Who was the asshole in this case, the atheist or the Catholic?

[Harry Black]

Believe it or not, the Canadian Catholic called in again.

I would love to hear your opinion about this whole situation?

I think Dillahunty is a bit impatient. But I can see how the Catholic is annoying with his implication that he is one step ahead, and yet has an awfully hard time to make an actual point. Dillahunty is very clear that he just wants the evidence for Catholicism (in this case) presented, for him to evaluate it, yet it doesn't seem to be forthcoming. It suggests to me that in the modern age, in the West at least (where people at least potentially have access to a huge quantity of information in most cases), people are religious mostly because of emotional reasons, not because of rational arguments.

I agree.
Do you think either or both of the individuals acted in an unreasonably rude or disingenuous way?

[CarbShark]

This whole thing about "complexity" is absurd. Yes, the human brain is complex, but complexity is not the only factor in consciousness and self awareness.  It's more of a minimum requirement. The nervous system must be complex and that complexity must be accompanied by other properties (storing short term and long term memory; access to those memories; for example).

Mere complexity is more like a minimal threshold than the actual mechanism.

[John Albert]

I don't feel that Matt was at all rude in that last video.

[Harry Black]

I don't feel that Matt was at all rude in that last video.

I havent seen the last one. Im just interested in Quetz' opinion on the first one as the OP, if he feels comfortable sharing.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Believe it or not, the Canadian Catholic called in again.

I would love to hear your opinion about this whole situation?

I think Dillahunty is a bit impatient. But I can see how the Catholic is annoying with his implication that he is one step ahead, and yet has an awfully hard time to make an actual point. Dillahunty is very clear that he just wants the evidence for Catholicism (in this case) presented, for him to evaluate it, yet it doesn't seem to be forthcoming. It suggests to me that in the modern age, in the West at least (where people at least potentially have access to a huge quantity of information in most cases), people are religious mostly because of emotional reasons, not because of rational arguments.

I agree.
Do you think either or both of the individuals acted in an unreasonably rude or disingenuous way?

I don't think Dillahunty was rude in the second video. Just a bit impatient. Better to let the Catholic make his point, I think it would have demonstrated the faultiness of religious reasoning.

I think the Catholic had a very hard time to make a coherent argument.

[arthwollipot]

I'm sorry, I don't have the spell slots this week to continue with this discussion. I'll probably have some more things to say later on, but I won't be providing a direct response to John Albert right now. Suffice to say I think he has made some cogent points but I still disagree with him on some matters.

[John Albert]

I won't be providing a direct response to John Albert right now. Suffice to say I think he has made some cogent points but I still disagree with him on some matters.

You don't have to refer to me in the third person. It's okay to address me directly.

[arthwollipot]

I won't be providing a direct response to John Albert right now. Suffice to say I think he has made some cogent points but I still disagree with him on some matters.

You don't have to refer to me in the third person. It's okay to address me directly.

Yeah, sorry about that. I was intending for it to be a general statement for anyone who's wondering why I'm not replying to you. But point taken.

[John Albert]

(click to show/hide)

Believe it or not, the Canadian Catholic called in again.

I would love to hear your opinion about this whole situation?

I think Dillahunty is a bit impatient. But I can see how the Catholic is annoying with his implication that he is one step ahead, and yet has an awfully hard time to make an actual point. Dillahunty is very clear that he just wants the evidence for Catholicism (in this case) presented, for him to evaluate it, yet it doesn't seem to be forthcoming. It suggests to me that in the modern age, in the West at least (where people at least potentially have access to a huge quantity of information in most cases), people are religious mostly because of emotional reasons, not because of rational arguments.

I agree.
Do you think either or both of the individuals acted in an unreasonably rude or disingenuous way?

I don't think Dillahunty was rude in the second video. Just a bit impatient. Better to let the Catholic make his point, I think it would have demonstrated the faultiness of religious reasoning.

I think the Catholic had a very hard time to make a coherent argument.

The pretense about being an "inner-circle atheist" and saying he's "one step ahead" were the first condescending, assholish things the Canadian Catholic guy said. Claiming to be a friend of David Silverman didn't score him any points either.

But he really wore out his welcome when he claimed to know Matt's mind, despite repeatedly demonstrating an inability to follow a single, basic point of discussion. Pretending to knowledge of somebody else's thoughts and beliefs is a really obnoxious thing to do, and is also an offense that atheists often get accused of.