photos circulating the internet are just too big of an elephant in the room, Godwin's Law fully applies and virtual every stream will get pulled in that direction. Nobody is really listening to your ideas, they just wait for you to stop talking so they can berate you for being a terrible person. That's just not the kind of show we want or content we want to put out.
The fact you are open about who you are and all that information is available, it's an albatross around the show. We just can't risk alienating a descent amount of our supporters to continue to platform you. You've made your case to them, they heard what you said and they'd rather not hear anymore. At this time we just won't be able to have you on the platform.
5:47:00 I have no idea why Jen says I treated her "like a prostitute".
5:49:00 My alleged behavioural problems
5:52:00 Banned from Amy Newman
5:53:00 Maximum contempt and scorn
Gun and flag photos
5:54:00 My alleged Nazism
5:58:00 When Doooovid met Jen and Claire
5:59:00 Jen alleges that I stalk her.
6:00:00 Jen wants to call the cops on me and thinks I am autistic.
6:03:00 Mistreatment of Claire
6:05:00 Day of Judgement this week on Yom Kippur
6:06:00 My allegedly toxic influence
6:08:00 My alleged dishonesty
6:08:00 David Irving
6:09:00 Jen says she will never talk to me again.
6:12:00 Doooovid talking to the alt-right
6:14:00 Indian Nazi
6:15:00 Jen says Doooovid and I amplify each other's bad traits.
6:18:00 Human motivations to kill, rape and steal.
6:19:00 Chinese, Luke Ford and OV
6:22:00 What Jen is doing to me is like beating your kid to make it behave better.
6:26:00 Brundle
6:27:00 Jen says I am "unrepentant".
6:33:00 Yom Kippur
6:36:00 Floaters
6:38:00 Jen says I am a "stalker".
6:42:00 Secular Koranism
6:43:00 Afghanistan and China
6:44:00 Doooovid is choosing a side.
6:47:00 Doooovid and I exchange messages.
6:48:00 Karma
6:49:00 Controlling behaviour
6:54:00 Armageddon
6:55:00 Trust
6:57:00 Jen says I am sexist against her.
6:59:00 Her husband, her mother and Doooovid
7:00:00 Jen is the one who is ill.
7:04:00 Jen can't control herself.
7:05:00 The world is going to be judged this week.
7:06:00 WiR is a microcosm of the conflict globally.
7:08:00 Lowell's rabbi on Armageddon
7:09:00 Luke Ford
7:13:00 Mordehai/Judas Maccabaeus
No comments:
Post a Comment