Hitchens: ethics vs. religion.

Q&A part IV of the Hitchens vs. Turek debate at VCU, VA. Full debate:
www.vimeo.com/1904911
and (commented)
• Video
At 4:45 Turek calls Hitler a humanist (!) what a shallow demagogue as well as a very pathetic apologist... even Hitchens (although just for a sec.) is speechless upon so much presumptuousness, but fortunately does not let Turek get away with it.
This was not a slip of tongue (Tureks dishonest "a human, a human" is simply defensive drivel of a rhetorical con artist) this was a deliberate smear known from fundamentalists around the world that backfired.
Besides, this guy uses the word "ontological" like Bush or Palin the word "nucular".
If I would have been in the audience I would have probably booed although this usually goes against my nature. I had to laugh watching it anyway though because in this moment I suddenly remembered that "Turak" means "dimwit" in Russian - nomen est omen, as the Romans would say.

[@justjohn1121]

“I am not gonna be called a Hitlerite because I’m humanist, let’s get that clear” lol

[@vjab1108]

NO ONE Needs ANY Religion to be a DECENT PERSON.

[@natanaellizama6559]

But you do need God to be a decent person - that is, for decency to exist so as a true and valid concept - and to make decency by itself the rational end of your actions.

[@RacistTortoise]

@BCLR 1703 For real, Hitchens was a beast. That guy is a legend

[@krissysspice4lifem.o.lskin801]

Exactly ... Therefore shouldn't we make all religions full blown Illegal and stop the abuse doled out via false religious ideas!

[@krissysspice4lifem.o.lskin801]

@BCLR 1703 ur a cult get off my planet please!

[@natanaellizama6559]

@@krissysspice4lifem.o.lskin801 The brilliance of honest and rational arguments!

[@mrgrimm415]

Hahaha. I love this. Look at Hitchens. Just chillin' the whole time LOL. He even kicks his feet up and answers questions before they're even spoken. He reads this guy like a book and is on fire. What an extremely intelligent and thought provoking man. A wonderful philosopher. Rest In Peace Christopher Hitchens.

[@lederereddy]

Mamamonkey Amen. We hope to God Hitchens is resting in peace. And I agree 100%. He's well above average in intelligence and extremely gifted in wit and rhetoric. Unfortunately, his wit, charm, intellect, etc, are actually irrelevant. He has fun using the huge reservoir of data points which reveal the errors permeating false religions. Think about it, though. There is only one truth. All the rest are, at best, partial truths, which are still total lies, whether deliberate or in ignorance. Atheism, tho, should he have ever decided to scrutinize it with even half the fervor he employed toward theistic belief systems, it would have failed every objective test! That's pertinent, because, had Chris tested his faith in atheism, he would have at least known he needed to find out which theistic religion was true. But he made his living sucking on the a never ending supply of sweet, thick, rich milk, from the massive tit of false theistic religions. And, as far as I know, Chris cultivated a hatred so powerful, against theistic religions, he swore he would leave this world an atheist, never conceding his faith in atheism, even at the peril of eternal damnation. As smart as he seemed on the outside, it ate him alive on the inside. God didn't want that for Chris. But Chris wasn't smart enough to separate his emotional spite towards man made theistic institutions and philosophies, to realize the fact that men can also create man made atheistic institutions and philosophies, which, according to his own logic, he should have hated with equal veracity! Because, in the end, it's God alone who could have led him to the absolute truth, honor, humility, and eternal redemption. Let God be true, and every man a liar. Why is it written like that? Because that's the way it is. We, by nature, do not want to be called liars, nor do we want to acknowledge God as true. Let God be true. It's your choice. True, He's true whether we let Him or not. But He has, in His infinite grace and mercy, given each of us the time and place to, in humility, face Him and acknowledge The Truth, for once and for all eternity. Find the time and place to do just that.

[@seaglider844]

@@lederereddy White noise....by the way nobody called him Chris....he promised his Mother he'd use Christopher. Anyone who knew anything about him knew that.

[@brianfergus839]

Mamamonkey piffle - you’d have been EATEN ALIVE by Hitch- don’t fool yourself

[@brianfergus839]

Tea of the GODS you had to edit that?? LOL

[@lederereddy]

"Look at Hitchens. Just chillin' the whole time LOL. He even kicks his feet up and answers questions before they're even spoken. He reads this guy like a book and is on fire." He's not singing with pride now, though, is he? He's probably still kicking his feet around... He had a head for knowledge, no question! But he did not have a head for wisdom. Wisdom is from The Lord. Who cares how much you can remember, when what you're remembering isn't true? And no amount of applause from bonded, soulful, like-minded atheistic camaraderie tilts the scale from failed to fair.. FYI... God is not mocked. Every word from His mouth has or will come to pass. And He has spoken! It's far wiser to assume His word is true, until you can prove otherwise, than to assume it's false, while you think it's someone else's responsibility to prove to you it's true. Especially once you've talked yourself into the abysmal state of perpetual disbelief.

[@josephnash7537]

The neurochemistry is what actually causes thought patterns, anger,calm, hate,joy, peace, delusions, good and evil. This is why certain drugs can make you crazy and do things you wouldn't normally do. It's not demons it's chemistry.

[@bleachit42]

Indeed, he even tries to get Hitch with a gotcha question about which molecule contains morality, as if he is a cutting-edge chemist capable of even speculating on such a pedantic, specialized question. When we do find out which molecules contain morality, wanna know what the religious will say? “How great God is to have made these molecules”. What a joke.

[@colreef]

"Where does evil come from"? Christopher answers "Religon" priceless!

[@gitbig333]

Me: "GET FUCKED NERD!!! YOU JUST GOT DUNKKKKKED"

[@3joewj]

Evil is a religious concept but morality is universal?

[@3joewj]

@3ddi3 3ddi3 that is a testament to existence of God.

[@kecowa2]

Oof damn that hits hard!!!

[@lutkedog1]

​@@3joewj 👍

[@Lewa500]

"Where does eeeevil come from-" "RELIGION!" Brilliant.

[@lederereddy]

Lewa500 Where does evil come from? Religion! "Brilliant!" Except for the fact that that's nothing more than a smart ass quip. He's notorious for it. Unfortunately, there's consequences for our thoughts, words, actions and attitudes. He's facing his now, no doubt. He spent his life, as it were, shaking his fists and wagging his head and tongue at God. A God he swore doesn't exist. Billions of people were crazy, stupid, archaic! And in a sense, he was right. But to doubt God's existence entirely is nothing short of insane absurdity. It's as if science had actual proof that nature is completely capable of resourcing, manufacturing, and successfully orchestrating its own creation, without once resorting to the supernatural! But the reality, though the atheist will boldly deny it, is just the opposite! In order to believe the big bang, every single law of physics and logic must be violated absolutely. Something from nothing. Order from chaos. You name it, it was broken. Not bent or twisted a little. Snapped in two, as if it were nothing. The vet same laws that atheist's swear their whole belief system is built on, is discarded without even a second thought! They simply cannot abide by God as their Creator, therefore anything but God is perfectly reasonable, no matter how many laws of nature, physics, science, etc, must be broken. No smart atheist is going to readily admit to the fact that he must believe in more miracles, that are even more inexplicable than those of a Christian, when it comes to questions of origins! The dumb ones don't even know they have any beliefs about anything. Even religious questions. The smart ones just stuff the subject, hoping it won't come up, or dance around the issue, or create confusion... Anything but concede tho the fact that there truly are just as many inexplicable problems with their atheist beliefs as there are for the theist! No one in their right mind, looks around at this creation, studies the detailed intricacies of nature, realizes the magnitude of the profundity of implications bound up in the reality that is life itself, and says "There is no Creator!" Not in this planet! That's just a ridiculous notion! Unless you have ulterior motives! Motive, opportunity, and the nagging thought that no one is looking! No one but the One you're hell bent on denying! The God that gave you eyes, sees. But hey... If an entire universe full of evidence, which, btw, 100% of it leads directly back to it's Creator, isn't enough proof for you? What would be? Are you going to threaten Him with insults, like, "if you part the lake by my house, so I can walk across it on dry land, then I will believe in you!" ... Or something else like that? Guaranteed, that's not going to happen. God is obviously God. He's given all of us plenty of great reasons to understand the fact that He's very real, and deadly serious. He does the miraculous at His discretion. Humility is the road to greater understanding and a more powerful faith. Pride has gotten you where? Any power you possess now, will be stripped away someday. True peace, true happiness, true power is eternal. And God is the only one who can dispense any of it. This life is a billion times more than we can imagine it could ever be. But not without its Creator. Give God as much a chance as you do atheism, atheists, etc. What do you have to lose?

[@davidfillary]

lederereddy if you claim it points back to a creator, why not creators? People looked up at the sun and assumed it was a God roaming the skies because it was amazing - since it could not be disproved at the time, would it be right to say it is true back then?

[@bnoguerasc]

Boom!

[@Irishmule169]

lederereddy Blah,blah,blah....your going to hell”... and blah,blah,blah.... your religious indoctrination has you brainwashed...

[@lederereddy]

Lewa500 Where does evil come from? Religion." "Brilliant!" Inaccurate statements aren't brilliant. Foolish, yes. Brilliant, no. Some evil comes from religion. Not all evil. In fact, ding bat, those who are truly having hardships, have often relied on churches for things they couldn't get anywhere else. And you do not need to be religious to be evil. Besides, God alone decides what's good and what's evil. His definitions are often in stark contrast to those of ours! I believe that's the lesson we can learn from biblical passages, like the one where a guy is stoned to death for collecting fire wood on the Sabbath day. It's not the work, the wood, the day that matters. It's the deliberate disobedience to God's commandment. One that was specifically reiterated, the night before, literally, by God and Moses, themselves! The point is, people are evil, by nature! We can't help it. Holiness is so far beyond our reach, we could reach up and get a hold of a moon in Orion's belt long before we'd reach anything near holiness. I get that people don't get that. Buddhist monks dedicate their lives to restraint from material things. In vein, I'm afraid. The whole enlightenment thing, looks amazing to people. But it's blasphemy to God. The worst kind of blasphemy. Men seeking to ascend to godhood. Literally. Don't get me wrong. Even God calls us gods. We are made in His image. But we are not God. And no amount of callused knee caps, hungry tummies, chemically induced astro-projecting's, yoga human pretzeling, levitation, etc, changes who or what we are. Our salvation comes by grace, through faith in the only begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ. Amen. I truly hope you find Him!

[@MFPWM2010]

Morality is a function of our brain trying to reason fairness and wellbeing. Morality changes over time, even within religions and between cultures. Things that were considered “moral” in Christianity centuries ago are no longer considered so. Culture and philosophy impact morality in a greater manner, whereas religious texts can always be interpreted differently in order to fit various viewpoints.

[@twholland1]

I love how Hitchens is just lounging in his chair as he casually parries Turek's "points", and Turek just gets angrier and angrier. Classic.

[@plusmin09]

Why is it not brought up that morality exists in order to have a functional society? It can be observed in many animals outside of humans; wolves, deer, elephants etc. There is benefit in working together and a moral code is required to do so effectively.

[@lederereddy]

Plusmin cares Morality cannot be reduced to human convention, without becoming subjective! What's so hard about this that anyone, including atheists, can't understand it? The only way morality could have become the universal, objective reality that it is, is because its source transcends the universe. Regardless of the implications, that's the bottom line brute force fact of the matter. Get over it. "Animals are moral beings!" That, sorry to say, is retarded. What happens to them when one of them breaks the law? Kangaroo court? The carnivorous Catholic's confessional? Cheata's and crookadile's rehab? Atheism does nothing to improve a person's critical thinking skills!

[@Linge88]

@@lederereddy If anyone here is saying retarded things, then my goodness it is you. All social species have moral codes, and, as the previous commenter has pointed out, when you break that code you are driven out of the pack. Social species have evolved that way for survival, and so in order to live longer and better we act in ways that benefit the group. We do that for OUR OWN individual survival as well! Because we need other individuals to care about us. It is very difficult to survive otherwise. And the more advanced the species is, the more advanced their moral codes are. So while wolves certainly have moral codes within their flocks, those codes become more advanced for elephants, and even more advanced for chimpanzees. There are plenty of studies you can look up for demonstrations of morality within other species, so the only problem here is your astounding ignorance.

[@tamarlk]

@@lederereddy That''s a ridiculous mischaracterization of a complex argument. If you are intellectually honest and interested in morality and its' relation to human (and animal) evolution, I suggest you read Affective Neuroscience by Jaak Panksepp. Numerous animal experiments have demonstrated that even rats are - to some degree - aware of the morality of their actions. Morality is not unique to humans.

[@lederereddy]

@@tamarlk You guys love to avoid the issue, huh? Animals are not subject to the same moral constraints as people are! They don't even know there's something called the ten commandments. Who cares what they do or don't do amongst themselves? It's irrelevant! The point is, there is this invisible, immaterial, authoritative force that comes from God, Who is at the infinite apex of all authority. He made all the laws matter and energy obey without question. He also made the laws originally intended to govern and prosper all of mankind. Commandments, like be fruitful and multiply, take dominion and spread out over the earth... And laws... Make that a law (singular), originally, do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Goodness isn't the problem. Our sin, our fallen and rebellious nature, that's the problem. And by God, alone, has the solution become attainable. But not to those who, because of pride, lust, envy, anger, greed, etc, have turned away from God. Wisdom does not abide with rebels. Rebellion, as slick and seductive as it seems, it's a dead end. Humility, open-mindedness and honesty... Those are the big guns. They're what tear down walls and build fortresses, open doors and gates... But man will never rise to his potential by focusing on himself and his fellow man's accomplishment... Meanwhile, shutting himself off from his eternal Creator. All you need to do is ask yourself a simple question. Are there any moral laws that are true, regardless of human consensus. Is it wrong to sodomize an infant? Is it good to help the elderly or feed the poor? Are they right or wrong, only because they sound right or wrong to you, or are they truly right or truly wrong. If you're honest, this isn't even a question. If you're hashing it over in your mind, then, I fear you may have ulterior motives. Because there's a very good reason why God just fits the description, so often. The most obvious being, He's the reason.

[@lederereddy]

@@Linge88 Alrighty then, Ingelinn... you keep telling yourself there's nothing to the whole God being the ultimate author of morality! You're clearly not missing anything by equating human moral constraints with those of animals!... What about the inanimate, Ingelinn? Things like rocks? Do they have the same constraints as us? If not, why not...how not!? You do know this much, don't you... Learning a whole lot of things that are not true doesn't equate to intellectual superiority. And when you get the God question wrong! Well, my goodness, that just tosses you straight to the bottom of that barrel.

[@fooshnickers1727]

I can see how bored Hitchens is of Turek's idiotic questions.

[@Kameltin]

As much as i like Hitchens, the question where morality comes from / whether it even exists, esp in a materialistic philosophy, is not a stupid one.

[@panagiotistsampanis1276]

@@Kameltin the way Turek tried to bait him was stupid, though

[@cassandrajoiner9933]

@@Kameltin yes morality exists not because it's moral but it's what we needed to thrive. It's a product of our mental evolution to be a stronger unit. Probably why we started to talk too. Trial and error mostly.

[@roqsteady5290]

@@Kameltin It comes from the simple fact that we survive better when we act together, hence are brains are adapted for that by natural selection.

[@krjo4215]

"Are you calling Hitler a humanist?" haha, brilliant

[@infinity1323]

The history of morality can be traced back to 3 basic 'ingredients' 1. Life experiences 2. Reasoned thought 3. Logical discussion Morality is the result of human realization, over many centuries and in hindsight, that performing certain actions toward a fellow human is not beneficial to either the individual, or, the society to which this individual is a member. Morality is not the 'gathering of good intentions,' it is the filtration of the bad ones based on logical thought and reasoned discussion. A very simplified example illustrating the 3 steps above: I, personally, do not want to suffer. From that, I can reasonably assume that other people do not want to suffer. I will not cause suffering onto other people because I do not want them to cause suffering onto me. To have morality dictated to the masses is immoral.

[@mathewhogan6946]

So easy, even a Christian could understand!

[@Pyrocanis]

Matt H And yet so many of them miss the last two and I'm speaking on behalf of the first one: life experience.

[@OmniphonProductions]

BRILLIANTLY STATED!!! By the way, you have just paraphrased Confucius, a political and sociological philosopher who lived around 400BC. Interestingly, when asked about death and the spirits, he answered his student, (paraphrasing) "You do not yet know all there is to know about Life and Man. Why would you even attempt to contemplate what lies beyond?"

[@infinity1323]

OmniphonProductions Thank you. I have read much of Confucius but have never come across that quote. Brilliant man was Confucius. Thanks again.

[@OmniphonProductions]

fez Technically it was two separate conversations. In one he was asked about the spirits, and in another he was asked about death. For purposes of expediency I amalgamated them, but his wisdom remains solid. At any rate, it's nice to have made a new friend in the KZbin-verse.

[@lordlacolith]

"Where does evil come from?" "Religion" (without a pause) Nice.

[@500dollarjapanesetoaster8]

What was Turek going to say? The Devil? What a stupid man. So you're left with choosing between a duality (Sky daddy vs Pitchfork [PM]) and if you aren't a possession of SD, you are to PM. No agency for the individual, only the choice of slavemaster. I'm sure Turek would claim SD's omnipotence and omnipresence, but still stymied by PM tempting people away from SD's camp (so not omni-anything).

[@BaseCu327]

The thought that some people are bound to morality by nothing other than the fear that they will go to a big fire forever is terrifying to me. The people that say those sorts of things are, in my book, grade A examples of sociopaths.

[@Appocratesthegreat]

So true or even to think that people need a god figure to dictate their morals for them. It is truly terrifying.

[@henryginn7490]

I think it is important to recognise them as people still and not write them off as sociopaths. Personally I would say most religious people who believe those things are victims of childhood indoctrination who never learnt/taught to think critically. These beliefs would have been instilled into people in the most vulnerable times of their lives and given the fear of going to hell for not believing, it's reasonable to understand why they wouldn't challenge those ideas. I'm an ex catholic myself btw

[@JM-ot8ux]

@@henryginn7490 We are creating a generationn of semi-literate Delta Plus individuals, through bad nutrition in their early lives (i.e., the "low fat is good for kids, no fat is better for kids, sugar isn't bad," which is 100 percent wrong) and resulting lack of neurological development, leading to drugs for "ADHD," various diagnoses of "learning diabilities," etc. These unfortunates grow up knowing they don't know things, and that they can't read very well, and that they can't keep up with world events, and they can't even sometimes get a job because their reading, math, and grown-up behavioral skills are so deficient. We are now putting pilots, nurses, lawyers, engineers, doctors, and other professionals into place who are less literate and less capable than a generation before. I think we see the results playing out every day. They're now going around in a desperate search for a new set of parents, hopefully a powerful mean daddy . . . or Big Brother. And a simmering rage, some of it justified. They want to Bash the people who did them wrong, and take their stuff because they think they deserve it for the rotten hand they were dealt.

[@princeedward21]

If you were a Catholic growing up, I see why you're not keen on religion. Many religions today we're started by people that fled the Catholic Church. Nearly all of the turmoil in Europe from the 200s until now started as a conflict with the Catholic Church. Somehow Catholics think they are Christians but they don't follow the teachings of Jesus as written in the many different translations of the Bible.

[@Stratboy999]

Morality / immorality is a learned behaviour. A lot of animals exhibit behaviour that could be interpreted as moral or immoral. No God required....

[@natanaellizama6559]

Why then act morally when it doesn't benefit the individual? Why subjugate yourself to that learned behaviour when it suits you? After all, unconverted atheists do it all the time. They learned religion, they unlearned it when it suited them and act irreligiously all the time. What's wrong then with having learned morality unlearning it when it suits us, and acting immorally when it suits us?

[@b1bbscraz3y]

Natanael Lizama - you don't understand the point. obviously. it was learned by the species, we as a species evolved and morality evolved as well. why act morally when it doesn't benefit the individual? for the betterment of society. human beings are social animals. some people make sacrifices to help the rest of society, that's what makes people heroic and praised as someone who would sacrifice for others

[@lewis72]

@@natanaellizama6559 "Why then act morally when it doesn't benefit the individual?" - It does benefit the individual.

[@natanaellizama6559]

@@lewis72 All the time? What an awfully romantic, idealistic and naive mindset. You've never encountered a scenario where acting in a way deemed immorally by a society were still beneficial to a given individual, maybe yourself?

[@lewis72]

@@natanaellizama6559 What an awfully ignorant comment. If you were genuinely interested in the subject of morality, you'd have a better understanding of it. Just because acting morally benefits someone all the time, doesn't mean that they do act morally all the time. You seem to have got confused.

[@Lewa500]

Hitchens answered the question, people. He said it was innate in a bunch of different ways, but it seems that if you don't hear it in plain English and in one sentence, your brain can't compute it. Fucking listen, for God's sake.

[@blamtasticful]

No it's that if religious people don't hear the answer they want they won't accept it. They define objective morality as "only that which comes from God." It's circular reasoning cleverly hidden by semantics.

[@redskinStu]

I don't know how Hitch can remain so calm and collected when talking with apologists, I'm just sitting at my computer drinking coffee and everytime the apologist hysterically pipes up, I rage

[@bowser515]

Turek always resorts to angrily shouting at Hitchens, he is totally out of his depth going against him. I suppose you should give him a little credit for actually trying. How can anybody listen to these two and favor the religious side? it is beyond me. As to Tureks little dig "And I suppose no evil comes from atheism" Well of course it doesn't, atheism is simply a lack of belief in a divine creator due to a lack of evidence, that is not evil. Evil does of course exist in the world, that does not prove the existence of a perfect creator, if anything, it kind of suggests the opposite imo.

[@kierenmoore3236]

bowser515 - The only 'evil' IS ignorance.

[@kierenmoore3236]

Bill Randall - I guess you’re smarter than Socrates, then ... 😏😉

[@plox8279]

Eh not really hitchens just failed to answer his argument really hard... I don't get how that many people don't even notice that the argument was every human has morality which was given to them by God (at the beginning). then hitchens talks about how Greeks didn't need the Bible? But the argument wasn't about Jesus or the Bible in the first place...

[@plox8279]

@Eddie the Kimo PunkMetal Senpai Dark Souls is the greatest video game series ever created, Miyazaki created an interconnected world that while being devoid of NPCs still feels alive. Not to mention the game play that not only hand in hand with hollowing and losing hope, but is also immensely satisfying.

[@CntrBrdr]

Good question! Every time I listen to CH, I yearn to eventually acquire his vocabulary and ability to work wonders with speech. It's at the heart of his debate abilities.

[@misshazel2106]

You saying that Hitler was a humanist? I’ve lived to hear it said. 🤣🤣🤦🏽‍♀️

[@maskedmarvyl4774]

Turek was being sarcastic when Hitchens refused to give an example of the extremely broad term "humanist". It was an extremely cheap and shabby thing Hitchens did, and it was beneath him. His performance was dismissive and dishonest in this debate.

[@misshazel2106]

Jon Davidson but it was funny 😄

[@TheWonderStraw]

@@maskedmarvyl4774 hmmm Hitchens said "morality comes from humanism and it is stolen by religion for its own purposes" Turek said "Humanism according to who? Hitler? Mussolini" Turek in the moments preceding was trying to get Hitchens to say that evil comes from Humanity, but Hitchens didn't bite. That doesn't strike me as sarcasm, but rather that Turek is trying to draw a parallel by calling the Axis Regimes of WW2 non-religious or "secular" which is ultimately untrue. Hitchens' response was just to point out how ridiculous it is to draw the comparison between Hitler and a secular authority.

[@maxorbit357]

4:26 BAMM, let the bodies hit the floor!!!

[@tracewallace23]

The answer is very simple. We are a social species. We have always lived in groups. Successful groups cooperate. Through cooperation, "morality" is born. Before we as a species could even imagine a god, we created morality through cooperation and the overall good of the group.

[@streameant]

morality arrives as a survival virtue and out of complex life.

[@pushyred]

When he says "you can't justify morality without him being behind yourself", that's when he loses all credibility and loses the argument completely. That statement makes no sense at all.

[@LordStanley94]

Christopher Hitchens was so astute. I literally listen to at least 1 video or some phrases by him daily. Observation: He is so calm in comparison to the other guy. The other guy is aggressive as hell. No pun intended.

[@harmonyvegan]

Christopher Hitchens, the father of ownage :)

[@Dave-zb1zv]

Morality comes from common sense; you don't support a dictator, celestial, secular or sacred, you stand on your own two feet and go your own way.

[@adamtequalsgreat]

"Where does evil come from?" "Religion" Epic.

[@GreatestMKfighter]

"Where does evil come from-" "Religion."

[@170221dn]

OK then if "God" gave us morality "built in" which molecule did he put it in?

[@lederereddy]

"Which molecule did God place our innate morality into?" That's the thing, 170221dn... Life and reality, as a whole, aren't, compositionally, as physical as they are immaterial. People might place more weightiness on materials, because of our limited perception of reality, but it is demonstrably the immaterial realm that governs the material realm. God, being immaterial by nature, is imho, apparently, trying to make a point. The invisible creator... That's a bare bones fact. Both, for the theist and the atheist. Even though they fail to acknowledge the attributes in its possession by downplaying its significance, by calling it something intert, non authoritative, mindless, etc, like nothing or an infinitely dense point of singularity, etc, like the theist, they still know this universe; time, space, matter, energy was created. They say it was nothing. But, in reality, everything we see must be accounted for to rightly discern the nature of this universe's causal prime. Because the actual creation suggests immense knowledge, unparalleled skill, eternal status , infinite power over the visible and invisible elements of reality. This immaterial Creator placed matter under subjection to the immaterial. Morality is one of those immaterial realities in authority over physical things. Specifically, us... Physics, obviously, are immaterial realities in authority over physical realities. There's a distinct order to all of it. By design, it sustains the theist position and defies the atheistic position. That is, objectively speaking, just how it is!...

[@lederereddy]

@JGodd lol? Do you disagree, Jgodd? Because I'll concede, if you can give me an example where physics are impotent over matter or where humans behave purely amoral. If you can't do that, then you'd have to demonstrate how physics are material. Or that humans behaving morally isn't because of an idea in their hearts and, or minds. Because you can laugh all you want, but if you're wrong, there are very real implications that you're choosing to ignore... Well, laugh at, apparently. Implications, btw, aren't implications unless they have real consequences... Implications are invitations to think and act accordingly. Consequences are what happens when you've run out of time. And the clock is ticking.

[@lederereddy]

@JGodd No argument. Just hissing at things you are just as aware of as anyone else, but, since you're not comfortable with them, you balk and lol, pretending to be immune... Typical atheist solution. You're an atheist? Well, no such thing, actually. No mortal has enough information to know The Creator doesn't exist. Especially since we're all created beings living in a created universe that is naturally inexplicable. So, you're an agnostic?

[@lederereddy]

@JGodd I am glad to hear you've got something real, heart felt and intelligent to say! Thank you! Yes, you're right. I am saying no human being has enough information to draw the atheistic conclusion. But the claim "there is no God" is not the same as the argument "there is a God." One is positive the other is negative. Some information is all we need to intelligently, objectively, logically draw the conclusion there is something! Including a God. Not that we can use that information to convince anyone else, or to demonstrate God's existence as an observed proven fact. But just as we know there are absolutely consistent invisible, immaterial forces governing this entire physical universe, we call the laws of physics and the theory of gravity... even though no one can even imagine what they are or how exactly they're bound to matter, we can... Well, I can and do know they're there and they are not arbitrary. Add that fact to things like; time, space and matter must logically have a very real origin. And that very real source needs to be existential to time, space and matter. Or the order, organization, sophisticated systems we observe. The shear diversity of matter and energy. And information? That's just not possible without forethought, design, resourcing, specified engineering... Agency. And then there's the fact that this universe is not random. With all of just its material and chemical diversity, random would have created a unigumbo. Not a universe. Meaning no information. No design. No purpose. Absolutely nothing cogent. Nothing intelligent. Nothing for minds... which were literally designed to read and express information, btw! Anyway... I'm not sure why you've soured toward The Lord, but my faith in Him is definitely not born from narrow mindedness! My conclusion is narrow! But all conclusions are narrow, unless your fickle about everything. I can't change my mind about Christ! But not because all I have is blind faith! My belief is based on the fact that Jesus Christ is not some man made story. His word speaks the truth. Regardless of how it offends people, or says the seemingly worst things it could, when trying to recruit believers, etc. What matters is wherever it mentions people, places and things, and their histories, earth's most epic events, most prominent exchanges in world powers, what it says about creation and life, marriage, family, community, laws and the supernatural, including Satan, demons, angels, miracles and prophecy... Even two thousand years after its last words were written, it stands tall against real scrutiny. Read what the Genesis account of procreation is. Then compare it to the secular evolution account! One is observed and expected. Never doubted! Not in action. The only place "evolution" happens is within the imaginations of human opinion. Period! And no one's demonstrated a physical mechanism to sustain macro aka Darwinian evolution. And frankly, we have seen the whole enchilada! If there were an actual mechanism, like mutations and natural selection, etc, we'd have found it! Plus I'm going with the facts that permeate biology through and through! It's 100 percent design engineering, from the cell nucleus to the elephants hide. And frankly, I am not gullible enough to imagine nature designing and building any living thing! Let alone whole freaking elephants! Life isn't arbitrary. There's a very real reason for your existence. You're no cosmic accident! There's lots of evil in religion and secularism! But there's a reason for that too! The factions are made of people. Sin, my friend. It's a real problem with a real solution! Seek God for that solution. Religiosity is when people try to solve the sin problem within their own power. Atheism is just people trying to ignore there even is a problem. Both are pride born, arrogant, selfish, etc. Jesus had the power to do what no man has the power to do! He, being, unlike any other man in history, holy, righteous and pure, God in the flesh, laid down His life willingly and became the innocent lamb slaughtered for the remission of man's sins! We are powerless to atone for our guilt and crimes. Even the most angelic, kind, gentle, loving, giving innocent souls we can ever meet are not holy! They're guilty of pride, lust, envy, greed, etc... It's just human nature... But thanks for replying! I will re-read it later. But I've said plenty already.

[@lederereddy]

@JGodd Btw, you do realize Christians recognize their faith as faith, don't you? It's atheists that deny the fact that they are guessing or that they are atheists, when cornered by the facts. But denial is their go to out for most of their worldview. So it's not surprising... to me, anyway. The point is Christianity's not, therefore, arrogance, at have value. Not like atheism. Christians have been and can be arrogant! Even about their faith. But it's, at least, honest at it's foundation. And instead of poo pooing everything and everyone, I suggest you keep an open mind! Sin is a spiritual dilemma with a spiritual solution. A dilemma that transcends man's finite array of earthly attributes. No man or woman has the strength, power, wisdom, etc, to remove, cover, atone their sins or anyone else's. I also suggest you focus all of your disbelief, frustration, skepticism at God Almighty, Himself, not religions, the religious, atheism and atheists. Ask Him who He is and what He wants! Be sincere to ask, and diligent to listen for His answer. In short, Seek The Lord, His word, His salvation, His grace, mercy, power and glory... Make it personal. Be real and expect Him to be at least as real as you. Fyi... God and His Kingdom are what's real. Time, space and matter, aka this universe is demonstrably temporal, fake, disposable, etc...

[@jonstoutcunningham2072]

When in my career involving televised debates about economics , finance etc... I managed to choose my opponents. Mr. Hitchens could not have had a more perfect opponent.

[@jonstoutcunningham2072]

this is monty python for f ing real

[@philmanson2991]

"Where does evil come from?" "Religion!"

[@RaionBot]

"Let's call it evil, where doe Eeeeeeevil come from?" Religion. I lol'd, owned so bluntly.

[@elguapoalso]

The phrase "punching above one's weight class immediately springs to mind when watching these two quarrel for longer than 40 seconds. Watching this debate I get the impression that Turek actually knows he's defending the indefensible and is just trying to come out of this debate looking like a worthy adversary.

[@cameronheilman8648]

I love how Turek steadily gets more frustrated and angry while Hitchens is just chill the entire time.

[@EMK395]

4:26 "Where does evil come from?" "Religion." Applause. RIP Hitch! You will be missed. :(

[@S.D.323]

Yeah but evil can also come from other things it was a clever response but pretty flawed too

[@xerox1959]

Christopher Hitchens: superior! Excellent speech, intelligent! This is true morality!

[@logwind]

Brilliant upload. Thanks for sharing these segments.

[@rashadblack96]

Lmao Turek looks nervous In the last 5 seconds

[@harveywabbit9541]

Religion is the misinterpretation (literal reading) of myth.

[@shioriuchiha7997]

You, my friend, have just been HITCHSLAPPED :D

[@pk-fi1ok]

This is a masterpiece of a brutal demolition. I absolutely adore how Hitchens could not only spot fallacies of that poor gentleman in the glasses, but destroyed them right on the spot. "Molecular distraction" .. wow! I love how that fop starts to wiggle his feet in anger. Lol :)

[@401files4]

How does morality exist? That is still like saying how does evil exist? Or how did the universe form? It’s one of Those questions we don’t yet have answers to. But where science says we’re still trying to find the answers, religion says we’ve already got them 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@OmniphonProductions]

Oh, I must remember that last statement about Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito. As for the religionist's opening statement, I ask this. Why would anybody need to "justify" morality?!?!?! Moreover, if God has "written it on our hearts" then why do all religions invariably contradict that inherent morality, even to such extent that believers must ignore parts of their own scripture?

[@lynnwood6839]

This Turek guy isn't even remotely on the same intelligence level as Hitchens. It's like watching Einstein with Tomi Lahren. LOLOL.

[@DARRBEV]

Thanks for the uploads, these are great

[@iameberitte3032]

Great philosophers lived before religion, and taught about morals with reasoning.

[@tyzer32]

Master troll Hitchens

[@HulkSmash0921]

So you all consider the fact that he is evading the question and working the crowd some kind of a win? So if dawkins debated joe rogan and all joe rogan did was evade the questions and reply with puns and worked the crowd.....then it would be some kind of win?

[@Lewa500]

He didn't dodge anything.

[@mackdmara]

Lewa500 Hitchens never answered the question. If you have some objective source of morality outside of God, what is it? If it is subjective, can you call it morality? Simply put, claiming it self evident would be to say serial killers, Hitler, Stalin, & many others self evident morals are just as good as a Humanist set of morals. Hitchens never answers that question & when pressed starts calling religion evil. Ad hominem is not an acceptable argument Hitchens, Ever! It is why he is a Demagogue, not truly a deep philosopher in my opinion. He is honest about it at least. Can you point to anything I missed, or am I correct?

[@JamesonPeligro]

@mackdmara Objective in the sense that morality is fixed, absolute, never changing? Or in the sense that it is established by something unquestionable, even when it has changed? if 1, even from a biblical standpoint morality evolves, one chapter god is telling us to stone disobedient children and people who pick up sticks on the sabbath.. the next his son is telling us to turn the other cheek and god is the ultimate judge. So that doesn't add up. It can't be absolute if god isn't absolute in what is moral or not. if 2, there's no evidence to refer to that the moral code written out in any religious text ever came from the mouth of a diety, we can't even see or hear this deity with any objective test for all to agree upon. so we're right back where reality has been all along. - morality is an evolving communal, cultural abstract that we all develop as a society. It is not absolute, it is not objective, it never has been.

[@mackdmara]

Jameson Peligro If the standard in 1 is the same (Old & New Testament) regardless of suggested punishment (that is not as absolute as you think), then the rule remains unchanged. The change is in culture. As to 2, you have to trust the source. Since you can contact said source personally, you can assert the source is valid. Beyond that the books of the Bible have lasted longer than any collection. Israel has lasted as a state after being removed repeatedly. This kind of unique endurance implies there maybe something more. There also are thousands of copies of these scriptures to know what is said is unchanged. The Jewish people have survived repeated ethnic cleansing by other groups. They persist & so does their beliefs, while the other cases all have been killed off. What makes them so special? God is what. Still, even if all this is not right, Hitchens never sets a standard that is unchanged. He lacks the ability to call anyone wrong as he cannot assert what is correct (or declined to at least). He chose an end & then justified his means to that end. Hence the ad hominem instead of a solid argument. He often did this kind of discussion, he has some kind of rational. Why with hold it?

[@JamesonPeligro]

"trust the source.. since you can contact said source personally..." Um.. all that does is create an opinion, have you been outside, like ever? there are thousands of christian sects, and many jewish sects, as well as muslim. If we all had access to the same objective god to answer this question we wouldn't be here looking at a debate about morality at all. "Beyond that the books of the Bible have lasted longer than any collection".. wrong again. You really need to research beyond what a pastor would tell you about the bible. The hindu texts and even some chinese confucian texts are hundreds to a thousand years older than any biblical book, and we definitely have more original unaltered copies than the biblical ones. "..thousands of copies of these scriptures to know what is said is unchanged".. no, no they are not 'unchanged', there are thousands of versions of every book, they were all hand written by scribes with personal objectives, there are hundreds of thousands of differences. Even today with the printing press in action there are dozens of variations and translations being printed, right now, of the bible, OT and NT. Where are you getting this idea from?

[@kelsosunshine3400]

The only lesson I needed from Jesus was the golden rule, which I was taught in a secular manner before I could talk. That was good enough for my family. We're open and loving people, who happen to be secular. I resent the idea that atheism equals moral confusion.

[@paulbrewer2374]

Hitch delivered a serious rhetorical ass-whupin’ to Turek. It was like watching Muhammad Ali in his prime destroying an amateur boxer.

[@irina-zk8iq]

I enjoyed it so much! Christopher at his best.

[@Azzoic]

"The oxygen molecule" lol

[@thelostone6981]

I lived in Micronesia back in the day and these tiny islands have been occupied for thousands of years. It wasn’t until the 1500s (at the earliest depending on the island) did those Pacific Islanders even hear of Christ. How did they survive for all that time before Europeans brought the “good” book? And in most cases, they brought the love of their fellow man forcefully and violently!! But if you don’t have a moral center, as Turdek argues, wouldn’t a society just self implode? What nonsense religious people have to convince themselves of!!!

[@krishnanunnimadathil8142]

Turek’s shrieking voice was enough to undo his entire thesis. A good argument, solidly delivered, is always delivered a la Hitchens - calmly and with no gaps, and with reason.

[@Green28142814]

"There is no morality, only morale." - Hannibal Lecter.

[@Sgarnoncunce]

I love how the people who ask questions try and reframe it or say it wasn't interoperated properly when they get fkn owned

[@eztyson]

Every time I listen to Christopher I feel rather dumb comparatively, but I always come away more enlightened too 😂

[@issadad]

I'll never grasp this distinction of theism that knowing what's right and doing what's right somehow amount to little unless I can "justify" any so-called moral conduct by crediting morality itself to a supernatural deity. Without this heavenly approval, Turek asserts, how can I possibly know if my notions of right and wrong are really -- that is, objectively -- right and wrong? To which I reply by asking the obvious: on the basis of what evidence -- what track record, what data, what results -- can you claim that Christian morality is any better than anybody else's worst attempts?

[@IamKlaus007]

When anyone is willing to debate someone like Christopher Hitchens on religion, they really need to have an holistic view of the world and it's components as well as a very good defence of their chosen belief system. Turek's extremely narrow view is such an easy target for someone like Hitchens who is extremely well travelled, read, researched and learned not just about the world in general but also about a great many aspects of religion, which, when listening to his interpretations makes so much sense exposing religion for exactly what it is.

[@Mark-ec8ix]

Nailed him when he tried to use science to defend his point.

[@cruz1ale]

Or if someone thinks I'm wrong on the above, please explain to me how Christopher answered the question, or why evading it was the right thing to do.

[@JustWasted3HoursHere]

Kindness and altruism have an evolutionary advantage as well. Also, why is it that people who are less religious are statistically less likely to be in jail, to be murderers, to get divorced, are generally happier? Seems to me that the _lack_ of religious belief is the moral approach, not the other way around.

[@josuke6869]

There is actually a materialistic reasoning as to why we some things are good and some are bad. I think it all falls under the rule of "Treat others as you would like to be treated". Suppose something happens to you, such as your girlfriend breaking up with you; certain neurons are fired in the brain in unique pathways. When the same thing happens to someone else, neurons fire in their brain HOWEVER a very similar pattern of neurons will fire in your brain just by observing it happen to another person. This I believe is the reason for empathy and how we can feel the sadness of others at times. It makes sense to be an evolutionary advantage since seeing another person and helping them would make it more likely for them to help us in the future. We've just classified this into good and bad...id say all GOOD actions can be boiled down to people feeling empathy for those in pain and doing something to help stop it. And all BAD actions can be seen as cases where you clearly feel the empathy of someones pain and choose to ignore it and/or inflict more pain on them (usually for your own gain)

[@firewallx1839]

This is like watching a conversation between a 5 year old and a University professor.

[@Dylan20121]

Why does frank assume his questions are valid, for me these questions are like asking "what does red taste like, or who made jealousy".

[@katey1dog]

Jebus Christ, I'm hooked! Somebody put this on a playlist!

[@globalnomad450]

He doesn’t even miss a beat…Hitch you were a master!

[@Anne--Marie]

Who is the judgemental person asking the questions?

[@HiveDes]

We sit down and reason out whether or not something should be prohibited based on its effects. For example: stealing. When we come together as a society, we decide that stealing each other's stuff is not conducive to a healthy and productive society, so we impose punishments to those who choose to participate in this act. Even after they are established, they are not absolute, but choosing to go against them will make you accountable to the law.

[@thisisanfield7085]

Mr Turek having his arse handed to him. In epic style.

[@woodytheduke]

remember the movie "a beautiful mind" should be remade about CH

[@hmgrraarrpffrzz9763]

I never understood that absolute / objective morals argument... Wouldn't we all then have the same moral standard and each and every event we'd have a definitive answer on whether it is moral or not?

[@omegavalerius]

Indeed, I agree. But there is yet many details to be found out.

[@liemyip159]

Turek talks about the "carbon molecule" and "oxygen molecule" when they are both atoms, where Hitchens knows all the quotes and religious passages off the top of his head really shows you which one of them knows what they're talking about.

[@carnifexprincipium5586]

"You can't justify morality without a being beyond yourself" Exactly! Our behavior is confined by the interests and well being of the millions of other people we must coexist with cooperatively. Morality is a complex organic process where we use empathy to balance our own interests and well being with those of the people we must answer to socially. To appeal to Divine dictate is the opposite of morality and negates all moral agency on our part. That does not necessarily make a divine law immoral but it certainly requires that it be non-moral.

[@2fast2block]

Steve, "Morality is a complex organic process where we use empathy to balance our own interests and well being with those of the people we must answer to socially." So "organic process" from living matter. Living matter from what? "To appeal to Divine dictate is the opposite of morality and negates all moral agency on our part." Great, back to living matter from what. Something that had to come from something that was created somehow. Going back, there had to be a creation or creation was always there. Creation can't be always there and it can't happen by natural means. That only leaves the option of creation was done supernaturally by a supernatural creator. Who are what the supernatural creator which also takes proof. First though, one must honestly reason there is a supernatural creator to be even looking. Hitchens never thought this through. Most of his answers are bitching, but bitching does not give answers. He has no interest in being logical, nor do you. "That does not necessarily make a divine law immoral but it certainly requires that it be non-moral." Coming from the dumbass, yourself.

[@theunholyhorseman7139]

I would love for Turek to explain just HOW his god's morality is "written on our hearts." This is nothing but a dramatized appeal to our emotions, and nothing more. The heart is neither the seat of reason nor a sensory organ.

[@cruz1ale]

Thx for replying guys. "Only civilisations which educated people to this rule survived." You're proposing a kind of group selection there - that civilizations with certain characteristics survive while other's don't. Well, that really doesn't have much to do with game theoretics. Game theory is about natural selection on the individual/gene level, and for example in that context the tit-for-that type of reciprocal altruism explains pretty well why there is goodness and unselfishness in people.

[@tedmom3029]

Hitchens is brilliant … So grateful to be able to continue to benefit from his great thinking. “Where does evil come from?” Love it … Religion. Bingo.

[@mynameisjonas45]

@PooeyBum11I acknowledge that you have a very valid point.

[@truthersteam4890]

Its like BobbyFischer playing chess with someone from the street...

[@johnmorris1764]

Morality comes from our imagination by way of our intelligence we have the imagination to be able to empathise with our fellow creatures.

[@11nephilim]

"That wouldn't prove that objective moral facts exist." 'Objective' moral facts don't exist, so attempting to prove that they do would be a waste of time.

[@Proteus6684]

4:26 possibly the best rebuttle I have ever heard! Turek is rapidly disolving,its so funny!!

[@HiveDes]

what if he says "I don't know" does that default to there being a god?

[@peterribolli8300]

"Where does evil come from?" Perhaps, the person who decreed "Papal Bul, terra nullius", none other than the pope of the catholic church. What an evil doctrine that is, and still exists today!

[@mauroprovatos]

nanosecond: the measure of time difference between "-Let's call it evil.Where does evil come from?" and "-Religion"

[@Dealwithit515]

How so?

[@DamonIcke]

That "Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin" comment was borderline chewbacca defense.

[@mynameisjonas45]

@shueevon What do you mean?

[@Viky.A.V.]

It's just so annoying that those religious hypocrites dare to think they own everything, from Love to Compassion to Empathy etc! Well, they do not. When I was a 4yo kid (no one tried to teach me any religion), I was given a little kitty, and it clicked inside my heart -- "I ought to take the best care of her, I will always protect animals!" Also, I inherited this positive attitude from my Mom, and back in my childhood years she wasn't a religious person at all. She's simply the kindest person I've ever seen in my life, neither thanks to the "fear of a god" nor for awaiting a reward for her kindness. PS: and, BTW, morality and kindness exist among animals too. Because those are natural things. The more a specie evolve, the more intelligent they become, the more positive mental qualities they develop.

[@rugbyanden]

4:26 oh he walked RIGHT into that one.

[@scotttinkler]

Turek is always yelling, Hitch so calmly destroys his every scream.

[@WyattCayer]

Man did he get him going!

[@hypobelow]

I could watch these videos all night, but I got science to study for a midterm in the morning. Peace.

[@space14605]

I sure miss the Hitchslaps

[@redetrigan]

"ontological category," eh? It's painful to see this goon overreaching his intellectual abilities.

[@Flyborg]

I kind of wish Hitchens would have answered though - good and evil don't "come from" any place, just like up and down don't "come from" any place. They are concepts; descriptions of things.

[@Krystallen]

"where does Evil come from?" "Religion"

[@thelordmemnoch]

@BrutalVikingFTW Ha ha, Christopher didn't even hesitate on that one which makes it the more amusing. I