1
00:00:00,160 --> 00:00:02,120
Speaker 1: Maybe you're not familiar with what grounding is. That just

2
00:00:02,120 --> 00:00:05,000
means giving an epistemic justification for why that's the case,

3
00:00:05,000 --> 00:00:05,559
good reason.

4
00:00:06,160 --> 00:00:06,799
Speaker 2: So what's yours?

5
00:00:07,360 --> 00:00:09,000
Speaker 1: Well, I believe the Christian world view, and I would

6
00:00:09,000 --> 00:00:11,560
defend that and now explain it. But it's it's coherent,

7
00:00:11,599 --> 00:00:15,320
it's consistent. Right, How Well, if you don't have that worldview,

8
00:00:15,359 --> 00:00:17,480
you are immediately caught it a bunch of contradictions like

9
00:00:17,480 --> 00:00:21,559
what like picking and choosing? Like what like picking and choosing? Well,

10
00:00:21,600 --> 00:00:23,640
I'll believe this thing and then I won't believe this thing.

11
00:00:24,120 --> 00:00:26,359
Speaker 2: That would make what things are contradictory? What are you

12
00:00:26,359 --> 00:00:26,879
talking about?

13
00:00:27,440 --> 00:00:30,199
Speaker 1: Well, to say that, we do it because it works

14
00:00:30,199 --> 00:00:34,439
as a contradiction. Why, because it's a fallacy works to

15
00:00:34,520 --> 00:00:34,799
do what?

16
00:00:35,280 --> 00:00:36,759
Speaker 2: Explain your idea?

17
00:00:38,159 --> 00:00:39,920
Speaker 1: I explained the fallacy right there.

18
00:00:39,960 --> 00:00:44,240
Speaker 2: That's a fallacy explaining it. I don't have to. It

19
00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:50,920
is you've contradicted yourself because that was a contradiction. It's paradoxical. Well,

20
00:00:51,000 --> 00:00:53,000
you said you said one thing wasn't one thing wasn't,

21
00:00:53,000 --> 00:00:55,880
so you're wrong. I'm not going to elaborate.

22
00:00:57,479 --> 00:00:59,679
Speaker 1: I mean I have been elaborating. So if you're characterizing

23
00:00:59,719 --> 00:01:02,640
my position is not elaborating. I mean it's very explicit.

24
00:01:08,239 --> 00:01:11,719
Neo Conservative is out of the UK. Bernard Lewis, who

25
00:01:11,799 --> 00:01:16,040
is the father of Leo, father of Samuel Huntington, who

26
00:01:16,079 --> 00:01:20,159
wrote uh books that influenced the Bush administration. So the

27
00:01:20,159 --> 00:01:23,200
Bush Cheney those are like sort of the arch neo

28
00:01:23,280 --> 00:01:26,120
cons but it's actually out of the UK from Bernard Lewis,

29
00:01:26,200 --> 00:01:29,040
and then they are also influenced by Leo Strauss who

30
00:01:29,079 --> 00:01:31,680
was influenced by Hilper. But they also have an influence.

31
00:01:34,680 --> 00:01:40,560
No joke, it was a Hungary joke. Jeans were made

32
00:01:40,599 --> 00:01:46,599
actually I think originally for for communist purposes. No, no, no, Ittually.

33
00:01:45,319 --> 00:01:48,480
Speaker 2: Jeans was like American Uh, it was like mining and.

34
00:01:48,599 --> 00:01:52,560
Speaker 1: Well they wanted to have a standard for like in

35
00:01:52,599 --> 00:01:55,239
a company town, like everybody had the same outfit. So

36
00:01:55,280 --> 00:01:57,280
I'm not saying that, I'm not saying they make profits.

37
00:01:57,319 --> 00:01:59,239
I'm just saying, like a company town, you could say.

38
00:01:59,079 --> 00:02:03,000
Speaker 2: It's it's leave. I. Strass invented blue jeans and it

39
00:02:03,239 --> 00:02:07,200
was in the United States, Denham work pants, but it

40
00:02:07,239 --> 00:02:08,479
was made by in San.

41
00:02:08,439 --> 00:02:11,360
Speaker 1: Francisco company town made what are you kidding me?

42
00:02:11,879 --> 00:02:13,639
Speaker 2: You mean in the US it was that company town, like.

43
00:02:13,680 --> 00:02:17,759
Speaker 1: A company town is not really a capitalist institution, like

44
00:02:17,759 --> 00:02:19,759
they make money, but like you have to buy everything

45
00:02:19,800 --> 00:02:20,639
from the company town.

46
00:02:21,319 --> 00:02:24,479
Speaker 2: Well, I disagree with that. I mean, if there's a

47
00:02:24,520 --> 00:02:28,080
barren wasteland and a company's like, we need to import

48
00:02:28,080 --> 00:02:29,840
a bunch of people and there's no industry here, then

49
00:02:29,840 --> 00:02:31,719
they have to create means by which people can choose

50
00:02:31,719 --> 00:02:32,280
to buy food.

51
00:02:32,400 --> 00:02:36,479
Speaker 1: But it's not classical libertarian free market. If everybody has

52
00:02:36,520 --> 00:02:38,879
to shop at the company town, it might be the but.

53
00:02:38,719 --> 00:02:41,879
Speaker 2: But but again, the point is if no town exists

54
00:02:42,000 --> 00:02:46,919
and they build it, they're sure it's I wouldn't call

55
00:02:46,960 --> 00:02:50,039
it communists. Well, it's called monopolistic.

56
00:02:50,599 --> 00:02:53,039
Speaker 1: Okay, But I mean, if you're a libertarian, monopolistic capitalism

57
00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:55,759
isn't classical libertarianism.

58
00:02:55,879 --> 00:02:59,000
Speaker 2: Also again, so like if if if if I personally

59
00:02:59,039 --> 00:03:01,439
have a private piece of land and I hire a

60
00:03:01,439 --> 00:03:03,960
bunch of people and they're like, hey, there's no restaurants anywhere,

61
00:03:03,960 --> 00:03:05,319
what do we eat? And I go, all right, I

62
00:03:05,319 --> 00:03:06,960
guess I'll have the crew coming open up a restaurant.

63
00:03:06,960 --> 00:03:08,960
But you got to pay for the food. Is that communism?

64
00:03:09,400 --> 00:03:12,919
Speaker 1: It's I mean again, monopoly capitalism isn't really.

65
00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:14,159
Speaker 2: Hold on, This is not this is this is not

66
00:03:14,319 --> 00:03:17,439
an issue of there's no competition, like it's an issue

67
00:03:17,479 --> 00:03:19,639
it is. I mean it's an issue there's no competition,

68
00:03:19,759 --> 00:03:22,400
not forcing people to do anything that so is the alternative.

69
00:03:22,439 --> 00:03:24,159
I just go, you know what, guys, I'm going to

70
00:03:24,240 --> 00:03:25,840
open a restaurant where only I get to eat. You're

71
00:03:25,879 --> 00:03:26,919
not actually not not allowed to eat it.

72
00:03:26,879 --> 00:03:28,000
Speaker 1: So I don't want to be a communist, right, But

73
00:03:28,080 --> 00:03:30,080
this is the same argument as to why people would

74
00:03:30,199 --> 00:03:34,199
own like an entire water supply, right, So if you

75
00:03:34,240 --> 00:03:36,319
privatize water, then no one has a right to the world.

76
00:03:36,319 --> 00:03:37,360
Speaker 2: But but I'm not talking about that.

77
00:03:37,400 --> 00:03:41,280
Speaker 1: I'm saying the company town could own the water. Indeed,

78
00:03:41,400 --> 00:03:43,280
what right do you have to take it? It's communist.

79
00:03:43,840 --> 00:03:50,199
It's not communist to have myalities. Wait what it's not.

80
00:03:50,520 --> 00:03:53,479
Speaker 2: I own a swath of land and I invite you

81
00:03:53,520 --> 00:03:55,800
to come work on it. I have to now relinquish

82
00:03:55,800 --> 00:03:57,560
my right to the water body and my property.

83
00:03:57,639 --> 00:03:59,439
Speaker 1: No, I'm saying, if you're going to create a society

84
00:03:59,479 --> 00:04:02,759
or civilism, and you have if you own the entiret

85
00:04:02,800 --> 00:04:03,280
year we're.

86
00:04:03,199 --> 00:04:05,319
Speaker 2: Talking about company towns. We're talking about company town.

87
00:04:05,120 --> 00:04:07,280
Speaker 1: That's the beginning of a civilization. Right, it's no different.

88
00:04:07,360 --> 00:04:09,479
Speaker 2: Right. So the point you bring up is that if

89
00:04:09,520 --> 00:04:13,680
I own let's say one hundred acres and I have

90
00:04:13,759 --> 00:04:18,920
a grain mill on it, and then I can't produce

91
00:04:18,959 --> 00:04:21,000
that much. So a handful of people are like, how

92
00:04:21,040 --> 00:04:24,240
do you good sir? We could increase the output of

93
00:04:24,279 --> 00:04:26,319
the grain if you give us, if you let us come,

94
00:04:26,360 --> 00:04:29,000
And I say, all right, you know what I'm gonna Actually,

95
00:04:29,079 --> 00:04:30,839
I'll pay you guys a share of the grain that

96
00:04:30,920 --> 00:04:34,439
you mill. Thank you for voluntarily coming and offering this service.

97
00:04:34,639 --> 00:04:36,959
They then say there's nowhere to eat for miles, and

98
00:04:37,000 --> 00:04:39,480
I go, well, Unfortunately, if I were to create something

99
00:04:39,519 --> 00:04:41,720
by which you could purchase food, that would be communism.

100
00:04:41,920 --> 00:04:44,000
Speaker 1: So no, it's not communism.

101
00:04:44,439 --> 00:04:47,600
Speaker 2: So then if I, as the landowner and the company owner,

102
00:04:47,639 --> 00:04:49,680
then say I will open a restaurant the property for

103
00:04:49,720 --> 00:04:52,160
you from which you can purchase goods, that's the beginning

104
00:04:52,199 --> 00:04:52,720
of communism.

105
00:04:52,800 --> 00:04:56,240
Speaker 1: So, but you're describing a situation of a small microcosm

106
00:04:56,240 --> 00:04:58,399
where there's no company like a company town right, where

107
00:04:58,399 --> 00:05:01,920
there's no competition. Huh, doesn't capitalism require competition.

108
00:05:02,560 --> 00:05:05,319
Speaker 2: Who's stopping people from opening a restaurant across the street.

109
00:05:05,680 --> 00:05:08,000
Speaker 1: Well, you would if you if you have a coon.

110
00:05:08,079 --> 00:05:09,720
Speaker 2: No no, no, no no no no. If I own property and.

111
00:05:09,720 --> 00:05:12,079
Speaker 1: You said a monopoly capitalism, that would you would be

112
00:05:12,319 --> 00:05:15,199
then stopping the competition in a monopoly capitalist situation.

113
00:05:15,240 --> 00:05:17,839
Speaker 2: No, no, no, we're talking about a company town right, privately

114
00:05:17,879 --> 00:05:20,600
own property. Right, So do they have to relinquish their

115
00:05:20,839 --> 00:05:21,360
water rights?

116
00:05:22,560 --> 00:05:24,759
Speaker 1: If the city, if it grows to a certain size

117
00:05:24,759 --> 00:05:26,720
where you begin to have competition.

118
00:05:26,360 --> 00:05:30,480
Speaker 2: That's literally communism. It's seizing the assets from the private landowners.

119
00:05:31,199 --> 00:05:31,399
Speaker 1: No.

120
00:05:31,439 --> 00:05:33,680
Speaker 2: I'm literally going to a guy who owned land and says,

121
00:05:33,720 --> 00:05:36,680
there's too many people here now, so your water is ours.

122
00:05:36,720 --> 00:05:42,000
Speaker 1: That's compet No. If it's if you grow to where

123
00:05:42,040 --> 00:05:44,920
you have a society that requires competition.

124
00:05:44,439 --> 00:05:48,519
Speaker 2: And the people can seize your assets. Agreed, we're communists.

125
00:05:48,519 --> 00:05:50,920
Speaker 1: If there's COMPETI but first of all, by the way,

126
00:05:51,040 --> 00:05:55,079
Marx was a libertarian, so it begets really I want

127
00:05:55,079 --> 00:05:55,519
to talk about it.

128
00:05:55,519 --> 00:05:56,920
Speaker 2: I don't care about Marx.

129
00:05:57,240 --> 00:05:59,959
Speaker 1: Well, you're accusing me of communism, then I'm not a

130
00:06:00,120 --> 00:06:00,480
using you.

131
00:06:00,560 --> 00:06:05,600
Speaker 2: I'm arguing if your argument is private land ownership is

132
00:06:05,720 --> 00:06:10,480
void upon access population, that's literally a function of communism.

133
00:06:10,720 --> 00:06:12,399
That's what the Venezuelands.

134
00:06:11,800 --> 00:06:15,600
Speaker 1: Did what you're describing is literally just communism itself. A

135
00:06:15,639 --> 00:06:18,439
company town is essentially the same as a communist side up.

136
00:06:18,879 --> 00:06:20,480
It is, it is not, it is identical.

137
00:06:20,560 --> 00:06:24,240
Speaker 2: It's completely so. So the people own the land in

138
00:06:24,279 --> 00:06:26,120
a company town. In a company town, the people are

139
00:06:26,160 --> 00:06:31,920
the people that the people have it. If we're talking

140
00:06:31,920 --> 00:06:35,480
about the structures of communism by which there is a

141
00:06:35,480 --> 00:06:38,240
private committee, and there's two ways we can look at it,

142
00:06:38,639 --> 00:06:41,600
your argument seems to fuse to gather both the authoritarian

143
00:06:41,639 --> 00:06:45,079
dictators ship components and the economic.

144
00:06:44,680 --> 00:06:46,560
Speaker 1: That's monopoly capitalism. That's for your argument.

145
00:06:46,600 --> 00:06:49,360
Speaker 2: If the argument is people can voluntarily choose to come

146
00:06:49,399 --> 00:06:52,079
and work for a company, but there is no competition

147
00:06:52,160 --> 00:06:55,040
because there's no market reason for it, it's not communism.

148
00:06:55,120 --> 00:06:57,879
It's just a monopoly. But there's no oppression. And it

149
00:06:57,879 --> 00:06:59,639
doesn't matter because you can always choose to leave.

150
00:07:00,519 --> 00:07:02,160
Speaker 1: You can't always oose to leave if you're out in

151
00:07:02,199 --> 00:07:04,319
the middle of nowhere, why did you go there? In

152
00:07:04,360 --> 00:07:04,759
the west.

153
00:07:05,040 --> 00:07:08,000
Speaker 2: And then again, Brot, I gotta tell you. If the

154
00:07:08,160 --> 00:07:12,040
argument is I have no choice in my circumstances, therefore

155
00:07:12,040 --> 00:07:14,079
I should get public rights, it's literally.

156
00:07:14,079 --> 00:07:14,600
Speaker 1: Not what I said.

157
00:07:14,639 --> 00:07:17,560
Speaker 2: This guy's a communist, So then leave, right, Why can't you?

158
00:07:17,639 --> 00:07:19,720
Speaker 1: Well, you can say that, but in a company town,

159
00:07:19,839 --> 00:07:22,879
especially like in situations when the eighteen hundreds company towns

160
00:07:22,879 --> 00:07:24,480
are being set up, you didn't have the ability to

161
00:07:24,519 --> 00:07:25,360
just leave right.

162
00:07:26,079 --> 00:07:27,519
Speaker 2: Well, they're holding you at gunpoint.

163
00:07:28,480 --> 00:07:30,240
Speaker 1: I mean, well, if you're under a contract, you might

164
00:07:30,279 --> 00:07:30,639
have to be this.

165
00:07:30,680 --> 00:07:33,360
Speaker 2: Why did you sign the contract? Well, again, is it

166
00:07:33,399 --> 00:07:36,000
communism to voluntarily enter into agreement with the company.

167
00:07:36,160 --> 00:07:38,720
Speaker 1: Yeah, but you can call it voluntary even their situation

168
00:07:38,759 --> 00:07:41,319
where something can be voluntary that you're actually locked into, right,

169
00:07:41,360 --> 00:07:42,120
I mean, I can.

170
00:07:42,040 --> 00:07:43,839
Speaker 2: You chose to enter into a contract.

171
00:07:43,920 --> 00:07:47,079
Speaker 1: Amazon owns an entire area and it's the only place

172
00:07:47,279 --> 00:07:50,360
to work, then to say well you can move and

173
00:07:50,439 --> 00:07:53,120
you can't. Yeah, but it's yeah, but it's still a

174
00:07:53,160 --> 00:07:54,959
form of wage slavery. Right. You don't think there's suit

175
00:07:55,000 --> 00:07:55,560
things as well?

176
00:07:55,600 --> 00:07:58,639
Speaker 2: No, I don't. I think that's comedy talk. Well, I

177
00:07:58,680 --> 00:08:01,519
think this is quite literally the arguments of Chavez and

178
00:08:01,560 --> 00:08:04,639
the arguments of Bernie Sanders, And my point that often

179
00:08:04,680 --> 00:08:08,079
bring up to these leftists is what's stopping you from

180
00:08:08,199 --> 00:08:10,720
just being a vagrant on federal land.

181
00:08:13,120 --> 00:08:14,279
Speaker 1: There's no differences you.

182
00:08:14,240 --> 00:08:18,360
Speaker 2: Want from my system without input, and that is the

183
00:08:18,360 --> 00:08:20,319
the component of the left that I disagree with.

184
00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:23,360
Speaker 1: This is your argument is a leftist argument. Actually, that

185
00:08:23,399 --> 00:08:25,959
people should have to work with classical liberalism is a

186
00:08:26,079 --> 00:08:30,319
leftist position. You argue classical liberalism, that's what I'm argus position.

187
00:08:30,519 --> 00:08:34,240
Speaker 2: What I'm arguing for merit based capitalism is leftist.

188
00:08:34,399 --> 00:08:38,000
Speaker 1: Yes, classical liberalism out of the Enlightenment, that is incorrect. No,

189
00:08:38,200 --> 00:08:40,240
out of the Enlightenment origin.

190
00:08:40,480 --> 00:08:43,159
Speaker 2: The origin of the left is the left aisle in

191
00:08:43,200 --> 00:08:47,519
the French Revolution, referring to those who wanted a socialist,

192
00:08:47,799 --> 00:08:52,960
anti monarchist and the right wanted a top down monarchist system. Okay,

193
00:08:53,519 --> 00:08:57,440
so you're arguing it was a French revolution, it was

194
00:08:57,480 --> 00:08:58,159
a left and the right.

195
00:08:58,200 --> 00:09:02,120
Speaker 1: The French Revolution wanted a uh, constitutional monarchy on the right,

196
00:09:02,600 --> 00:09:06,559
and they wanted private property on the right. Leftist wanted communism.

197
00:09:06,679 --> 00:09:08,840
Speaker 2: Indeed, so when we say left and right in an

198
00:09:08,840 --> 00:09:12,200
economic sense, at refers to left meaning communal right, meaning.

199
00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:16,799
Speaker 1: That's that's classical liberalism, which is against the traditional position

200
00:09:17,039 --> 00:09:19,080
of church and state. And this is a state.

201
00:09:19,639 --> 00:09:23,039
Speaker 3: This is the argument that that Karl makes about about liberalism. Now,

202
00:09:23,519 --> 00:09:28,039
what's the argent that a cod this is I'm only

203
00:09:28,080 --> 00:09:33,240
saying that they're they're similar, that that liberalism is actually

204
00:09:33,679 --> 00:09:38,080
a creation of the left, and that the ultimate.

205
00:09:37,960 --> 00:09:41,320
Speaker 2: Form I'm not I am not advocating for in this

206
00:09:41,360 --> 00:09:44,080
circumstance classical liberalism. I'm advocating for private rights.

207
00:09:44,360 --> 00:09:46,120
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, But the point that i'm the only point

208
00:09:46,120 --> 00:09:49,399
that I make. His perspective is similar to Carl's perspective.

209
00:09:49,720 --> 00:09:52,279
Speaker 2: Sure, but that's immaterial to the argument being made.

210
00:09:52,919 --> 00:09:55,039
Speaker 1: It's not because what you're you're saying that you're a

211
00:09:55,039 --> 00:09:57,720
socialist here in Marxist, but what I'm arguing would be

212
00:09:57,759 --> 00:10:00,000
the same as any medieval village philosophy, and they weren't

213
00:10:00,039 --> 00:10:02,080
Marxist or socialists back in the Middle Ages. Like if

214
00:10:02,080 --> 00:10:03,200
you end up French village.

215
00:10:02,960 --> 00:10:05,879
Speaker 2: In that, you're okay. Again, if the core of your

216
00:10:05,960 --> 00:10:11,159
argument is there's a private landowner, twenty years later, there's

217
00:10:11,200 --> 00:10:15,000
now three hundred people working in this land. We now

218
00:10:15,039 --> 00:10:18,200
transfer the private rights from the landowner to a communal function.

219
00:10:20,000 --> 00:10:22,679
Speaker 1: Again, it's complex where you have something like the total

220
00:10:22,720 --> 00:10:25,519
ownership of something like a water supply, right, yeah, so

221
00:10:25,639 --> 00:10:28,720
when you have people that need that, that's different than

222
00:10:28,879 --> 00:10:32,240
a situation where Nestley's trying to buy an entire countries

223
00:10:32,360 --> 00:10:33,440
like private water supply.

224
00:10:34,000 --> 00:10:36,519
Speaker 2: So again the issue was company towns. I have one

225
00:10:36,559 --> 00:10:39,120
hundred acres, I own the body of water on that land.

226
00:10:39,440 --> 00:10:41,320
I invite a bunch of people to work. They say

227
00:10:41,320 --> 00:10:42,639
i'll work here. I need a place to say. I say,

228
00:10:42,639 --> 00:10:44,480
I'll bag a house. They say where do I get food?

229
00:10:44,919 --> 00:10:46,759
I'll build a store, and they say we need water.

230
00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:48,600
I say, I'll set up a water pump for you.

231
00:10:48,960 --> 00:10:49,759
That's communism.

232
00:10:49,799 --> 00:10:52,360
Speaker 1: Well let's go to the rights then, because you're arguing

233
00:10:52,360 --> 00:10:55,279
that this you have this right as a company owner,

234
00:10:55,279 --> 00:10:57,440
and I would agree, but on what basis do you

235
00:10:57,480 --> 00:11:00,360
have those rights? Because classical liberalism lost this whole argument.

236
00:11:00,480 --> 00:11:02,200
Speaker 2: Can I don't know why you're bring up classical liberalism.

237
00:11:02,200 --> 00:11:03,559
Speaker 1: It's not it's not your position.

238
00:11:03,799 --> 00:11:06,120
Speaker 2: No, it isn't your it is you're not aware of that,

239
00:11:06,159 --> 00:11:08,039
but it is your positions. Now you're throwing a blanket

240
00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:10,759
to encompass one point and combine with a bunch of

241
00:11:10,799 --> 00:11:11,320
other point.

242
00:11:11,519 --> 00:11:13,879
Speaker 1: Because your arguments come out of that ethos, whether you

243
00:11:13,879 --> 00:11:15,440
know it or not, they're classical liberal.

244
00:11:15,399 --> 00:11:18,159
Speaker 2: And you can have varying ideologies mix and match. Let's

245
00:11:18,159 --> 00:11:21,879
make an argument what I actually the basis for the

246
00:11:22,000 --> 00:11:27,519
right to own private property well ethos. So I argue

247
00:11:27,519 --> 00:11:30,120
that the rights of man are derived from the will

248
00:11:30,200 --> 00:11:33,399
or the duties God bestows upon man. The requirements that

249
00:11:33,440 --> 00:11:36,799
we have from God, which is be fruitful and multiply

250
00:11:36,919 --> 00:11:39,759
requires a handful of things for which we recognize in

251
00:11:39,799 --> 00:11:42,279
the United States that we allow the people to do fully.

252
00:11:42,320 --> 00:11:45,159
Recognizing that other groups have different ideas of what rights are,

253
00:11:45,600 --> 00:11:47,320
so I would argue rights are we need to be

254
00:11:47,320 --> 00:11:49,559
able to communicate, we need to to protect ourselves, and

255
00:11:49,600 --> 00:11:51,159
we be able to we need to be secure in

256
00:11:51,159 --> 00:11:55,120
our possessions. These are principal rights that we struggle to

257
00:11:55,159 --> 00:11:59,080
survive without. As the basis of this is is look

258
00:11:59,120 --> 00:12:01,759
at commune in general in the Soviet Union, and when

259
00:12:01,759 --> 00:12:04,799
you don't have property rights, congratulations. Look what happens when

260
00:12:04,799 --> 00:12:08,360
you have mass monopolization and oligopoly you get something similar. So,

261
00:12:08,960 --> 00:12:13,039
in a simple sense, certainly it is my moral worldview

262
00:12:13,159 --> 00:12:15,679
and faith based structures that define what I think someone

263
00:12:15,919 --> 00:12:20,639
has an inherent claim to. Progressives think of an inherent

264
00:12:20,679 --> 00:12:22,639
claim to someone else's labor, which would just I would

265
00:12:22,639 --> 00:12:25,480
describe as slavery. So when it comes to the idea

266
00:12:25,480 --> 00:12:29,559
of private land, ownership. The argument is fully understanding population

267
00:12:29,679 --> 00:12:32,279
expansion can come to a point where some people will

268
00:12:32,279 --> 00:12:35,279
never own land. But the idea is I need to

269
00:12:35,360 --> 00:12:39,240
be secure in my possessions, to know and prepare for

270
00:12:39,559 --> 00:12:43,039
harsh winters, for instability, so that I can survive, so

271
00:12:43,039 --> 00:12:44,879
that I can be fruitful, and that I can multiply.

272
00:12:45,240 --> 00:12:48,559
Speaker 1: So you build a genesis, and God, what God? What

273
00:12:49,080 --> 00:12:51,600
principles of Genesis? Tell you that? What are you talking about?

274
00:12:51,639 --> 00:12:52,320
Speaker 2: I'm not a Christian?

275
00:12:53,639 --> 00:12:56,440
Speaker 1: Then how are you going to base this argument for

276
00:12:56,600 --> 00:12:59,120
rights in God? What do you mean? What? God?

277
00:12:59,480 --> 00:13:01,399
Speaker 2: My God? My moral worldview?

278
00:13:01,759 --> 00:13:04,000
Speaker 1: So it's not a universal principle, it's just subjective.

279
00:13:04,440 --> 00:13:06,000
Speaker 2: Well, I think to a lot of people they have

280
00:13:06,519 --> 00:13:09,120
a moral worldview and a philosophical understanding of some things

281
00:13:09,120 --> 00:13:13,200
and not others, And I base mine largely on First

282
00:13:13,639 --> 00:13:16,480
I would argue that perhaps there are greater moral philosophies

283
00:13:16,559 --> 00:13:19,080
than the Christian moral structures. We just don't know them yet.

284
00:13:19,320 --> 00:13:21,559
I would say, historically, based upon what we have seen

285
00:13:21,679 --> 00:13:23,759
throughout the world and what we think we know, the

286
00:13:23,919 --> 00:13:28,960
Christian moral worldview has been dramatically superior to other moral structures.

287
00:13:29,240 --> 00:13:32,080
So that being said, I am not a Christian, and

288
00:13:32,120 --> 00:13:34,720
I don't believe in the faith structures they have. However,

289
00:13:34,840 --> 00:13:38,080
I have recognized that the moral structures of a Christian

290
00:13:38,120 --> 00:13:42,879
society tend to make life more successful for individuals, which

291
00:13:42,960 --> 00:13:46,080
is ultimately beneficial to the standard function of life, which

292
00:13:46,120 --> 00:13:49,840
is organizing complex or organizing free energy in and complex systems.

293
00:13:50,159 --> 00:13:53,279
Speaker 1: So just utilitarianism. So because it works, well, that was

294
00:13:53,399 --> 00:13:58,159
utilitarian You're wrong, that's utilitarianism. No argue that works. Well.

295
00:13:58,240 --> 00:14:00,240
Speaker 2: Hey, if you don't have an argument for what I said,

296
00:14:00,279 --> 00:14:02,600
stop trying to blanket it with something else. As a

297
00:14:02,600 --> 00:14:03,000
straw man.

298
00:14:03,080 --> 00:14:07,360
Speaker 1: The argument was utilitarianism. I'm it's literally not I did.

299
00:14:07,519 --> 00:14:09,320
We can talk about it. Is it not utilitarian?

300
00:14:09,360 --> 00:14:11,559
Speaker 2: Well, we can talk about dantological ethos, we can talk

301
00:14:11,600 --> 00:14:16,360
about No. Indeed, my point is, instead of arguing what

302
00:14:16,440 --> 00:14:19,080
I said, you're going you're arguing thing. I'm like, well,

303
00:14:19,120 --> 00:14:21,120
I gave you a specific outline. I'm giving you the.

304
00:14:21,039 --> 00:14:23,559
Speaker 1: Problem with utilitarianism. I'm sorry that you're not aware with

305
00:14:23,799 --> 00:14:24,759
of the problems with that, but.

306
00:14:24,879 --> 00:14:27,000
Speaker 2: I'm sorry that you can't actually address what I told you.

307
00:14:27,320 --> 00:14:30,200
Speaker 1: I'm addressing it now, which is you're not utilitarian. Arguments

308
00:14:30,200 --> 00:14:31,879
are pragmatic and it's not a justify.

309
00:14:31,960 --> 00:14:34,879
Speaker 2: Right, I'm not a utilitarian, but you made a utilitarian

310
00:14:34,960 --> 00:14:38,559
argument a component of some perhaps, so I don't believe

311
00:14:38,559 --> 00:14:42,840
in utilitarianism because that would sacrifice individuals. Again, do you

312
00:14:42,879 --> 00:14:46,080
know what dantological moral ethosism? Okay? Great? So when you

313
00:14:46,120 --> 00:14:49,559
say something like and then I bring up we do

314
00:14:49,639 --> 00:14:52,519
not we do not take immoral actions against an individual

315
00:14:52,759 --> 00:14:58,240
for the betterment of the of it. I know you

316
00:14:58,279 --> 00:15:01,279
are making an argument the needs of the many outweigh

317
00:15:01,279 --> 00:15:03,159
the needs of the few, which I did not say.

318
00:15:04,080 --> 00:15:07,639
You can have different types of utilitarianism. Sure that instead

319
00:15:07,639 --> 00:15:08,840
of arguing the point that.

320
00:15:08,799 --> 00:15:11,320
Speaker 1: I made, point you argue a pragmatic point.

321
00:15:11,840 --> 00:15:14,360
Speaker 2: Argue the point I made. Stop trying to blanket into

322
00:15:14,399 --> 00:15:14,960
other hou.

323
00:15:15,039 --> 00:15:19,240
Speaker 1: Does pragmatism justify the rights? That's what you argued? Okay?

324
00:15:19,279 --> 00:15:22,480
Speaker 2: I made an argument about private land ownership as a

325
00:15:22,519 --> 00:15:23,720
benefit to human survival.

326
00:15:23,759 --> 00:15:24,480
Speaker 1: Right pragmatic?

327
00:15:24,919 --> 00:15:29,320
Speaker 2: Okay, So address what I said. How does appeal you

328
00:15:29,360 --> 00:15:30,840
make yours? Addressing what I said?

329
00:15:31,200 --> 00:15:32,240
Speaker 1: That's not a justification.

330
00:15:32,320 --> 00:15:33,120
Speaker 2: It's a bad argument.

331
00:15:33,240 --> 00:15:36,919
Speaker 1: Why because appealing to things that work or pragmatism isn't

332
00:15:36,919 --> 00:15:37,600
a justification.

333
00:15:38,000 --> 00:15:41,639
Speaker 2: Explain why I'm wrong about the requirement of private land

334
00:15:41,639 --> 00:15:42,559
ownership for survival.

335
00:15:42,600 --> 00:15:45,799
Speaker 1: You grounded the right in utilitarianism and pragmatism, and I'm

336
00:15:45,799 --> 00:15:48,159
saying that's not a good justification. It's a bad argument.

337
00:15:48,440 --> 00:15:52,480
So explain anything that works could be all over the place,

338
00:15:52,519 --> 00:15:53,440
that could be subjective.

339
00:15:53,679 --> 00:15:57,039
Speaker 2: Indeed, that was my point in which I said, there

340
00:15:57,120 --> 00:16:01,600
is structuralism that work better we have not discovered yet.

341
00:16:01,679 --> 00:16:04,840
Speaker 1: Then if it's so, you don't know. So if it's

342
00:16:04,879 --> 00:16:06,679
a future thing that you haven't figured out yet, then

343
00:16:06,720 --> 00:16:08,159
you don't know right now.

344
00:16:08,200 --> 00:16:11,480
Speaker 2: That justase I understand certain principles of gravity and the

345
00:16:11,519 --> 00:16:13,759
speed at which things fall, but we don't know for

346
00:16:13,879 --> 00:16:16,840
sure how the structures work. And it wouldn't we operate

347
00:16:16,919 --> 00:16:18,960
based on probabilities, but it.

348
00:16:18,960 --> 00:16:21,799
Speaker 1: Would then that would not work to justify the rights

349
00:16:21,840 --> 00:16:23,480
as grounded in an unknown.

350
00:16:23,320 --> 00:16:25,039
Speaker 2: Then go jump off a building and see how it works.

351
00:16:25,039 --> 00:16:25,440
For you.

352
00:16:25,440 --> 00:16:27,120
Speaker 1: You told me I have to I have to go.

353
00:16:27,159 --> 00:16:28,639
Speaker 2: Jump off a building and see how it works. Because

354
00:16:28,679 --> 00:16:30,120
you don't know gravity, it's a future thing you haven't

355
00:16:30,120 --> 00:16:33,000
figured out yet. We operate on probabilities based on what

356
00:16:33,039 --> 00:16:34,879
we think we know because we actually don't know.

357
00:16:34,960 --> 00:16:38,080
Speaker 1: But that doesn't ground a right. That's the point, indeed

358
00:16:38,159 --> 00:16:40,759
future probabilities. I asked you for the grounding for the

359
00:16:40,840 --> 00:16:42,039
right to private property.

360
00:16:42,360 --> 00:16:46,559
Speaker 2: So far human history has proven private land ownership is

361
00:16:46,600 --> 00:16:48,039
beneficial to human existence.

362
00:16:48,480 --> 00:16:51,480
Speaker 1: That's a circular argument benefit. I'm asking how you know

363
00:16:51,480 --> 00:16:52,960
that it benefits of what does mean to benefit? And

364
00:16:52,960 --> 00:16:53,720
you're saying, because it.

365
00:16:53,639 --> 00:16:54,799
Speaker 2: Was good, it makes more of it.

366
00:16:55,799 --> 00:16:58,840
Speaker 1: That's a circular argument. Why well, why maybe making more

367
00:16:58,879 --> 00:16:59,399
of it's bad.

368
00:16:59,840 --> 00:17:00,759
Speaker 2: It's certainly not.

369
00:17:01,240 --> 00:17:04,279
Speaker 1: Okay, but why not? That's the point, That's why it's circle.

370
00:17:04,440 --> 00:17:08,240
Speaker 2: Well, let's go back to the origin of what we

371
00:17:08,279 --> 00:17:10,400
think we know again, because everything we think, everything is

372
00:17:10,480 --> 00:17:13,200
rooted in what we think we know. Right, some people

373
00:17:13,279 --> 00:17:15,720
think the Earth is flat. They're probably wrong, But honestly,

374
00:17:15,839 --> 00:17:18,960
I've not done the experiment experiments myself to a great degree.

375
00:17:19,119 --> 00:17:21,559
I've just been in a plane. So if we go

376
00:17:21,720 --> 00:17:23,960
back to again the roots of science, we can take

377
00:17:23,960 --> 00:17:26,759
a look at a few things. Free energy tends to

378
00:17:28,079 --> 00:17:31,799
coalesce into complex systems, starting with the baser elements, or

379
00:17:31,839 --> 00:17:35,759
we can say quarks, I'm sorry, quarks into particles, into atoms,

380
00:17:36,039 --> 00:17:39,799
into elements into compounds. At some point, for some reason,

381
00:17:40,200 --> 00:17:44,480
you get gravity. Likely because if you're familiar with our

382
00:17:44,480 --> 00:17:48,519
current understanding of gravity. Mass creates attraction, et cetera. And

383
00:17:48,559 --> 00:17:52,200
this results in certain masses coming together. Eventually you'll get

384
00:17:52,200 --> 00:17:54,279
something like a gas giant. You'll get something that compresses

385
00:17:54,279 --> 00:17:56,000
then ignites fusion, and you get a sun. We get

386
00:17:56,000 --> 00:17:58,160
all this stuff, then you get an Earth. Earth is

387
00:17:58,279 --> 00:18:01,559
the result of certain things slamming together, creating a bunch

388
00:18:01,599 --> 00:18:04,160
of complex elements through process of fusion, et cetera. And

389
00:18:04,200 --> 00:18:06,119
then at some point on Earth, for some reason, again

390
00:18:06,160 --> 00:18:09,200
we don't really know for sure, these molecules and compounds

391
00:18:09,200 --> 00:18:14,039
start forming self replicating proteins. The Again, in modern science,

392
00:18:14,079 --> 00:18:16,559
the one thing we recognize is that there is greater

393
00:18:16,759 --> 00:18:19,839
entropy and limited entropy. Negative entropy can only exist in

394
00:18:19,880 --> 00:18:23,599
a slightly greater entropic system. But we do see free

395
00:18:23,680 --> 00:18:26,720
energy organizing in the complex systems throughout the Earth and

396
00:18:26,759 --> 00:18:29,759
in the universe. That's what we monitor. Eventually, these complex

397
00:18:29,799 --> 00:18:33,799
systems ultimately become mult They become cellular organisms, single cells,

398
00:18:33,799 --> 00:18:39,039
then multicellular organisms, by which they then create complex organism systems.

399
00:18:39,319 --> 00:18:41,759
They create ecosystems. Now, you've got a squirrel planting a nut,

400
00:18:41,759 --> 00:18:43,759
growing a tree. The tree then drops the food for

401
00:18:43,799 --> 00:18:45,960
the squirrel, And now I've got two distinct life forms

402
00:18:46,000 --> 00:18:49,160
that form a complex system within its own free energy.

403
00:18:49,440 --> 00:18:51,640
And then we get to the craziest part with humanity

404
00:18:51,640 --> 00:18:55,039
in the creation of abstract complex systems. That is, humans

405
00:18:55,079 --> 00:18:57,920
give names to things that don't exist anywhere in reality

406
00:18:58,079 --> 00:19:00,680
except and the energy transference between the mind and the

407
00:19:00,720 --> 00:19:04,079
vibrations between their mouths. So what we then see is

408
00:19:04,640 --> 00:19:08,440
the function of life is negative entropy within a larger

409
00:19:08,599 --> 00:19:12,079
entropic system. If we as life, which are driven to

410
00:19:12,200 --> 00:19:15,960
reproduce and are and we typically associate all of those

411
00:19:15,960 --> 00:19:19,039
things with being good and enjoyable, like having kids having

412
00:19:19,079 --> 00:19:21,799
Christmas morning, then we track based on what we have

413
00:19:21,839 --> 00:19:24,480
seen throughout the Earth, what is the most beneficial to that.

414
00:19:24,839 --> 00:19:27,480
There are few answers for this. Islam could be one

415
00:19:27,480 --> 00:19:30,200
of them. They've certainly been massively successful, have lots of kids.

416
00:19:30,440 --> 00:19:32,279
We can take a look at Africa and say, certainly

417
00:19:32,359 --> 00:19:35,680
that is beneficial. However, I would make the arguments that

418
00:19:35,799 --> 00:19:39,960
the European cultures that develop science, space travel cures for

419
00:19:40,039 --> 00:19:43,680
diseases and then effectively colonize the whole planet, as well

420
00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:47,119
as the Asian cultures, have proven greatly that these moral

421
00:19:47,160 --> 00:19:51,240
worldviews lend themselves greater to the ectropic system within the entropy,

422
00:19:51,720 --> 00:19:56,319
and then we would say, well, it's maybe a toss up.

423
00:19:56,680 --> 00:20:00,640
But I do think that the American Judaeo Christian or

424
00:20:00,680 --> 00:20:03,880
just Christian moral values, which include things like private property,

425
00:20:03,920 --> 00:20:07,319
have lended itself to the formation of complex systems that is,

426
00:20:07,720 --> 00:20:11,000
life expansion and all the things that we cherish in

427
00:20:11,039 --> 00:20:14,839
the world, and thus those are the things we aim for. Certainly,

428
00:20:14,920 --> 00:20:17,920
these things are very subjective, and some people believe other things.

429
00:20:18,160 --> 00:20:20,039
Some people might think it's better to watch the whole

430
00:20:20,039 --> 00:20:22,200
world burn because humans are a virus that's spread like

431
00:20:22,240 --> 00:20:24,920
a plague. I don't believe that, but I do recognize

432
00:20:24,960 --> 00:20:27,359
I can't convince other people, nor do I know everything.

433
00:20:27,759 --> 00:20:30,759
So in the end, I ultimately conclude if we want

434
00:20:30,759 --> 00:20:33,400
people to have families and have kids, private land ownership

435
00:20:33,440 --> 00:20:34,720
is probably the best thing we can do.

436
00:20:35,599 --> 00:20:38,359
Speaker 1: That's a good story, but it doesn't get to grounding

437
00:20:38,400 --> 00:20:41,759
or justification for why the right is actually something that

438
00:20:41,839 --> 00:20:44,440
is grounded in God. So storytelling is one thing.

439
00:20:44,559 --> 00:20:47,240
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, it's grounded in God because God commands us

440
00:20:47,279 --> 00:20:50,279
to be fruitful and multiply and the But.

441
00:20:50,240 --> 00:20:52,599
Speaker 1: You don't accept that revelation. So it's just I do

442
00:20:52,759 --> 00:20:54,160
what do you mean to we? You said you're not

443
00:20:54,160 --> 00:20:54,640
a Christian.

444
00:20:54,680 --> 00:20:56,720
Speaker 2: You indeed, just because you're not a Christian, you can't

445
00:20:56,720 --> 00:20:57,960
believe some things Christians believe.

446
00:20:58,799 --> 00:21:01,000
Speaker 1: Well, but I mean it would you could do that.

447
00:21:01,079 --> 00:21:03,160
But it's not a consistent position, is all I'm saying.

448
00:21:03,240 --> 00:21:05,720
Speaker 2: It's a consistent position to believe that humans should be

449
00:21:05,720 --> 00:21:08,359
fruitful and multiply. I didn't argue that I believe Jesus

450
00:21:08,359 --> 00:21:10,640
died on the cross, but to pick.

451
00:21:10,480 --> 00:21:13,240
Speaker 1: And choose elements of the worldview as a grounding for

452
00:21:13,559 --> 00:21:15,039
rights and private property.

453
00:21:14,680 --> 00:21:16,920
Speaker 2: As well, is something that everyone will do.

454
00:21:17,519 --> 00:21:20,720
Speaker 1: But that that's another fallacy, the fact that people do it.

455
00:21:21,119 --> 00:21:25,000
Speaker 2: I don't have to connect myself to one of someone else's.

456
00:21:24,759 --> 00:21:27,319
Speaker 1: Books use their fallacies. It's the fact that people do

457
00:21:27,440 --> 00:21:29,839
things doesn't have anything to do with whether that's correct

458
00:21:30,039 --> 00:21:30,920
or whether that's right.

459
00:21:31,079 --> 00:21:31,640
Speaker 2: I agree.

460
00:21:32,400 --> 00:21:33,720
Speaker 1: Then you're admitting it's a fallacy.

461
00:21:34,119 --> 00:21:37,799
Speaker 2: No, you're arguing that if I believe one thing from Christianity,

462
00:21:37,839 --> 00:21:39,000
I have to believe everything. No.

463
00:21:39,279 --> 00:21:42,279
Speaker 1: Again, it was an argument about grounding the idea of

464
00:21:42,319 --> 00:21:44,880
private property. So maybe you're not familiar with what grounding is.

465
00:21:44,920 --> 00:21:47,680
That just means giving an epistemic justification for why that's

466
00:21:47,720 --> 00:21:48,559
the case, good reason.

467
00:21:49,240 --> 00:21:49,880
Speaker 2: So what's yours?

468
00:21:50,440 --> 00:21:52,319
Speaker 1: Well, I believe the Christian worldview, and I would defend

469
00:21:52,400 --> 00:21:55,559
that and now explain it. But it's it's coherent, it's consistent. Right,

470
00:21:55,559 --> 00:21:58,720
How Well, if you don't have that worldview, you are

471
00:21:58,759 --> 00:22:01,759
immediately caught in a bunch of countrydiction like what like picking

472
00:22:01,759 --> 00:22:04,720
and choosing? Like what like picking and choosing? Well, I

473
00:22:04,799 --> 00:22:06,720
believe this thing, and then I won't believe this thing.

474
00:22:07,200 --> 00:22:09,440
Speaker 2: That would make what things are contradictory? What are you

475
00:22:09,440 --> 00:22:09,960
talking about?

476
00:22:10,519 --> 00:22:13,279
Speaker 1: Well, to say that, we do it because it works

477
00:22:13,319 --> 00:22:17,720
as a contradiction. Why, because it's a fallacy works to do?

478
00:22:17,799 --> 00:22:19,839
Speaker 2: What? Explain your idea?

479
00:22:21,240 --> 00:22:25,519
Speaker 1: I explained the fallacy right there. That's a fallacy explaining it.

480
00:22:25,559 --> 00:22:30,279
Speaker 2: I don't have to. It is you've contradicted yourself because

481
00:22:30,319 --> 00:22:34,599
that was a contradiction. It's paradoxical. Well, you said you

482
00:22:34,640 --> 00:22:36,559
said one thing wasn't one thing wasn't, so you're wrong.

483
00:22:37,880 --> 00:22:38,960
I'm not going to elaborate.

484
00:22:40,559 --> 00:22:42,839
Speaker 1: I mean I have been elaborating. So if you're characterizing

485
00:22:42,880 --> 00:22:45,720
my position is not elaborating, I've been very explicit.

486
00:22:46,279 --> 00:22:49,279
Speaker 2: So what makes what makes the Christian moral worldview on

487
00:22:49,319 --> 00:22:50,240
private landownership.

488
00:22:51,400 --> 00:22:53,160
Speaker 1: Well, we're made in God's image, so we have the

489
00:22:53,200 --> 00:22:56,000
Ten Commandments. It has a position where you can't steal.

490
00:22:56,400 --> 00:22:58,359
So that's a basis for private property right there.

491
00:22:58,599 --> 00:23:01,240
Speaker 2: But I can't just pick and you can't explain it.

492
00:23:01,880 --> 00:23:02,759
Speaker 1: What do you mean by explaining?

493
00:23:02,920 --> 00:23:05,160
Speaker 2: Is your answer just God said no?

494
00:23:05,440 --> 00:23:08,720
Speaker 1: The answer is that your world view is inconsistent and contradicts.

495
00:23:08,720 --> 00:23:10,480
That's a transcendental argument. That's the argument.

496
00:23:10,519 --> 00:23:11,880
Speaker 2: What is inconsistent about my worldview?

497
00:23:12,119 --> 00:23:14,799
Speaker 1: You gave no justification for why rights are a thing?

498
00:23:15,079 --> 00:23:18,039
You just said because literally did. That's not a justification

499
00:23:18,079 --> 00:23:19,079
as a fallacy.

500
00:23:19,279 --> 00:23:22,079
Speaker 2: That I explain function of existence.

501
00:23:22,200 --> 00:23:24,400
Speaker 1: That's not a good argument explaining function.

502
00:23:24,519 --> 00:23:25,559
Speaker 2: That's not an argument at all.

503
00:23:25,720 --> 00:23:28,440
Speaker 1: Explaining functions. That's not a good argument to justification.

504
00:23:28,559 --> 00:23:31,200
Speaker 2: That's a bad argument. So you're just saying things, Well,

505
00:23:31,319 --> 00:23:32,559
you're just saying things to me.

506
00:23:32,680 --> 00:23:34,599
Speaker 1: I'm explaining to you how it will work in a

507
00:23:34,599 --> 00:23:37,240
college class if you take it in as epistemology class,

508
00:23:37,279 --> 00:23:39,160
that you are getting the same critique.

509
00:23:38,839 --> 00:23:40,920
Speaker 2: Is your arguments God wills it?

510
00:23:41,480 --> 00:23:44,720
Speaker 1: No? Then what argument is that the worldview as a

511
00:23:44,720 --> 00:23:48,519
whole is coherent and gives a justification under grounding for

512
00:23:48,599 --> 00:23:50,079
the ethics for these.

513
00:23:49,880 --> 00:23:52,880
Speaker 2: Things, and why explain the coherence of it?

514
00:23:53,720 --> 00:23:56,680
Speaker 1: Well, if the world is made by God, if we

515
00:23:56,759 --> 00:23:59,599
have ethics being made in the image of God based

516
00:23:59,640 --> 00:24:01,200
on the tame commandments, these kinds of things, then it

517
00:24:01,200 --> 00:24:02,839
makes sense why things are wrong and right?

518
00:24:02,880 --> 00:24:05,920
Speaker 2: Are there other religions? Of course, do they think you

519
00:24:05,960 --> 00:24:06,440
are wrong?

520
00:24:07,119 --> 00:24:10,359
Speaker 1: That's a fallacy. It doesn't matter, So why would why

521
00:24:10,400 --> 00:24:13,079
would there people that don't believe too? Tolle two is four, Yeah, sure, sure.

522
00:24:13,119 --> 00:24:14,720
My point is it has have anything to do with anything.

523
00:24:14,839 --> 00:24:15,720
Does that have anything to do with it?

524
00:24:15,880 --> 00:24:18,039
Speaker 2: Let's try this before we actually go to the next segment.

525
00:24:19,119 --> 00:24:22,440
If your argument is I am right and other world

526
00:24:22,519 --> 00:24:23,960
views are just wrong and don't.

527
00:24:23,839 --> 00:24:26,599
Speaker 1: Matter, that's not what I argue. They're contradictory.

528
00:24:27,039 --> 00:24:29,640
Speaker 2: Okay, I argue yours is contradictory.

529
00:24:29,119 --> 00:24:30,920
Speaker 1: And your that's not an argument it is. I gave

530
00:24:30,960 --> 00:24:33,400
you the argument you gave to me. I showed your

531
00:24:33,440 --> 00:24:36,319
contradiction because you said it's the contradiction. You said that

532
00:24:36,400 --> 00:24:37,759
it's true because it works.

533
00:24:37,759 --> 00:24:38,880
Speaker 2: I didn't say it was true.

534
00:24:39,039 --> 00:24:40,480
Speaker 1: You said that that's why you believe it.

535
00:24:40,480 --> 00:24:43,079
Speaker 2: That was I said, based on what we think we

536
00:24:43,119 --> 00:24:45,480
know right now, and there may be better structures we

537
00:24:45,519 --> 00:24:48,680
discover in the future. This seems to be the best

538
00:24:48,680 --> 00:24:50,839
course of action for promoting human existence.

539
00:24:50,839 --> 00:24:52,599
Speaker 1: Well, it works, let's say it works.

540
00:24:52,680 --> 00:24:56,839
Speaker 2: Argument it I think that's an oversimplification of we act

541
00:24:56,920 --> 00:24:58,599
upon probabilities to do the best we can.

542
00:24:58,960 --> 00:25:01,559
Speaker 1: But again, none of those things work to ground why

543
00:25:01,640 --> 00:25:04,079
private property should be something everybody should accept.

544
00:25:04,799 --> 00:25:09,319
Speaker 2: I think my argument is it helps people survive better

545
00:25:09,359 --> 00:25:10,640
than any system we have.

546
00:25:10,799 --> 00:25:13,640
Speaker 1: So it works. That's a pragmatic argument, and that doesn't

547
00:25:13,680 --> 00:25:16,680
work to justify our ground The position certainly does.

548
00:25:16,960 --> 00:25:19,759
Speaker 2: No, not why should we use Why should we use

549
00:25:19,799 --> 00:25:21,359
a fire hose to put out fires?

550
00:25:21,440 --> 00:25:24,519
Speaker 1: You keep thinking that working means that it's a justification.

551
00:25:24,640 --> 00:25:26,960
That's not what grounding is even asking for. It's a

552
00:25:27,000 --> 00:25:27,640
different type of.

553
00:25:27,680 --> 00:25:30,079
Speaker 2: Question, I understand. But you are not actually making any

554
00:25:30,079 --> 00:25:31,960
point at all other than God wills it.

555
00:25:32,240 --> 00:25:33,680
Speaker 1: That was not what the argument. Argument was that the

556
00:25:33,720 --> 00:25:34,440
whole world view.

557
00:25:34,480 --> 00:25:36,519
Speaker 2: Or argument is I have a Christian worldview.

558
00:25:36,559 --> 00:25:39,480
Speaker 1: That is, it's a transcendental argument for the whole worldview.

559
00:25:39,079 --> 00:25:41,200
Speaker 2: And I have I have that same exact thing.

560
00:25:41,240 --> 00:25:44,599
Speaker 1: No, you didn't argue that I do. You argued utilitarianism

561
00:25:44,599 --> 00:25:45,240
and pragmatism.

562
00:25:45,319 --> 00:25:48,480
Speaker 2: I argued that the structure of life is organizing free

563
00:25:48,519 --> 00:25:49,680
energy into complex systems.

564
00:25:49,920 --> 00:25:51,440
Speaker 1: But that doesn't tell me what I ought to do.

565
00:25:51,559 --> 00:25:53,240
That just says what is it?

566
00:25:53,440 --> 00:25:54,759
Speaker 2: Indeed, tells you what you ought to do?

567
00:25:54,920 --> 00:25:56,400
Speaker 1: Why? How is that universal?

568
00:25:56,480 --> 00:25:57,839
Speaker 2: You are to be fruitful and multiply?

569
00:25:58,000 --> 00:25:58,720
Speaker 1: Is that universal?

570
00:25:59,160 --> 00:26:02,720
Speaker 2: Indeed? That life procreates and creates more life?

571
00:26:02,759 --> 00:26:05,400
Speaker 1: Well, that's a universal claim. But you said that it's

572
00:26:05,400 --> 00:26:06,440
subjective to you.

573
00:26:07,160 --> 00:26:10,079
Speaker 2: Well, I recognize that other people believe other things.

574
00:26:11,160 --> 00:26:13,039
Speaker 1: That's not what universally it just means. Is it binding

575
00:26:13,039 --> 00:26:13,880
everywhere at all times?

576
00:26:13,880 --> 00:26:15,839
Speaker 2: You said it was subjective to me, and I said

577
00:26:16,039 --> 00:26:18,680
you said that, I said, no, I recognize other people

578
00:26:18,720 --> 00:26:21,880
believe other things. That's what other people could perceive that

579
00:26:21,920 --> 00:26:22,680
as subjective.

580
00:26:23,920 --> 00:26:26,279
Speaker 1: Universal means it applies at all times, at all places,

581
00:26:26,279 --> 00:26:26,960
to all people.

582
00:26:27,640 --> 00:26:29,680
Speaker 2: They ought to do this, They should ought to do this.

583
00:26:29,960 --> 00:26:32,759
Speaker 1: Okay, what is the basis for the aught in your position?

584
00:26:33,319 --> 00:26:36,279
Speaker 2: The basis for why people should have children.

585
00:26:36,119 --> 00:26:39,359
Speaker 1: And have private property or whatever God wills it. But

586
00:26:39,519 --> 00:26:42,200
you don't believe in God any in any specific way,

587
00:26:42,240 --> 00:26:43,079
So how does that have anything?

588
00:26:43,119 --> 00:26:44,799
Speaker 2: I literally do believe in God, but you.

589
00:26:44,759 --> 00:26:46,839
Speaker 1: Said, it's not the Christian God, it's just parts of Genesis.

590
00:26:46,880 --> 00:26:49,400
Speaker 2: Correct. I don't believe in the God because.

591
00:26:49,319 --> 00:26:50,640
Speaker 1: What's the principle of this god?

592
00:26:51,039 --> 00:26:53,279
Speaker 2: Principle? God is largely a Christian God.

593
00:26:54,599 --> 00:26:56,279
Speaker 1: So you do, but don't I don't get it.

594
00:26:56,359 --> 00:26:59,279
Speaker 2: What do you have the ability to understand that there

595
00:26:59,319 --> 00:27:01,079
are different eighth structures?

596
00:27:01,519 --> 00:27:01,759
Speaker 1: Yeah?

597
00:27:01,920 --> 00:27:03,680
Speaker 2: You, by all means are allowed to say my religion

598
00:27:03,720 --> 00:27:04,359
is wrong, but.

599
00:27:04,319 --> 00:27:05,880
Speaker 1: It has to be coherent to argue that.

600
00:27:05,960 --> 00:27:09,279
Speaker 2: I don't have to be a religion. Certainly my religion

601
00:27:09,319 --> 00:27:09,880
is consistent.

602
00:27:10,480 --> 00:27:13,680
Speaker 1: Okay, what is the basis for when you know when

603
00:27:13,720 --> 00:27:16,279
to pick from what text and which ones to reject?

604
00:27:17,400 --> 00:27:18,559
Speaker 2: I'd ask the same question of you.

605
00:27:18,960 --> 00:27:19,799
Speaker 1: Well, that's a two quote.

606
00:27:19,960 --> 00:27:22,759
Speaker 2: That's a fallacy to ask you to define, So you

607
00:27:22,799 --> 00:27:23,720
can ask.

608
00:27:23,519 --> 00:27:25,119
Speaker 1: Me the question I just asked you as a fallacy

609
00:27:25,119 --> 00:27:25,960
in be yeah.

610
00:27:25,920 --> 00:27:27,920
Speaker 2: Can can? Can you do it?

611
00:27:28,039 --> 00:27:30,599
Speaker 1: Or no? Yeah? I don't pick and choose, so I

612
00:27:30,599 --> 00:27:33,599
don't have that problem. I accept the totality of the

613
00:27:33,680 --> 00:27:36,319
Christian paradigm. So for me, it's not a problem to

614
00:27:36,400 --> 00:27:38,319
which you can choose or dogs.

615
00:27:38,759 --> 00:27:41,880
Speaker 2: So are there things in the in the Bible that

616
00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:42,720
you do not adhere to?

617
00:27:43,640 --> 00:27:43,720
Speaker 1: No?

618
00:27:44,359 --> 00:27:49,279
Speaker 2: Are you explained to me, like there's modernization, correct of

619
00:27:49,319 --> 00:27:52,440
what of of of the of the Christian I don't know.

620
00:27:52,480 --> 00:27:54,519
I guess moral structure is what you're supposed to do,

621
00:27:54,519 --> 00:27:58,000
what you're not supposed to do? Like like like, talk

622
00:27:58,000 --> 00:27:59,039
to me about Leviticus?

623
00:28:00,079 --> 00:28:01,559
Speaker 1: What about it? It's a typology?

624
00:28:01,759 --> 00:28:03,720
Speaker 2: Do you follow it? Are the things to be followed?

625
00:28:04,799 --> 00:28:07,559
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's principles in the Leviticus. Sure, Jesus references those.

626
00:28:07,599 --> 00:28:09,759
Speaker 2: Yeah, do you Is it okay to not follow some

627
00:28:09,759 --> 00:28:10,920
of them? Is okay to follow some of them?

628
00:28:11,000 --> 00:28:13,839
Speaker 1: Well, Jesus, being the one that gave Leviticus as the law,

629
00:28:13,920 --> 00:28:16,640
would have the ability to decide how it's interpreted.

630
00:28:16,680 --> 00:28:19,519
Speaker 2: So yes, are there things in the Bible that you

631
00:28:19,559 --> 00:28:20,680
are supposed to do that you don't?

632
00:28:20,799 --> 00:28:23,880
Speaker 1: There are temporary ceremonial commands that are fulfilled. So you're

633
00:28:23,880 --> 00:28:25,559
talking about like sacrifice the animals.

634
00:28:25,599 --> 00:28:27,480
Speaker 2: Sure, sometimes you do, sometimes you don't.

635
00:28:28,240 --> 00:28:31,000
Speaker 1: If the principle is that Jesus gave the law and

636
00:28:31,039 --> 00:28:34,200
he says how it's exercised and fulfilled, that's not inconsistent.

637
00:28:35,359 --> 00:28:37,079
Speaker 2: What I don't understand is there Christians that don't eat

638
00:28:37,119 --> 00:28:37,839
meat on Fridays.

639
00:28:38,559 --> 00:28:40,960
Speaker 1: That's just a fasting position. That Catholics do.

640
00:28:41,559 --> 00:28:43,279
Speaker 2: Yeah, is that? Is that right or wrong?

641
00:28:43,839 --> 00:28:45,680
Speaker 1: But what does that have to do with Leviticus.

642
00:28:45,799 --> 00:28:50,240
Speaker 2: I'm now moving forward and asking you about a specific thing.

643
00:28:50,680 --> 00:28:54,319
I don't understand that there are Catholics they don't eat

644
00:28:54,319 --> 00:28:57,039
meat on Fridays? Is that? Is that?

645
00:28:57,119 --> 00:28:57,720
Speaker 1: Not? So?

646
00:28:57,720 --> 00:29:00,720
Speaker 2: So again, I think you don't view Catholic says coherent.

647
00:29:01,039 --> 00:29:01,279
Speaker 1: Right.

648
00:29:02,200 --> 00:29:05,640
Speaker 2: That is well, and the argument there you view your

649
00:29:05,640 --> 00:29:09,440
religious structure as the coherent structure, and other structures are incoherent. Okay,

650
00:29:09,599 --> 00:29:12,079
I disagree, and we are allowed to disagree. That we

651
00:29:12,119 --> 00:29:15,319
have two different moral religious worldviews, and that is the

652
00:29:15,319 --> 00:29:20,559
inherent disagreement. So in my moral worldview, I believe there

653
00:29:20,599 --> 00:29:23,960
is a basis in private ownership because if you are

654
00:29:24,000 --> 00:29:27,519
to fulfill God's will of having children, having families, you

655
00:29:27,599 --> 00:29:29,640
need a way to control your resources so that you

656
00:29:29,680 --> 00:29:32,640
can do that without being taken from you. I actually

657
00:29:32,720 --> 00:29:33,880
think we agree on that point.

658
00:29:33,920 --> 00:29:34,119
Speaker 1: I do.

659
00:29:34,559 --> 00:29:36,400
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I don't know why you were arguing when

660
00:29:36,440 --> 00:29:38,160
we had completely agreed on that, other than to say

661
00:29:38,160 --> 00:29:39,759
I'm not a Christian because it's.

662
00:29:39,599 --> 00:29:42,000
Speaker 1: Not just a question of having the right position, but

663
00:29:42,480 --> 00:29:44,039
what are the good reasons.

664
00:29:43,640 --> 00:29:47,240
Speaker 2: For that'sh No, it's not that's what epistols. Let's let's

665
00:29:47,279 --> 00:29:49,319
go talk to talk about Trump, City of the Union

666
00:29:49,400 --> 00:29:51,519
and CNN, and it was fund debating, though I appreciate