- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 106
- Reaction score
- 0
????So if I think he's retarded? Should I start insulting him? Does that really solve anything if we just start insulting things/people we disagree with? Does that sounds smart? Do you get my drift here?
????
lol omg lecter, was pickin on you for all your question marksThe dude said they are insulting his intelligence, only because they say, in his opinion, stupid things. And then says that's a reason to insult them back. Fight fire with fire kinda thing.
But if I think that's a stupid thing to say/think, to insult people you think are insulting you (but aren't actually purposefully doing that), then by his logic I should start insulting him. To which he would probably just start insulting me. And what would that resolve? Nothing. Would people actually listen to you, or just automatically go on the defense because they are being insulted? I think the latter. So is insulting people a smart/productive plan? Not IMO. Which makes it ironic because his whole thing is based on his perceived higher intelligence.
It was hilarious. Milo knows that he's not going to win and already conceded yet Rogan won't stop attacking. And most of the atheists I talk to online are quite level-headed and can handle intellectual discussions, until you talk about religion, then they turn like Rogan. Milo kept saying(paraphrasing) how disappointed he was that a man of Rogan's intelligence can be so venomous when it comes to religious discussions. Rogan kept on & on about folktales. When folktales themselves have moral lessons.I actually clicked on this. What stuck out to me was how absurdly angry Rogan got when Milo said that the ideals and ethics of Western Culture are largely influenced by religion. Rogan was dead against any idea that our modern sense of morals and ethics could come from religious sources.
Then I guess Rogan, while turning his lungs inside out with rage, forgot all about how he does mushrooms, DMT, etc. and takes directions of life from induced visions of pulsing lights, sage spirits, and dragons as they talk to and mentor him during these literal trips, from which he bases his strong opinions about life and molds his personal philosophy on, which he enthusiastically discusses at length in several of his other youtube videos and podcasts.
lol omg lecter, was pickin on you for all your question marks
wtf man xD
Ya this is an old interview. Rogan had his ass whooped by nuns too many times and was in no mood for Christianity talk. Milo was speaking out of his ass too. Yes Christianity was a big influence on Western cultures, but the real reason our quality of life is better is due to advances in science and medicine.
Still, Rogan was a bit over aggressive and it became a shitty debate.
I've tried saying I'm non-religious, or that I consider spirituality a personal matter, and a couple other ways of describing it, because of the stigma. I'm not part of a specific movement and I don't know if I believe the same things as other atheists until I meet them and we discuss those things. There is such a wide range of views among atheists that it sometimes confuses the discussion. Recently I've gone back to the term atheist (I tire of making the distinction), or sometimes secular liberal if the context of the discussion suggests it. I don't know what the best approach is. It's such an odd feature of our culture, the threat of being discriminated against for a lack of belief in the supernatural.OT Even though I'm an atheist by definition, I just say I'm non-religious now. Atheism's been hijacked by the sjws. I'm not part of a movement. I don't think the world needs to abolish religion. I just personally believe the concept of god is ridiculous.
I've tried saying I'm non-religious, or that I consider spirituality a personal matter, and a couple other ways of describing it, because of the stigma. I'm not part of a specific movement and I don't know if I believe the same things as other atheists until I meet them and we discuss those things. There is such a wide range of views among atheists that it sometimes confuses the discussion. Recently I've gone back to the term atheist (I tire of making the distinction), or sometimes secular liberal if the context of the discussion suggests it. I don't know what the best approach is. It's such an odd feature of our culture, the threat of being discriminated against for a lack of belief in the supernatural.