/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3606983]

The Muslim managed to wipe the floor with the Atheist.

What do you, as philosophers, think of this debate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=uSwJuOPG4FI

[Anonymous No.3606994]

>thinking debates are won or lost
>being this pleb

Pick both.

[Anonymous No.3606996]

>>3606994

I am that pleb.

[Anonymous No.3607003]

>spending 2 hours watching a debate
shiggity
if you can't get your point across in <5 min then you dont know what ur talking about

[Anonymous No.3607006]

>>3606983
How do you even debate about religion? Doesn't it necessarily boil down to belief and lack of belief? I'm just confused as to the point of debating it

[Anonymous No.3607015]

>>3607003
>that feel when you bring your point across a hidden message

I don't always do it but it's fun sometimes.

[Anonymous No.3607020]

Did the Muslim make it through the whole debate without threatening to blow himself up?

[Anonymous No.3607022]

>>3607003

That the Quran can be DEDUCTIVELY shown to be a miracle.

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/

[Anonymous No.3607028]

>>3607020
Did the Atheist make it through the whole debate without cutting someone with his edge?

[Anonymous No.3607035]

This is the only book I need to understand Islam.

[Anonymous No.3607056]

>professor lawrence krause
spontaneous generated mule that never ceases to show his ugly mug.
saged and reported

[Anonymous No.3607091]

>>3607006

Study theology.

[Anonymous No.3607094]

>>3606994
>being this relativist

Have some courage, anon.

[Anonymous No.3607101]

>>>/b/

[Anonymous No.3607110]

>>3606983
>Not Rushdie or Hirsi Ali

Genuinely surprised

[Anonymous No.3607111]

>>3607101

>philosophical debate

Too much for you?

[Anonymous No.3607119]

>>3607111
>krause
>philosopher
stop embarrassing yourself.

[Anonymous No.3607125]

>>3607119

Philosophical debate doesn't have to occur between 'philosophers' - it's the content which is being discussed which matters.

A five year old child questioning whether they can step in the same river twice can be said to be doing 'philosophy'.

[Anonymous No.3607129]

>>3607028
I'm atheist but this reply made me lol

[Anonymous No.3607143]

>>3607129
Why? The all-purpose 'edgy' put-down for anything that someone disagrees with is getting overused now. It's going the same meaningless way as 'overrated'.

[Anonymous No.3607149]

>>3606983
Not even 5 minutes in and Lawrence is already in full asshat mode.

[Anonymous No.3607155]

>>3607125
why the fuck wouldn't he be able to step in the same river twice, unless he drowned

[Anonymous No.3607158]

>>3607155
I think he is questioning the purpose of stepping in the same river the second time. It might not be necessary and he would make his feet wet without any good reason.

[Anonymous No.3607164]

>>3607158
why would it be necesarry to step in it at all

[Anonymous No.3607166]

Oh god, I've seen the atheist before. One time I was forced to watch the Bill Maher show in a hotel room with my friends and he and 2 other douchebags were blabbering on and on about random bullshit. There were strawman arguments and ad hominem galore.

[Anonymous No.3607168]

>>3607164
Maybe it's one thing in life he had to do. Maybe someone pushed the child, maybe he was testing something.

[Anonymous No.3607170]

>>3607168
this is some bullshit im leaving this gay thread

[Anonymous No.3607172]

COULD YOU PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK STOP FEEDING THESE CAREERISTS?!

[Anonymous No.3607176]

>>3607170
you can't handle their phulosophing

[Anonymous No.3607178]

>>3607155
>>3607168
>>3607164
>>3607158
lrn2heraclitus

[Anonymous No.3607180]

>>3607155
>>3607158
>>3607164
>>3607168

This is just embarrassing for a people who pride themselves on philosophy and literature.

[Anonymous No.3607181]

>mfw Krauss makes atheists look like arrogant pricks in the first minute of his response

goddammit Krauss, fucking stop

[Anonymous No.3607179]

>>3607178
Ahahahahahaha, HAIRY CLITUS! AHAHAhahahahahahHAHAAHA!

[Anonymous No.3607184]

>>3607155

[Anonymous No.3607186]

>>3607180
do you get jokes?

[Anonymous No.3607187]

>>3607181
No, he pretty much just makes himself look like an arrogant fool.

[Anonymous No.3607191]

>>3607186

No.

Also, check your capitalization.

[Anonymous No.3607195]

I hate when people act like they are not listening in debates.

[Anonymous No.3607217]

>London

I didn't even need to start watching to know it was there.
What happened, England?

[Anonymous No.3607222]

>starts with self-victimization
>assumes Hindu and Egyptian religions all assume the universe was created ex nihilo
>Islam is a religion, ergo, it's like all religions

Come on dude.

[Anonymous No.3607232]

>>3607217

Islam came.

[Anonymous No.3607233]

>>3607006

You can do a heck of a lot of debating from the point of view within the theology itself, both as a believer and as not one. You can hit topics like logically supporting the religion, arguing the morals of the religion, theories about the theology, etc.

Long story short: Yes it does pretty much come down to belief or disbelief but most religious debates aren't about convincing the opponent to believe or not believe.

[Anonymous No.3607237]

>Keeps calling him Turkish when the moderator said he was Greek
>Asks if he fluently speaks Classical Arabic to discredit his knowledge as "speculative"
>Calls it "Ancient" Arabic

I don't know whether to turn it off or keep listening.

[Anonymous No.3607247]

That Hamza guy is one handsome dude, no homo.

[Anonymous No.3607248]

>>3607233

Then what are debates about?

[Anonymous No.3607249]

>>3607247
I was fucking thinking the same. I wanted to post like:
Islam: Handsome guy with nice beard.
Atheism: Grumpy old professor.

[Anonymous No.3607253]

>>3607249
Not to mention the handsome guy is humble and seems to genuinely want to derive some truths from the event.

The ugly professor is just needlessly self-bloated, arrogant, and closed off.

[Anonymous No.3607255]

>>3607248

Depends. A few of the topics I listed are some things that are sometimes debated. A believer will try and logically support his faith, and disbeliever will try to logically discredit it. There will be arguments over whether or not the faith contradicts itself or not, arguments over whether or not the atheist stands on logical ground in his own stance, etc. This is from my own experience by the way.

[Anonymous No.3607256]

>>3607249
>>3607253

Shall we convert to Islam, everyone?

[Anonymous No.3607263]

>>3607255

Humanity has been debating religion for thousands of years. So, what's the conclusion?

[Anonymous No.3607266]

>>3607249

To be honest I was expecting an old middle eastern dude in white robes, not a good looking, sharply dressed dude who looks like a total bro.

[Anonymous No.3607269]

>>3607256

Can't, already have a theology.

[Anonymous No.3607272]

>>3607217

The collapse of the Empire.

[Anonymous No.3607273]

>>3607266

A good PR job.

[Anonymous No.3607276]

>>3607256
Eh, sure.

[Anonymous No.3607277]

>>3607263

On that one I'm gonna have to give a resounding "I dunno." We all come to our own conclusions. My conclusion is that God is real, the Bible is true, and Christ is the savior of the human race. You undoubtedly have different conclusions.

[Anonymous No.3607282]

>>3607256

Do the good looks come with it?

>that hair!
>that beard!

[Anonymous No.3607283]

>Do you think "Shariah Law" should be enacted?!
>Paedophilia

Oh god.

[Anonymous No.3607284]

>You are now aware that Richard Dawkins has admitted to have never read the Koran

http://pastebin.com/fDXCq7ws

(4chan is picking up the direct twitter link as spam)

[Anonymous No.3607288]

>>3607284

Quick Question: Are you Muslim?

[Anonymous No.3607289]

>>3607283
So revoltingly derivative. Krauss was grabbing at straws.

[Anonymous No.3607297]

There is no god worthy of worship except God and Muhammad is His messenger.

[Anonymous No.3607303]

>>3607284
Dawkins has never been ashamed of his ignorance

[Anonymous No.3607305]

>>3607288

Agnostic master race

[Anonymous No.3607308]

>>3607305

Why haven't you converted to Islam after watching this debate?

[Anonymous No.3607312]

When are we going to get someone that isn't a bumbling moron that can represent atheism in the public sphere?

[Anonymous No.3607313]

>>3607284

Because you need to read the entire meandering, medieval fantasy book that is the Quran to know that it's not true.

[Anonymous No.3607314]

>>3607313
You do need to read it for a decent debate, though.

[Anonymous No.3607315]

>>3607256
Muslim here, grow a beard and welcome aboard.

[Anonymous No.3607317]

>>3607313
Hey, Dick. Can I call you Dick?

[Anonymous No.3607318]

>>3607313

Why did you slap some adjectives onto "book" in an attempt to discredit it instead of actually using rational argument?

[Anonymous No.3607322]

What's up with the audio cutting out at 19:50?

[Anonymous No.3607320]

>>3607277
well considering all the evidence of the great flood that's been found, plus the ruins of the tower of Babel, as well as the hill where Christ was crucified and the fact that Adam and Eve are the only logical explanation for how humanity started, Christianity is a good way to think and live

[Anonymous No.3607321]

>>3607315
>implying the girly, beta males on /lit/ can even grow beards that aren't patchy, scraggly messes.

[Anonymous No.3607323]

> two ugly middle easterners debate over what to replace european civilization with
lol

[Anonymous No.3607325]

>>3607323
>Hamza
>ugly

[Anonymous No.3607330]

>>3607321

I happen to be an agnostic Arab and I can grow a magnificent beard.

Even though I love growing my beard, and have let it grow a couple of times in my home country, I do not dare grow it in the USA. My ethnicity is enough for people to assume that I am a durka durka allahu akbar, and the last thing I would want is to add a beard to the formula.

[Anonymous No.3607332]

I will never understand why Krauss is even in a religious debate. He should stick with physics lectures.

[Anonymous No.3607337]

>>3607320

Can't tell if you're being facetious or not, but if not thank you, I agree.

[Anonymous No.3607338]

>"Why is incest wrong?"
>"It's not clear to me that it is!"

[Anonymous No.3607339]

>>3607334
> implying Islam is all down-lo homosexuality
kaffir please

[Anonymous No.3607334]

>>3607325

> gay anon who is going to convert to Islam to suck Hamza's dick only to get rejected or stoned to death when England become Islamic

[Anonymous No.3607335]

>>3607330
>Even though I love growing my beard, and have let it grow a couple of times in my home country, I do not dare grow it in the USA. My ethnicity is enough for people to assume that I am a durka durka allahu akbar, and the last thing I would want is to add a beard to the formula.
I know that feel, and I'm not even related to you fucks.

[Anonymous No.3607336]

>>3607330
>caring what retarded Americans think

[Anonymous No.3607342]

>>3607320
>evidence of the great flood
>plus the ruins of the tower of Babel
>Adam and Eve are the only logical explanation
wat? what fucking evidence?

[Anonymous No.3607343]

>>3607321
Oh god, it's true

[Anonymous No.3607341]

>>3607334
>implying there is a passage in the Quran that forbids a bromance

[Anonymous No.3607345]

>>3607320

ITT: Possessed people.
Keep worshiping your Dawkins and your Alah.

[Anonymous No.3607346]

>>3607335

Who are you calling fucks, buddy?

[Anonymous No.3607348]

>>3607341
Muhammad and Ali are my OTP bromance

[Anonymous No.3607350]

>>3607346
I'm not your buddy, friend.

[Anonymous No.3607353]

>>3607345
huh? Dawkins is a biologist who is shit at debating theology, and while Allah may also be part of the monotheistic tradition, that's certainly not who I'm praying to. New Testament all the way baby

[Anonymous No.3607354]

>>3607336

Believe me, life is much easier for me as a beardless Arab.

I am too Arab to grow a beard that does not shout "religion".

[Anonymous No.3607352]

>>3607346
Durka durka allah couscous
islam.

[Anonymous No.3607356]

>>3607350
well i'm not your friend, guy

[Anonymous No.3607358]

>>3607350

I am not your friend, pal!

[Anonymous No.3607359]

>>3607353
The point is that you're an idiot. Don't respond to this post if you know what's good for you, sonny.

[Anonymous No.3607360]

>>3606983
The muslim is wrong, and the atheist is annoying. I don't even need to watch the video.

[Anonymous No.3607362]

>>3607191
I read this as "I have atheism" at first. Still works.

[Anonymous No.3607365]

If a book is divinely inspired it would contain evidence of such inspiration. However, the Quran's view of the natural world is about as erroneous as it can possibly be.

[Anonymous No.3607363]

>>3607354
Where are you from? penninsula?

[Anonymous No.3607368]

>>3607363

Egypt.

[Anonymous No.3607371]

>>3607359
i'm an idiot for believing there are things beyond myself? you are more arrogant than the other christians who think the universe was designed just for them.

[Anonymous No.3607372]

>>3607368
Wear a pyramid on your head.

[Anonymous No.3607376]

>public debates

I'm fine up here, thanks.

[Anonymous No.3607374]

>>3607353
>New Testament all the way baby

Awh yeah, what up fellow brother in Christ?

[Anonymous No.3607377]

>2013
>Theology

[Anonymous No.3607378]

Muslim [British] vs. Atheist [American]. I think we know why the Muslim 'wiped the floor' with the Atheist.

[Anonymous No.3607382]

>>3607376
Fuck you, Popo.

[Anonymous No.3607379]

>>3607365

Hamza addresses your point in the Q&A session.

Also, check this >>3607022 for an allegedly objective and deductive proof of the divinity of the Quran.

[Anonymous No.3607380]

>>3607371
You're an idiot for believing there are things above yourself. And "arrogant" is just a buzzword.

[Anonymous No.3607381]

>>3607374
A blessed Good Friday to you! About to get some fish fried up in this biznatch!

[Anonymous No.3607383]

>>3607378
:)

[Anonymous No.3607384]

>>3607360
Seriously.
Would it hurt 'atheists' if they developed some compassion?

[Anonymous No.3607386]

>>3607372

I really don't want anything that makes me stand out in a crowd.

[Anonymous No.3607387]

>>3607386
I'm so ugly I stand out in the crow immediately!

[Anonymous No.3607388]

>>3607380
since when is being humble and open to new experiences a bad thing? even though i'm sure you won't appreciate it, i will pray earnestly and sincerely for a change of heart in you

[Anonymous No.3607393]

>>3607386
Eat 40 pounds of lard then.

[Anonymous No.3607394]

>>3607388
I'm not going to change my mind and neither are you, so don't even talk about "new experiences".

All religious people that aren't Ian Anderson should just off themselves.

[Anonymous No.3607397]

>>3607382
>dismissing the literary life

[Anonymous No.3607401]

>>3607384

As an apostate of Islam coming from a country where 80% of the Muslim population believe that I should be killed I literally have 0 reasons to develop any compassion for the religious. And when I see shit like this

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/03/22/us-rights-atheists-eu-idUKBRE92L0N520130322

you should not blame me.

But do not worry, my parents raised me well and I don't hate the Muslims who want to cut my head for leaving a religion I didn't consciously consent into adopting.

I also hope that the USA stays as far as possible from becoming an Islamic country as it seems there will be no where for me to go in the future.

[Anonymous No.3607399]

>>3607394
you may not change your mind, but you should never doubt His power

[Anonymous No.3607409]

>>3607312

Isn't Dawkins good enough?

[Anonymous No.3607411]

The muslim didn't 'win' at all.

His entire argument relied on several basic strawmen within specific models. He held these models as objective, claimed otherwise, then just quoted excerpts from various philosophers while the scientist attempted to clarify aspects of the models. The entire thing was a disgusting display of fallacious reasoning from both sides.

[Anonymous No.3607412]

>>3607381

Same to you! Can't wait for Easter this Sunday!

[Anonymous No.3607413]

>>3607397
Why do so many people on /lit/ think that "the literary life" consists of wearing sweat pants and living with your parents?

[Anonymous No.3607416]

>>3607409
>Dawkins
lelelel

[Anonymous No.3607418]

>>3607323

Hey, now, if there's one thing that we can all come away from that debate was that the middle eastern rep was most certainly not ugly.

[Anonymous No.3607419]

>>3607401
I meant compassion and sensibility mostly as a means for a proper debate and persuasion.
You can't properly debate with a religious/superstitious person without compassion and understanding.

[Anonymous No.3607424]

>>3607418
Seriously? Keep in mind I'm not running on Amerifat standards here.

[Anonymous No.3607425]

>>3607419
Why would you debate him if you had those two?

[Anonymous No.3607427]

>>3607425
Because you're not a self-absorbed irresponsible faggot and care about human progress?

[Anonymous No.3607430]

>>3607338
cont.
>Someone who is rationalizing incest has no more high ground to point the finger at Muslim women

[Anonymous No.3607431]

>>3607427

>spooks

[Anonymous No.3607432]

>>3607419

I get you.

From my experience it is useless to debate a Western Muslim. It is possible to have a calm and compassionate discussion with, say, and Egyptian Muslim and get them to agree that the morality of Islam is at least questionable and that the Quran has some issues, but not with a Western Muslim.

[Anonymous No.3607434]

>>3607365
>However, the Quran's view of the natural world is about as erroneous as it can possibly be.

Except...it's not.

There are actually a number of passages which allude to scientific principles which couldn't possibly have been known at the time of when it was purportedly written.

For instance, one such which comes to mind is a passage alluding to the foetus which is describes as a 'wad of chewed meat/gum' (I can't remember the exact wording). On examination of the early stages of the foetal developement it does indeed resemble a piece of chewed gum.

Another alludes to the front part of the brain being associated with lying. Neuroscience has only in recent decades found that the part of the brain involved in the cognition associated with lying is indeed found in the frontal lobe.

There are many out there if you bothered looking.

[Anonymous No.3607435]

>>3607427
lol i am. speak for yourself, dude.

[Anonymous No.3607437]

>>3607434
>For instance, one such which comes to mind is a passage alluding to the foetus which is describes as a 'wad of chewed meat/gum' (I can't remember the exact wording). On examination of the early stages of the foetal developement it does indeed resemble a piece of chewed gum.
You can just carve that out. It probably looks like goat fetuses too.

>>3607434
>Another alludes to the front part of the brain being associated with lying. Neuroscience has only in recent decades found that the part of the brain involved in the cognition associated with lying is indeed found in the frontal lobe.
What if Irish pagans knew about this as well? Do we know they didn't?

[Anonymous No.3607438]

>>3607401
I don't want to say that you are equal to the people who threaten to cut throats so I form my post in an other way. I find it annoying when people walk around and praise themselves to death. What the fuck do you want, a medal cause your parents "raised you well" and that you don't hate?

[Anonymous No.3607439]

>>3607434

>make a gazillion guesses
>be correct about one or two

Yup they knew it all along, god bless alah.

[Anonymous No.3607436]

>>3607434

Are you fucking twelve?

[Anonymous No.3607441]

>>3607401
>implying the .1 percent of the US population that is Muslim has any executive, judicial, or legislative power in the US government

So you're really an American neo-con?

[Anonymous No.3607442]

>>3607409
>Dawkins
Here's Dawkins talking to the Muslim in OPs link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASCevc3Ib14

[Anonymous No.3607444]

>>3607397

Why is he wearing a dressing gown outside?

[Anonymous No.3607445]

>>3607436
>Are you fucking twelve?

I am indeed fucking twelve, one which is your mom!

[Anonymous No.3607446]

>>3607434

Even if the Quran was "right" about these things, which it isn't, it still would not bespeak any divine inspiration.

[Anonymous No.3607449]

>>3607434
>Another alludes to the front part of the brain being associated with lying. Neuroscience has only in recent decades found that the part of the brain involved in the cognition associated with lying is indeed found in the frontal lobe.

Let's see:

> A lying, sinning forelock.

http://quran.com/96/16

That's called exegesis. You're injecting meaning into the verse.

[Anonymous No.3607451]

>>3607432

Wouldn't it be the other way around?

At least in my experiences the western raised Muslims tend to be less 'conservative' than their middle eastern brethren.

The only exception to that would be those youngsters who fawn for their homelands and culture and develop a massive ego from being 'different'. But then you get those types everywhere.

[Anonymous No.3607454]

>>3607438

I was just being defensive. Muslims attack be for being an apostate, and non-Muslims assume that me being an agnostic implies that I worship Dawkins.

[Anonymous No.3607455]

>>3607436

Why do you ask?

[Anonymous No.3607456]

>>3607451

If you find an observant Muslim in the west, he is going to be defensive.

[Anonymous No.3607457]

>>3607451
>At least in my experiences the western raised Muslims tend to be less 'conservative' than their middle eastern brethren.
>
>The only exception to that would be those youngsters who fawn for their homelands and culture and develop a massive ego from being 'different'. But then you get those types everywhere.
America =/= Europe

[Anonymous No.3607459]

>>3607442
>Psychology ought to include evolution

Stopped right there.

[Anonymous No.3607463]

>>3607459
Sounds right. Who said that?

[Anonymous No.3607461]

>>3607442
Hahaha. Dawkins ran away.

[Anonymous No.3607462]

>>3607457

Western typically means Western Europe + Anglosphere though.

It's less based on geography and moreso on social aspects.

[Anonymous No.3607466]

>>3607459
I do hope you are joking.

[Anonymous No.3607467]

>>3607441

Well, I am not a US citizen. Excuse me for feeling worried about the Muslim population in the only country I have a passport from.

[Anonymous No.3607470]

>>3607461
>this is what muslims actually believe

[Anonymous No.3607471]

>>3607462
Yes. That's why is retarded. American muslims are not European muslims. They have nothing in common socially.

[Anonymous No.3607472]

>>3607454
Also, why do you care when people assume something? It doesn't matter as long as the things they assume aren't true and if they try to make an argument based on their assumption then it's your turn to say that they misunderstood you. I hope you get me.

[Anonymous No.3607473]

>>3607442

>You can't see evolution happening

>drug resistant strains of bacteria arising all the time
>it's possible to artificially create environments for bacterial species and observe evolution taking place over many generation over several months

I thought Dawkins was a biologist.

[Anonymous No.3607475]

We already had a thread about this, and a former Muslim explained how his argument amounted to little more than intellectual trickery. The problem was that Krauss went in expecting Islamic theology to be the same as Christian theology and was caught off guard.

Pic related, it's the true nimage of Tzortzis.

[Anonymous No.3607478]

>>3607472

I get you.

[Anonymous No.3607479]

>>3607475
> The problem was that Krauss went in expecting Islamic theology to be the same as his imagined strawman ideas and was caught off guard.

Pic related.

[Anonymous No.3607482]

>>3607413
It mostly consists of idle bohemianism, the arts and a disinterest towards public life. It's better to live alone though. But sweat pants and a robe are the indoor wear of the neo-decadent.

>>3607444
Because he is too cool.

[Anonymous No.3607483]

>>3607449
I think that's going to be too big a word for him.

[Anonymous No.3607486]

>>3607475
>Krauss went in expecting Islamic theology to be the same as Christian theology and was caught off guard.

So, he didn't know that the partner in the debate was going to be a Muslim, or he just didn't give a shit to do any research to prepare for the event?

[Anonymous No.3607487]

>>3607479
er, switch pic related for fixed that for you.

[Anonymous No.3607488]

>>3607473
That isn't really "seeing" evolution happening.

[Anonymous No.3607489]

>>3607413

Because most of /lit/ as has rather surprisingly, though not entirely without basis, have turned out to be NEETs as several threads in these past weeks have shown.

[Anonymous No.3607491]

>>3607489
NEET master race reporting in.

[Anonymous No.3607494]

>>3607488
...what?

[Anonymous No.3607496]

>>3607488

Why not?

Evolution is a process of enviromental adaptation.

In those instances you can readily observe bacteria changing to meet their environments both chemically and physically (physically being implied by the fact that they would need to change to be able alter ion channels and whatnot to enact chemical adaption on the firs place).

[Anonymous No.3607498]

>>3607456

I know a couple of Egyptian Muslims in the USA and they are fine liberals whose knowledge of Islam does not exceed what they learnt about it in school (which will start to change with the MB in power). On the other hand, I met a couple of British Muslims when I spent a year in the Oxbridge area and they scared the shit out of me. Even though we have a lot of fucked up Muslims in Egypt, we have very very few who are as fucked up as those I saw in the UK.

[Anonymous No.3607504]

>>3607486
>So, he didn't know that the partner in the debate was going to be a Muslim, or he just didn't give a shit to do any research to prepare for the event?

The latter.

[Anonymous No.3607507]

>>3607498
>>3607456
>>3607432

>anecdotal evidence

[Anonymous No.3607511]

>>3607504

So why bother going up to get anally devastated, and don't deny it - he was visibly agitated and perturbed.

[Anonymous No.3607515]

Was Krauss reminiscent of this guy for anyone else?

[Anonymous No.3607516]

>>3607515
lol yes i was wondering what jew he reminded me of

[Anonymous No.3607517]

>>3607507
>anecdotal evidence
This is getting to be just as bad as those people who throw out the name of every fallacy they learned in a basic logic class.

[Anonymous No.3607522]

>>3607516
>Muslim being anti-semitic
Why am I not surprised?

[Anonymous No.3607524]

>>3607486

The latter is glaringly obvious from the debate. I don't think he was prepared for arguments about Arabic linguistics.

>>3607479
And he was greeted by unfamiliar and equally retarded strawmen. But, to some extent, you are correct.

[Anonymous No.3607525]

>>3607489
For someone with an interest in artistic pursuits and culture in general the NEET life is one of the best choices. Some of us might do well on academic side of it and that's fine. Some of us may be independently wealthy. But having a regular job can be outright detrimental. It's only reasonable for those who pursue the more ethereal things in life to lean towards a more bohemian existence, especially in times where work in general is dwindling.

[Anonymous No.3607530]

>>3607522
Islam is based in Arabic, the most popular Semitic language. Jews were tortured in Germany for looking like Arabs. It was the Germans who created antisemitism (biological arguments against Jews).

Arabs have none of this.

But I'm not Muslim or Arabic.

[Anonymous No.3607535]

Oh and both Krauss and that actor are Jewish. there is nothing 'antisemitic' about pointing it out. They look and sound identical, you know, because of genes.

[Anonymous No.3607539]

>>3607479

What pic?

[Anonymous No.3607549]

I hate when people try to change someones mind. If someone wants to be a Muslim or Atheist let him be, you can have a discussion without dropping the lines "Why don't you open your eyes! I can see things clearer than you!" There are people who see things from an other perspective and that they don't want to change it, that doesn't mean that they are dumber than you.

[Anonymous No.3607547]

>>3607507

I invite you to pay a visit to the Abu Bakr Mosque in Cambridge on Friday and listen to the Friday lecture. Their address is: 1 Mawson Rd, Cambridge CB1 2DZ, UK.

You'll find a shop selling halal chicken owned by Turkish guy a few meters away from it, and down the street you'll find a barber shop owned by a Persian lady where a couple of Muslims work. I invite you to go there, grap a bit or get a hair cut, and listen to the discussions. Or just take a walk in Mawson Road.

Seriously, I cannot wrap my head around the fact that this cancerous street exists in Cambridge.

[Anonymous No.3607550]

I'm about 40 mins in, and that atheist guy is pretty bad. Jumping off of a 4 storey building being a bad idea is not something we get from empiricism.

[Anonymous No.3607552]

>>3607530
>Jews were tortured in Germany for looking like Arabs.
Top lel. Pic related

>It was the Germans who created antisemitism
Even more lel. You do know antisemitism has existed, well, as long as the jews right?

[Anonymous No.3607553]

>>3607535
yeah, im sure. back to /pol/

[Anonymous No.3607556]

>>3607549
The problem is that people tend to look down on others for being different, this is where the argument erupts.

[Anonymous No.3607558]

>>3607550
I'm at the Q&A section. It's not worth it, just abort.

[Anonymous No.3607559]

>>3607552
Is there any information about what they discussed?

[Anonymous No.3607560]

>>3607552
He's a butthurt Arab with a terribly misinformed view of history,

[Anonymous No.3607561]

>>3607558
I only watched some minutes of every part.

[Anonymous No.3607564]

>>3607552
>Even more lel. You do know antisemitism has existed, well, as long as the jews right?
Hatred of Jews.

The fact that there is diversity in all groups is irrelevant. Many Jews didn't fight the type. That's not the point. The point is that the scientific racism involved specified Arabids/Orientalids and Armenids - typology to classify 'Semites'.

Antijudism had been rather religious or ethnic prior to this, not a matter of scientific rigidity.

[Anonymous No.3607569]

>>3607507
>>3607547

And don't get me wrong. I love going to Mosques when I am in Egypt on Fridays to meet my friends after the lecture+prayer ceremony is over, so I do not hate mosques or Muslim areas per se. I really was shocked by the status of the Abu Bakr mosque and Mawson Rd.

[Anonymous No.3607574]

>>3607560
I'm a guy who agreed that actor looks like Krauss. Calling some spic from California a butthurt Muslim..

[Anonymous No.3607578]

>>3607558
Is a decent counter brought up to the Quranic Arabic being a miracle? It just seems to me that the guy went "I disagree with Hume on a miracle going against inductive laws, blah blah blah, see how the Quranic verse goes against our prescribed notions (i.e. inductive laws) of verse, it's a miracle!" but I don't see anyone bringing this point up. It seems to be as much of a miracle as Iambic pentameter existing.

[Anonymous No.3607580]

>>3607559
His wiki should provide with a lot of information. They shared enemies (brits, jews, commies) and Husseini wanted clay for his people. Seems only sensible to talk to Hitler. I guess the affinities go deeper though, there were also ideological similarities as far as I know.

[Anonymous No.3607584]

>mf circa 2:00:00

[Anonymous No.3607595]

>>3607584

What happens at 2:00:00

> yaa Allah, laa yumkin an takuun khatiira

What's does the transliteration "khatiira" stand for?

[Anonymous No.3607596]

>>3607564
Anti-semitism, as a term, does not just refer to biological "race science" based hatred of Jews.

[Anonymous No.3607598]

>>3607475
Yeah, his logically sound arguments were just trickery perpetuated by the academic elite.

[Anonymous No.3607601]

>>3607578
>Is a decent counter brought up to the Quranic Arabic being a miracle?

No

[Anonymous No.3607608]

My thought go to the direction that a religions gf is less likely to be a bitch.

[Anonymous No.3607616]

>>3607584
Just saw that. "Lets look at the deductive arguments if they're there, not 'you put bags on heads' or 'you don't clean your earwax'"
About 2 mins later from the other guy
"Just like that woman who drowned her kids"

It reminds me of the Stewart Lee Taxi Driver bit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n-UGQcG3Jw

[Anonymous No.3607625]

>>3607595
Serious.

It's probably wrong since I took it from gtranslate.

[Anonymous No.3607627]

>>3607596
Now, it doesn't. Historically there wasn't any such thing as antisemitism. It's a nonsense term as applied now. Christians rejected Jews because they were Jews. There was a clear religious reaosn.

[Anonymous No.3607624]

>>3607601

Then it's true! The Quran is indeed a miracle.

[Anonymous No.3607634]

>>3607616
He even says something like "Stop using words to make a point"

[Anonymous No.3607636]

>>3607624
Time to convert

[Anonymous No.3607643]

>>3607530
>>3607552

Most jews are not really semites though

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23241444

[Anonymous No.3607645]

>>3607636

There is no god worthy of worship except God and Muhammad is His messenger.

[Anonymous No.3607650]

>>3607645
Why is this line so laughably stupid?

[Anonymous No.3607652]

>>3607318
Burden of Proof is on the person saying "This book is true!"

If you cannot prove beyond shadow of reasonable doubt that something you have written is true, it is, by default, to be considered false.

There's a reason non-fiction should always include citations.

[Anonymous No.3607656]

>>3607552

Wasn't Hitler something of an Islamaboo? Or he at least respected the religion.

[Anonymous No.3607657]

>>3607652

[Anonymous No.3607662]

>>3607656
He made a couple remarks about how he admired Islam for being a strong religion and disliked Christianity for being weak.

[Anonymous No.3607663]

>>3607627
>Historically there wasn't any such thing as antisemitism.

B-but muh Roman led persecutions?

[Anonymous No.3607667]

>>3607650

In what way?

It's a simple statement first accepting monotheism, and second that that is who his messenger was.

[Anonymous No.3607670]

>>3607652
>Burden of Proof is on the person saying "This book is true!"

Here you go:

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/

An objective deductive argument.

[Anonymous No.3607672]

>>3607667
It's misleading only to make the God seem more divine or powerful.

[Anonymous No.3607678]

>>3607022
>The implication of this is that there is no link between the Qur’an and the Arabic language; however this seems impossible because the Qur’an is made up of the Arabic language. On the other hand, every combination of Arabic words and letters have been used to try and imitate the Qur’an. Therefore, this leaves only one conclusion; a Divine explanation is the only coherent explanation for this impossible Arabic literary form – the Qur’an. Hence, it logically follows that if the Qur’an is a literary event that lies outside the productive capacity of the Arabic language, i.e. an impossibility, then by definition, it is a miracle.

"This book is so good, so it must be from god!"

Well, shit. Looks like I need to start worshiping The Knight of the Sorrowful Face, his Holiness Don Quixote, and his profit Miguel de Cervantes. After all, if a book is really good, it must be divinely inspired!

[Anonymous No.3607679]

>>3607657
That's how formal logic works.

>>3607670
Responded to that here:

>>3607678

[Anonymous No.3607682]

>>3607413
It's the only way they can be aristocratic.

[Anonymous No.3607684]

>>3607656
Himmler was the prime Islamaboo of the high ranking nazi's. He really loved it and saw it as the superior living warrior religion if I'm correct.

>>3607627
Antisemitism in the way it's used is simply a broad term for hatred of anything Jewish.

[Anonymous No.3607691]

>>3607678

You weren't paying attention like Dr. Krauss. Here is Hamza's reply to you:

> The Professor misconstrued aesthetic reception with literary form. One of my arguments was the literary inimitability and uniqueness of the Qur'anic discourse. I presented a coherent definition of what a miracle is, and showed how the Qur'an's inimitability makes it a miracle. I highlighted the Qur'an's inimitability by discussing the classical Arabic literary forms, which are based on the structural features of the language and not aesthetic appreciation. The Professor argued that he didn't find the Qur'an beautiful. I responded by saying that he was not attentive to my argument and that it was based on the structural features of language and not the subjective appreciation of the reader or listener.

[Anonymous No.3607693]

>>3607678
But.. that's not what he said.

Shit, man, you quoted it and you still strawmaned him.

[Anonymous No.3607694]

>>3607682
This. The aristocracy and the lumpenproletariat are the only classes that are interesting and worth belonging to.

[Anonymous No.3607697]

>>3607684

Himmler also had a massive boner for Hinduism and the Indians.

Hence there was much facepalming in Berlin when he wasted shitloads of money with the Ahnenerbe missions to Asia.

[Anonymous No.3607699]

Lel. Europe is gone!

[Anonymous No.3607700]

>>3607652

That's not true. Burden of proof is on anyone making any kind of claim whatsoever, true or false. If you can't prove that the book of true then it doesn't immediately prove that it's not true, that's not logical reasoning. The logical conclusion is that you simply don't know for sure. Most humans can't live with that lack of certainty. So they pick a conclusion, and they slap the term "logical" on it.

[Anonymous No.3607705]

>>3607699
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.3607708]

>>3607470

Yeah, it was more of a "tactical withdrawal", right?

[Anonymous No.3607709]

>>3607700
>of true

Isn't. No idea why I wrote of.

[Anonymous No.3607710]

>>3607705
>it's fine to worship a religion but not discuss the impact it has on a country.

[Anonymous No.3607712]

>>3607700
>That's not true. Burden of proof is on anyone making any kind of claim whatsoever, true or false.
Very good point well made.

[Anonymous No.3607713]

>>3607708
No, more like a "fuck it I can't stand these inbred sandniggers"

[Anonymous No.3607722]

>>3607713

>he doesn't know shit about any other religion than christianity?
>no, it's just because he can't be bothered with them lol pwned!

This is what atheists actually believe.

[Anonymous No.3607725]

>>3607691
Nothing being said there can be accepted as an objective argument. Whether something is inimitabile or not is still simply an opinion

[Anonymous No.3607729]

>mfw Krauss actually says "stop saying words"

[Anonymous No.3607732]

>>3607725

You haven't read the essay, have you?

[Anonymous No.3607734]

>>3607722
He actually has to follow scientific laws when debating unlike religious people who can dig up some old scroll and call it truth. It's pretty hard to keep track of everything let alone argue against it in the middle of the street unprepared.

[Anonymous No.3607736]

It was downright ridiculous for Krauss to claim that Hamza's remark about gays in the U.S. was "rude" considering how Krauss had been treating Hamza up until that point. How delusional is Krauss anyway?

[Anonymous No.3607738]

>>3607691
What about:
>>3607578
>It just seems to me that the guy went "I disagree with Hume on a miracle going against inductive laws, blah blah blah, see how the Quranic verse goes against our prescribed notions (i.e. inductive laws) of verse, it's a miracle!" but I don't see anyone bringing this point up. It seems to be as much of a miracle as Iambic pentameter existing.
this point?

[Anonymous No.3607739]

Some atheists linked me to a Krauss video before, glad to see he has gotten some proper treatment.

[Anonymous No.3607740]

>>3607736
Delusional enough that he participates in religious debates.

[Anonymous No.3607746]

>>3607732
Of course not. It's a response to that poster's quote of Hamza, which he posted in response to someone pointing out how bad an argument that was. The implication is that that quote sums up, or at least explains his argument. I'd read it if someone were to post it.

[Anonymous No.3607750]

Also have to say that Hamza is a little too timid.

"Is it punishable for two men to have sex in a desert?"
"If there's no one in the desert then no, it's not."
"Let me ask you this then: Is homosexuality wrong?"
"Isamic tradition teaches that it's a sin."

Dang dude, just say "yes, it's wrong." Be up front and unabashed about your beliefs. And then of course Krauss goes all Appeal to Nature.

[Anonymous No.3607757]

>>3607693
He said that the style was "inimitable."

This, according to him, implies that it must have been the work of god. However, this is fundimentally untrue.

Even worse is this line:

>On the other hand, every combination of Arabic words and letters have been used to try and imitate the Qur’an

Let's assume that you are making a 60-character line to try and immitate the Q'ran. There are 28 characters in the Arabic alphabet, plus one for spaces, so let's say you can do it in 29 characters. Note: This is ignoring punctuation.

In this one sixty-character phrase, there are 29^60 possible combinations. That means that - In this one line - There are 5.5447232x 10^ 87 combinations. Assuming you can store each of these combinations in one kilobyte, that means that you would need just over five petabytes to store this one sixty-character phrase.

There is no way that all of those combinations have been written down. This line is fundamentally false.

[Anonymous No.3607763]

>>3607734

>He actually has to follow scientific laws
Yes, like here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKGtcVoBhBQ
So scientific.

>unlike religious people who can dig up some old scroll and call it truth
Maybe you should read into the controversy over the Yemeni Quran or the Dead Sea Scrolls before making such remarks.

>It's pretty hard to keep track of everything let alone argue against it in the middle of the street unprepared.
Then why take up the fight against religion if you're only going to specialise in one of hundreds?

[Anonymous No.3607771]

>>3607734
>He actually has to follow scientific laws when debating

>scientific laws
>debating

Bullshit he does. He may draw upon scientific facts and theory but his debating skills are hardly scientific in themselves.

>here is my opinion
>because this theory...
>repeat to counter points

[Anonymous No.3607775]

>>3607691
Prove that the Q'ran is inimitable.

This means that you must:
>Provide a vigorous definition of what "imitable" means
>Show - Using deductive arguments or mathematical proofs - That the Q'ran does not fit this definition.

If you can do that, I'll leave my boyfriend and join your religion.

[Anonymous No.3607778]

Hitch already delt with these sand niggers

/watch?v=CADoG-gu5Zk

[Anonymous No.3607780]

>>3607775

Nah dude, you should join MY religion instead. And bring your boyfriend with you.

[Anonymous No.3607781]

>>3607775
By religion do you mean "passionate love making"?

[Anonymous No.3607786]

>>3607775

Grill detected.

Thread derailed.

[Anonymous No.3607788]

>>3607763
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKGtcVoBhBQ
So hallucinations aren't proven scientifically?

And no I'm not going to read any of the things you listed

>inb4 don't start debates then
I won't if you don't respond to this post

[Anonymous No.3607793]

>>3607775

Read Hamza's essay.

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/

[Anonymous No.3607797]

(not pic related (rammstein's mutter album cover art))I haven't watched/listened to this debate but I think it would be cool if WWIII (not the war on terror) could be between Japan and Islam over who gets to have a monopoly when dealing with the trade of rare insects of the world (e.i. see Earth Defense Force: 2017 (Xbox 360) and its sequel)

[Anonymous No.3607807]

>>3607788

>convictions = hallucinations
lol ok.

>And no I'm not going to read any of the things you listed
Shame. It was for your benefit too, seeing as how you could use them in arguments against theists.
Have fun undermining yourself.

[Anonymous No.3607804]

>>3607793
I read it. He just says "You can't imitate it, it's too clever!"

He never does either of the things I said he must do.

[Anonymous No.3607806]

>>3607652
Popper would like to have a word with you.

[Anonymous No.3607823]

>>3607793
>http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/the-inimitable-quran/
>What makes the Qur’an a miracle, is that it is impossible for a human being to compose something like it, as it lies outside the productive capacity of the nature of the Arabic language. The productive capacity of nature, concerning the Arabic language, is that any grammatically sound expression of the Arabic language will always fall with-in the known Arabic literary forms of prose and poetry. All of the possible combinations of Arabic words, letters and grammatical rules have been exhausted and yet its literary form has not been matched linguistically.
>The Arabs, who were known to have been Arabic linguists par excellence, failed to successfully challenge the Qur’an.

Is this a joke? He's literally arguing that the aesthetic quality of a book is proof of the existence of God.

[Anonymous No.3607830]

>>3607807
If I'm ever arguing I do it for my own personal amusement, and if that's the case I'm only using a mixture of insults and a basic understanding of the opposition. No need for anything fancy.

[Anonymous No.3607840]

>>3607823
Historically it worked at times. The Qur'an was written during an era of great poetic proficiency and is a very poetic work. One of the argument of Muhamad was "If you mortals can come with better poetry than this, then show me".
Just think about how some people on /lit worship this or that author on the ground of their unique style. It is not really surprising.

[Anonymous No.3607846]

>>3607840
So, if I dislike the Qur'an I also disprove the existance of God?

[Anonymous No.3607850]

>>3607734
If anyone had to follow scientific laws (and by "scientific", I assume you mean logical?) it was Hamza. Hamza brought up the logical incoherence of infinity in the real world while Krause spouted out some nonsense about mathematical laws always being true in real life circumstances(which they're not. For example irrational numbers and infinity). He also used various strawman arguments and brought about the ole inductive reasoning sham. He basically claimed that you should trust what you see and believe over ideas and logical premises, while soon after claiming that we can't entirely grasp mathematics. His reasoning made me think of Anaximenes, who believed, through observation, that everything was made of air. He said that the soul was made of air and that was the reason you quit breathing when you died, or something along those lines. What I'm trying to get at is that just because it makes sense to you doesn't mean that it actually is, which is what krause argues.

[Anonymous No.3607854]

>>3607823
It's actually the quality of the book from its source. Muhammad was illiterate for most of his life and he was not trained in poetry or rhetoric, which were serious professions then. This fact and the supreme quality of the text lead to the argument that it's a miraculous occurrence since, as Tzortzis says, exceeds the productive capacity of nature.

[Anonymous No.3607855]

>>3607850
The universe isn't infinite, and Calculus does solve the problem of supertasks...

[Anonymous No.3607856]

>>3607850
I guess that is the point of this argument, yeah. But it would probably phrased the other way around: "denying the God of the Qur'an is dismissing the beauty of Quranic poetry". So it makes you look like a faggot for not liking great poetry. It's a fraud but a rather nice one nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.3607859]

>>3607846
This is what some non-muslims believe.

[Anonymous No.3607866]

>>3607859
Surely it must work both ways? It's a question of subjectivity after all.

[Anonymous No.3607874]

>>3607854

I'm not Islamic, but Muhammad's lack of education together with the beauty of the Koran is very interesting.

[Anonymous No.3607878]

>>3607855
>The universe isn't infinite
You can't know that.

He said infinity can't exist, when time can clearly continue infinitely from this present moment. He adopted certain models of physics, mathematics, and linguistics to make his claim, then tried to pretend his statements were true external to them.

[Anonymous No.3607880]

>>3607866
I agree. It's not a very convincing argument either way.

[Anonymous No.3607881]

>>3607823

Context.

If person who could not read nor wrote, and had nil education were to suddenly produce such a work wouldn't that raise suspicion? Even more so when there was no-one else that they could have turned to to 'help' them in writing it.

You have to remember that during the time of its revelation they were going under pretty harsh persecution with little support nor people wanting to be associated with in the early beginning.

[Anonymous No.3607940]

>To deny a deductive argument is to deny reality

Bullshit. For all the certainty logicians and mathematicians like to taut, all of it amounts to mere abstraction.

Einstein showed that geometry is not universally applicable; that when it leaves our very small segment of the universe it begins to fall apart, despite its deductive nature and origins. Why? Because man is the measure of all things; the systems he creates are in the end limited by his own limitations.

For example: Hamza seems to prove that something coming from nothing is an absurd possibility through his appeals to logic, but in the end all this amounts to is intellectual cloud-gazing. Quantum fluctuation is an observed, well-documented phenomenon which shows that -- brief as they are -- things can come from non-things. Again, another instance of tautologies failing in the face of concrete, empirical fact.

The laws man constructs from his own mind can either describe reality and be uncertain, or be certain and not describe reality -- they cannot be both. We've known this since the 18th century for Christ's sake.

[Anonymous No.3607966]

>>3607940
but you can make false/inaccurate deductions, this alone proves unreliability if you rely on it exclusively

[Anonymous No.3607975]

>>3607940

The something-can't-come-from-nothing argument is more about how effects require a cause than it is a relationship between things. What causes quantum fluctuation?

[Anonymous No.3607981]

After watching most of the debate, both of them could have behaved better. Krauss just came out of the gate with an elitist, arrogant air about him whereas Hamza kind of reacted to that with his own rudeness. Out of the two Hamza probably behaved a little better.

[Anonymous No.3607992]

>>3607940
>Einstein showed that geometry is not universally applicable

He did not and couldn't have done. Einstein used Riemannien geometry, which is still a legit geometry for anyone who has seen a sphere in his life. Relativity has nothing to do qith the inherent limitations of human reason, if anything, it demonstrates our ability to account for very strange phenomena. Quantum flluctuation doesn't show that things come from non-things, anything we observe, including fluctuation, exists in spacetime which has structural ^properties we interpret as force fields. This is not a non-thing in any way. I think you are making a confusion between the paradigmatical shifts introduced by relativity and quantum mechanics in science and the critics of the power of reason that started with Hume and Kant and deals with our innate abilty to think abstractly. I won't say they aren't related, I don't know enough about it, but while twentieth century physics deals with empirically provable explanations of observations, eighteenth century philosophy what about thinking in itself; which is not quite the same problem.

[Anonymous No.3608018]

>>3607823
>the likenesses of this event is very slim, and look how good everything turned out because of it!
>GOD GOD GOD GOD

Who is he trying to fool? Anyone that makes use of logic can see that this is bullshit. Is he trying to make idiots think that Islam is logically divine by throwing terms at them that they don't know and think are really important?

[Anonymous No.3608022]

>>3608018
/b/ might be more your speed

[Anonymous No.3608034]

>>3608022
You are really agreeing and/or conceding that the Quran can be deductively proven to be a miracle, a gift from god? I knew I shouldn't have gotten into a thread that wasn't about a book I was wanting to discuss.

[Anonymous No.3608039]

>>3608034

I think he's more talking about how you chose to barge in here and label all Muslims "idiots".

[Anonymous No.3608043]

>>3608034
>You are really agreeing and/or conceding that the Quran can be deductively proven to be a miracle, a gift from god?
Again, /b/
>I knew I shouldn't have gotten into a thread that wasn't about a book I was wanting to discuss.
Now that makes sense.

[Anonymous No.3608050]

>>3608039
I never labeled all Muslims "idiots". I find their ability to reason shaky, but idiotic? No. My post was referring to the man's argument that the Quran can be deductively proven as a miracle, which cannot be and the man failed to do so. I was then musing on why he would write all this out, why the man would place so much on having to prove his religion true/correct/believable on logically reasoning.

[Anonymous No.3608152]

>>3607878
We can know the universe isn't infinite. We've measured its boundaries.

[Anonymous No.3608176]

>>3608152
Ummmm, wat?

[Anonymous No.3608178]

>/lit/
>being pretentious, elitist and anti-intellectual all at the same time

Never change.

[Anonymous No.3608180]

>>3608152
What the hell do you mean we've measured its boundaries? We don't know shit about anything. All we have are our 5 senses and our biased human perspective.

[Anonymous No.3608182]

>>3608180

>5 senses

We have a lot more than 5 senses.

[Anonymous No.3608184]

>>3608178
>anon
>being pretentious, elitist, and anti-intellectual all at the same time

Never change.

[Anonymous No.3608265]

>>3608180
>>3608176

Pardon me, I was actually wrong. While we do have estimates, it is extremely difficult to get an accurate measurement.

[Anonymous No.3608273]

This mediator seems to be having a hell of a time.

[Anonymous No.3608369]

>>3608180
>>3608265
There's a hard limit on the observable universe because of expansion and light having the same speed regardless of reference frame.

[Anonymous No.3608400]

Christopher Hitchens remains the undefeated champion when it comes to these kind of debates. And he's been dead for over a year now.

[Anonymous No.3609676]

>>3608152
>we've measured it's boundaries

I chuckled.

[Anonymous No.3609706]

>>3608400
Was his intention to look like Camus here?

[Anonymous No.3609712]

>>3607091

[Anonymous No.3609765]

Holy shit, I'm atheist OP but the atheist debater is terrible. You were right. In this debate, the Muslim won. Not enough to change my perspective though, but interesting.

[Anonymous No.3610360]

>>3607475
>The problem was that Krauss went in expecting Islamic theology to be the same as Christian theology and was caught off guard.

That's not "being caught off guard". That's not doing your research.

[Anonymous No.3610402]

"Do you know ancient arabic?"
"I can read it perfectly fine but verbally I have"
"You can read it but you can't say it? So you don't know what you're talking about?"

close window, turn off computer, post this via the will of my thoughts.