🎙️ Ben Shapiro vs. Alex O'Connor: The Value of Religion in Society 🌍💬🔍

Ben Shapiro: "Religion offers a realm beyond our understanding - a giant escape hatch for life's mysteries." 🌌✨🔬 Alex O'Connor: "Atheists need to explain the mechanism of a materialist universe." 🧠🔍🔥 Whose side are you on? 🤔👇 #ReligionVsAtheism #DeepDebate #BenShapiro #AlexOConnor

[thoughtfortheday]

All Alex has to do is sit quietly and let Ben lock his giant escape hatch with himself inside.

[chessenthusiast]

Absolutely astounding. “MY philosophy explicitly says I can’t know if it’s true or not, therefore anyone who wants to provide an alternative explanation has to prove I’m wrong and they’re right.” The “facts and logic” guy of the right, ladies and gentlemen.

[PsiRipples]

The idk therefore god, well done Ben.

[Idontknowwhatswaitingforme]

Ben is making a very foolish claim. The materialist view of existence does not mean that I have to explain or understand every mechanism at work. It just says that the mechanisms at work are natural instead of supernatural, and do not have an all-powerful and all-knowing creator at their core

[bond-.]

After years of believing in something, most people will never admit that they may have been wrong. Nobody wants to feel like they were manipulated.

[needbettername]

"I don't know, therefore God" vs "I don't know, therefore, I don't know."

But at least, and I hate to give Shapiro his dues, he's at least veing honest here. It's rare, but it happens. I'm glad he realised he couldn't baffle Alex with bs.

[generichuman_]

The problem with this escape hatch, is that it could lead to a God named Kevin that is a 300 lb software developer that created the universe as a simulation on his laptop. This type of reasoning, by virtue of being mysterious and unknowable, can never point towards the God you actually want it to be.

[sunwukong]

Props to Ben for inventing "The giant escape hatch" fallacy...(Some Ben Shapiro fanboys up voting this comment proves how dumb his fan base is, they can't understand that him alluding to an escape hatch argument is intellectually embarrassing, Ben is as dumb as he is evil. Can't believe I have to explain this...)

[Raadpensionaris]

Bruh. Just say I don't know, instead of making stuff up and than still coming up with the answer "I don't know"

[Adam.Langton]

"You have the burden of demonstrating science. I have the trump card of magic." Touche Shapiro. Truly, the best theology has to offer.

[Jay-xwll]

Religion makes ppl say all sorts of rubbish.

[jonathanfountain]

Alex later got Ben to admit that slavery is and was immoral despite God’s endorsement. Ben then implies that God is a slow adopter and that God did it to due to man’s stubbornness/cohesion issues. It was a good moment, but I feel Alex didn’t push hard enough here - To me, the hypocrisy is clear, God gave the 10 commandments- including Do not Steal and this was expected to be obeyed immediately. Of course this doesn’t include stealing someone else’s labor and life.

[lautaroc]

Arguing "I explain the unknown by reverting to prehistoric myths" might not be the flex Ben thinks it is

[willhastings]

Ben: My position is incomprehensible to even myself, and therefore I can claim anything without the need to defend it. checkmate atheist. Now you may think that leaves me a giant escape hatch, but you have to understand that the entirety of my philosophy is fundamentally that very escape hatch. Now pray to my god and follow my moral code."

[pety]

Ben has some interesting points but in this one he's wrong. The burden of proof is on him.

[beliefisnotachoice]

Ben is making a claim, he certainly does have a burden of proof. This is him just admitting he can't meet it.

[jesseparrish]

"I don't know. Anyways, here's my elaborate theory on which I'll base my entire worldview. Not that I really know or anything."

[TyDreacon]

I'm confused why Ben thinks his position is exceptional.
In one case, you have what's unknown shuffled off into a separate "realm."
In another case, you have what's unknown intermingled with the material universe.
In each case, you can have accessible (i.e. knowable) and inaccessible (i.e. unknowable) unknowns.
Both are claims of the organization of the universe and, so, would carry the same burdens of proof. The exact way you go about meeting those burdens might be different because of that organization, of course, and maybe a religious view might have an easier time handling all that. But shuffling all your unknowns over there doesn't magically make that burden go away for only one side.

[MrReasonabubble]

"My mind is not God's" might be a reasonable argument if believers would be consistent in applying it.

What we actually tend to get is people insisting that all the desirable stuff that happens in the world is evidence of God's infinite goodness and mercy. On those occasions they know exactly what God's motivations are. It's only when you ask them to explain the "bad" stuff that happens that they shrug and say, "Who can know the mind of God?"

[sunwukong]

Ben " You have to make me understand theoretically physics or theoretical physics is a lie..."