Matts debate with Sye Ten Bruggencate | Scott-MI | The Atheist Experience 918

The Atheist Experience 918 for May 17, 2015, with Matt Dillahunty and John Iacoletti.
Regarding Matt’s debate with [Sye Ten Bruggencate] punishment/morality and why God’s morality makes no sense.

Call the show on Sundays 4:00-6:00pm CDT: 1-512-686-0279

We welcome your comments on the open blog thread for this show.

YouTube comments are at present disabled in our channel, to the displeasure of some. However, each video has a prominent link to the associated open thread that appears on our blog. In the past we've tried opening up the channel to comments, but we found that a very high number of episodes wound up being flooded with a combination of spam, long winded apologists, and various obscene or misogynistic comments directed at various hosts by people with an axe to grind. This seems to be the nature of YouTube comment sections, in our experience.

We do moderate the blog, the same way that we moderate chat during the show, as well as comments on our Facebook group. For comment sections that are "officially" associated with our show (and, to a much lesser extent, channels that may give the unintended appearance of being official), we prefer not to play host to straight up ad hominem attacks and bigotry. As a general policy we do not block commenters simply on the basis of disagreement with our point of view. However, we do prefer discussion environments that don't actively chase off more reasonable contributors.

-------

You can read more about this show on the Atheist Experience blog:

WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?

The Atheist Experience is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.

The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.

We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.

VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES

More shows and video clips can be found in the archive:

DVDs of the Atheist Experience can be purchased via:

NOTES

TheAtheistExperience is the official channel of The Atheist Experience. "The Atheist Experience" is a trademark of the ACA.

Opening Theme:
Limited use license by Shelley Segal
Copyright © 2011 Shelley Segal

Copyright © 1997 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.

[studlord]

"You can't corner Sye. He's completely circular." Now THAT'S a great line.

[ptolemyauletesxii]

I never thought much of the Sye Ten series anyway. The Sye Eleven series had a much better microprocessor and a superior chip set.

[CAPSLOCKPUNDIT]

Sye plays loose with a lot of unsubstantiated claims. He appears inconsistent, but at least is consistently wrong. Credit where it's due.

[TVWJ]

Advanced Matt's: "you can't corner Sye, he is completely circular" ;-)

[cliveadams]

And we all know how tenuous a grip on morality that STB had. Gone but not missed.

[redmed]

Sye doesn't debate. He tries to shut down debate. Seems like he's got his own troubles now so it looks like he's his own enemy which I always though when I heard him speak in the past.

[CentristToday]

‘You can’t get me… I’m the Gingerbread Man!’ -Sye

[elainejohnson]

"You can't "corner" Sye, he is completely circular!!!" Ha ha ha!

[punishedgloyperstormtroope]

Is this sye ten the youtube cartoonist who used to make anti Islam cartoons?

[johnelliott]

Sye escapes epidemic uncertainty by invoking revelation. The rest of us just try to falsify the things we believe to make sure they are as close to truth as we can get. Sye would never question his "revelation", the rest of us would.

[isuckharderthanlife]

It's the Karma Sutra that makes me resserect to come again and again..

[theunholyhorseman]

Not much is being heard from Bruggencate these days. I wonder why. . .

[johnelliott]

That could be Matt's best comment ever! You can't corner Sye, he is completely circular. ROFL.

[gregbooker]

Sye is a Calvinist, so you win the debate by sinply asking him "You don't think anybody is capable of successfully acting contrary to God's secret will, so what should I be afraid of? That God is going to punish me because I obeyed his secret will perfectly?"

[ajax]

There was a lovely moment in the 'debate' when Sye tried his 'I don't do bible studies with atheists' cop-out. A woman from the audience completely trashed him by calling out simply; 'Jesus would.'

[davebrown]

I like this question when a JW turns up with a kid. I ask "assuming your idea of god is perfect, If some was to convince your kid (wrongly obviously) that god is not real and they are going to be pinnished or destroyed because they are wrong. What are you expecting to get from god that will make you eternally happy knowing that your kid is being punished just for being wrong? I add that there I cannot think of anything that a god could offer that would placate me even it was to happen to their kid (a total stranger to me) let alone someone I care about.

[canderson]

Give Sye credit for at least doing this in public, unlike some other fake names that live here.

[michaelnelson]

Since birth and growing into an adult from a childhood Sye had to leverage a learning process from a secular starting point in learning the laws of linguistical logic in order to first understand spoken language and written that process he could not known of any God (no infant is born a theist or aware of any doctrinal then upon his reaching a level of exposure to any doctrinal God claims now turns around and says the same process that allowed him to reach that point now claims is invalidated with any truth claims because it had to be borrowed from his theistic based world view. Presupposition claims are pathetic and infantile in their logistical grasp just from this illustration alone.

[bobstevens]

What would be an argument against coming back as a different lifeform other than a human?? Why can't the "spirit" (if there is one) be a part of the universe(s) and everything is alive so the "spark" from the universe doesn't have a preference for where the spark of the universe ends up?? We humans might be a higher form of existence but the spark of the universe has no knowledge of where it ends up, so we could end up as a rock, tree, insect or any other form of existence. W/out a brain to recall where it's been, the spark of universal life would have no recollection of what or where it has ever been or where it's going and probably doesn't know or care. We humans have a brain but when the brain is dead, so are all the memories that we ever had and it seems sensible to me that the spark of the universe might very well move on but will have no idea where it's going or has been and most likely won't care either. This seems the most likely thing to happen. It's also reasonably sensible to me that if there was a Creator, that the Creator would be an asshole since the universe is a very beautiful but extremely violent place.

[lateralus]

Anyone claiming that they have absolute certainty that god exist, by Sye's metric, would not be able to carry out (interrupted) secret sins that they wouldn't want even an average human being to know about. For instance, imagine Sye looking at porn and masturbating and a human being -- who Sye is certain exists -- walks in on him while he is in the act. Sye would very very likely cease his activities immediately out of shame and embarrassment. Why??? Because Sye believes he knows for certain that someone can see him and is watching him. Now, if Sye carries out that same activity but doesn't stop -- even though he claims he is certain that his god exists -- then he is not NEARLY as certain about his god's existence than he is with the hypothetical human being that could walk in on him. If Sye's god can see everything he is doing (even in private), and if Sye is absolutely certain that his god exists and that his is being invigilated by him at all times, then Sye and people like him should NEVER be able to fully carryout such a transgression, even if they could get themselves started in one. Doubt this??? Then imagine again, if Sye was doing what I said above and he is not stoping his activities but, this time, imagine his god appears to him while in the act. I think we all could safely predict that Sye would immediately stop what he is doing because he would now become (actually) certain -- and not just abstractly or hypothetically "certain" -- that his god is real and that he is really really watching him. This scenario should prove my point; Sye merely claiming to know that god exists -- and that we all know it too (supposedly) -- is just a false claim of certainty. If this fatuous claim that he makes were to actually be tested in the manner above (or maybe in other ways), we would all see just how empty and vacuous Sye's "certainty" really is. Sye has no real external, verifiable, or practical justification for his epistemic claims.