Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Blair vs. Hitchens;  The Munk Debates

Bing Posts: 144 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2010,13:33    The Munk Debates Fresh on the heels of his appearance vs. DrDr Dembski last week Christopher Hitchens will be debating Tony Blair tonight at 7 pm. Be it resolved religion is a force for good in the world... The site says that tix are sold out but there is a Live-stream available for $4.99. So, who's going to watch it?

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2010,15:09    What is it defending religion all of a sudden?  Are they getting the idea that most of the population thinks its a scam? Anyway, Hitchens and a few others did this same debate on intelligence squared a few years ago.  The Christians lost their shirts. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2010,16:22    I don't want to threadjack, but to wet the appatite for Blair/Hitchens: Hitchens/Robinson Morals of Atheism I would have mentioned that monkeys also seem to appreciate the divine, have empathy for others, and similar traits that Robinson implies only humans have. I also would have said that all we are is emergent behavior that has acquired to realize that we are nothing more than emergent behavior.  Empathy is an emergent behavior in many animal species (some might go so far as to say "less so in humans than some other animals").  And that, not a morality (universal or otherwise) is what we derive the desire to not commit acts that would be socially frowned upon. Finally, I would have mentioned that the society in which one lives much more determines morality than any innate or universal morality. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2010,17:29    Quote Be it resolved religion is a force for good in the world... Just the general (and rather vague) category of religion? Not a specific religion, let alone a specific branch of whichever one is under discussion? Seems to me that an argument for or against "religion is force for good" would have to address a specific religion; otherwise there would be too many exceptions for the argument to get anywhere. Henry

Badger3k Posts: 861 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 26 2010,19:41    Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 26 2010,17:29) Quote Be it resolved religion is a force for good in the world... Just the general (and rather vague) category of religion? Not a specific religion, let alone a specific branch of whichever one is under discussion? Seems to me that an argument for or against "religion is force for good" would have to address a specific religion; otherwise there would be too many exceptions for the argument to get anywhere. Henry You also need to be specific as to what "a force of good" means.  Does that mean it is all what is commonly perceived as good, or does it count if there is good and bad, but overall it leans one way or another?  What is also considered good in one culture or context might not be in another.  Such arguments as these are fairly meaningless, IMO,  although they can be fun to listen to or participate in. -------------- "Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2010,03:13    Not seen the result but I've got a tenner on Blair's overblown messiah complex getting a right good puncturing. I reckon that's a safe bet. Louis -------------- Bye.

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2010,08:59    From the BBC: Quote But a random sample afterwards tended to tell a consistent story. People weren't necessarily opposed to Mr Blair's argument, but they found Mr Hitchens the more persuasive speaker. A poll of audience members resulted in a defeat for the motion, by a margin of two to one.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2010,10:52    Transcript For those that missed it... like me. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 27 2010,11:43      Quote The Toilet >>Place of Enlightenment, by arnoKath ETA a reminder: This marks a removal to the BW, not a comment on the topic. Edited by Lou FCD on Nov. 27 2010,12:51 -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Bing Posts: 144 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2010,08:46    I don't know if I should be honoured that my thread managed to drag the lunatic repeatedly out of his lair, or if I should be sorry and deeply ashamed instead. Anyhoo, back to the topic.  The debate is archived and can be viewed until March 2011.  Can anyone here download it and post to youtube?

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2010,09:21    David Mabus (real name Dennis Markuze) is Canadian. http://www.canlii.org/en....46.html IANAL, but up to 5 years in prison for making threats on the internet. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 28 2010,10:00    The videos have been posted to YouTube, and Greg Laden has them posted on his blog. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2010,17:59    I have now seen both of Hitchens' debates. I think that he completely out-argued Dembski but Blair did better than WMAD. IMO Hitchens beat Blair, but the official count looked like a draw to me.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2010,18:48    Obviously, I'm slightly biased, but I think Hitchens won both debates. Dembski... well... Blair, at least has sincerity and is actively 'working' in Africa.  However, he fails to grasp the dichotomy that Hitchens kept pointing out. If religion wasn't telling those people to not use condoms and that having AIDS was better in God's sight than using condoms... then all the great work that the religion does in Africa wouldn't be needed in the first place. I submit that people who do good works would do them regardless of religion (or lack thereof).  Perhaps there would be fewer people, because without the fear of hell, some of them would sit at home instead of going to Zimbabwe or something.   I'd rather have an honest jerk than a hypocritical nice person. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2010,19:06    Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 29 2010,18:48) Obviously, I'm slightly biased, but I think Hitchens won both debates. Dembski... well... Blair, at least has sincerity and is actively 'working' in Africa.  However, he fails to grasp the dichotomy that Hitchens kept pointing out. If religion wasn't telling those people to not use condoms and that having AIDS was better in God's sight than using condoms... then all the great work that the religion does in Africa wouldn't be needed in the first place. I submit that people who do good works would do them regardless of religion (or lack thereof).  Perhaps there would be fewer people, because without the fear of hell, some of them would sit at home instead of going to Zimbabwe or something.   I'd rather have an honest jerk than a hypocritical nice person. I agree. IMO Hitchens won. However the vote indicated a draw. Both Blair and Hitchens persuaded a roughly similar percentage to their cause. Dembski was crap. I am not saying that Blair convinced me. I am just saying that according to the vote. Blair and Hitchens persuaded a roughly = amount to vote their way.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2010,00:14    The thing about religion, at least from my neck of the woods (The Bible Belt)... is that so many people grow up with religion.  They see all the good things that 'the church' does and anything bad is 'the person'. So many people grow up this way that any positive support that they uncritically accept it.  Fortunately, many of the my generation are walking away from the church of their parents, mainly because it isn't relevant and obviously so.  The average age in my old church was 54.  There were multiple Sunday school classes for the over 80 crowd.  I'm hopeful that our children will grow up respectful of the church... in the same way you respect that crazy guy down the street. While I enjoyed Hitchens, I would have said some other things that may have emphasized the point more. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2010,02:30    Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 30 2010,00:14) The thing about religion, at least from my neck of the woods (The Bible Belt)... is that so many people grow up with religion. They see all the good things that 'the church' does and anything bad is 'the person'... Got to agree with that. It is pretty much how I thought when I was religious.

Bing Posts: 144 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 02 2010,13:31    Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Nov. 29 2010,19:06) I agree. IMO Hitchens won. However the vote indicated a draw. Both Blair and Hitchens persuaded a roughly similar percentage to their cause. Dembski was crap. I am not saying that Blair convinced me. I am just saying that according to the vote. Blair and Hitchens persuaded a roughly = amount to vote their way. I just got an email from the Munk Organizers and they declare a win, albeit slight, for Hitchens. Quote Dear Munk Debates Member: Friday night’s debate on Religion saw an electric exchange between Tony Blair and Christopher Hitchens. Prior to the debate, 25% of the 2,600 audience members agreed with the motion, while 55% disagreed, and 20% were undecided. The audience vote immediately following the debate showed that Christopher Hitchens won the debate, by a hair, by garnering 13% of the previously undecided vote versus 7% for Tony Blair. The final results for the second audience vote on the motion were 32% in agreement and 68% opposed. To access a detailed report on the results click here.

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 12 2010,06:10    Quote Me too..., by IkaInk Responses to Markuzi/Mabus can be found on the BW. Edited by Lou FCD on Dec. 12 2010,07:11 -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Dec. 15 2010,22:58    Quote (Lou FCD @ Dec. 12 2010,04:10)   Quote Me too..., by IkaInk Responses to Markuzi/Mabus can be found on the BW. It may be time to notify his ISP about his behaviour.  If ISP's still care about such things. -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard