David

Liberal. Antidote to Chaos. Will debate anyone

[David @monkeyDad55]

@Mickemini @lejackel @paleochristcon The guy is me!

[David @monkeyDad55]

Andrew Wilson does not debate leftists. He cherry picks his opponents and when he inevitably loses, he resorts to name calling. He is a the ultimate LARPer.

[Andrew Wilson @paleochristcon]

@Lauren_Southern Ok finally a name. MINE. So whats the larp?

I am not a christian ehticist who debates my worldview with leftists? Or I am?

[David @monkeyDad55]

@abforn @paleochristcon @mehdirhasan Based

[David @monkeyDad55]

How do you expect to debate @mehdirhasan if you can’t even spell his name correctly? You can’t even take the time to proofread your own posts. I’m not expecting perfection, but I am expecting an effort. Especially from a self appointed bloodsports debater.

[Andrew Wilson @paleochristcon]

@BinaryBit01 @monkeyDad55 @adammocklerr @briantylercohen @mehdirhasan Already debated Brian and wrecked him.

Adam mockler I would happily debate and meditate hassan as well.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@nasticuss @pgavigan77 @mehdirhasan Oh my bad. The R is his middle initial it seems.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@Mickemini @lejackel @paleochristcon Andrew and I briefly debated today and he failed to convince me why his beliefs apply universally. Yeah he’s a foundationalist. But he couldn’t state why he thinks his beliefs should be applied to everyone, especially those that reject them.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@Ignoramus_001 It’s not a lot to ask for someone who claims to have more authority to clearly define why they think their belief system applies universally, not just within their own worldview.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@Ignoramus_001 You said a whole lot of nothing. Andrew clearly defined foundationalism. He did not explain what gives him justification to believe that his beliefs are obligations for everyone.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@lWEARJ0RTS The last thing I’ll say, every time I press him about what gives him justification for his beliefs being a universal obligation for everyone else, all he said was foundationalism. That’s not much of an argument. He has yet to adequately defend that.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@lWEARJ0RTS You can call me retarded, but I am more than willing to go on camera and debate him. I fully understand what his worldview is, what he has not proven is how it is an obligation for people outside of his belief system. He has yet to prove that.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@lWEARJ0RTS He and I briefly debated today, I remain unconvinced of his arguments. He gave me a definition of a foundationalism, but he did not prove that his beliefs universally apply to people that reject them. His response was a video about foundationalism and that’s it.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@Ignoramus_001 I’m not convinced by his arguments. I understand he believes in foundationalism but again, he provided me no proof that it universally applies to everyone. It fits his worldview but not for those who reject it. He didn’t prove that. Maybe we’ll go on cam soon, my offer is open.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@Ignoramus_001 So Andrew and I debated briefly today. He asked if I would go on Camera and I yes. And instead we talked about it in the comments. I asked some questions about his belief system and why he feels that it justifies applying to everyone. He posted a video and that was it.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 Done. I grant foundationalism and I’ll concede 1=1. What I don’t see is how that establishes universal moral obligation. The video explains why foundations exist, but I don’t see how it explains why moral prescriptions derived from a worldview are binding on those who reject it.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 Fair enough. I’ll watch it. If it answers my question, I’ll concede the point. If not, I’ll come back with a better understanding of where we disagree.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 Fair enough. I’ll watch it when I have time and respond after. My question remains whether foundationalism itself explains why your moral obligations are universally binding, or whether it only explains why they’re foundational within your worldview.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 I don’t dispute that worldviews have foundations. My question is why your particular foundation entails universally binding moral obligations.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 “It’s foundational to my worldview” answers why you hold the belief. It doesn’t explain why people outside that worldview are obligated by it.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 I understand that’s your position. My question is what justifies it. What makes those obligations binding on people who reject your worldview?

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 Then are they binding only within your worldview, or are they binding regardless of whether someone accepts your worldview?

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 That explains why they’re foundational to your worldview. My question is what makes them binding on people who don’t share your worldview.

[David @monkeyDad55]

@paleochristcon @kahblanco1776 Close, but not exactly. I’m asking what makes your moral prescriptions obligations rather than opinions someone can simply reject.