YouTube is a shit show, we all know that, but it’s a shit show with an agenda. Anyone who thinks otherwise is out of their mind. When YouTube recommends videos to you, it’s one part marketing and one part political pandering and personally, I’m kind of sick of it.
So let’s look at one example. Unfortunately, there are others.
Let’s piss some more people off. That tends to happen a lot whenever I open my mouth on certain subjects so let’s do some more of that.
This is a multi-faceted post that’s going to wander and it comes from a number of different sources, mostly YouTube videos that I’ve seen in recent days. I’ll link to all of those below so you can go and see what I’m talking about.
This is going to be a short one because there isn’t really a lot that needs to be said, but please, can we stop shilling for Bart Ehrman’s various and sundry “classes”? Please?
Because truth be told, he’s starting to look a whole lot like the religious apologist scammers that run around in the incestuous social media sphere, trying to sell books, lectures and all manner of nonsense to gullible sycophants.
So, as is no surprise, Matt Dillahunty is wrong once again. He claimed, on a recent video from The Line, that anecdotal evidence is, in fact, evidence. It’s not. It’s a claim. In and of itself, it doesn’t actually demonstrate anything.
This was something that I was considering making a video on for my YouTube channel and then, I decided it would be much better doing it here. This was published on the website for the Houston Baptist University and frankly, it’s just a mess of bald rationalizations for why God is an explanation that isn’t just absurd.
This comes up a lot and I went and answered a question posed over on the MythVision YouTube channel today that asked if I believed that Jesus was real.
I don’t know why we have to keep having these conversations but apparently we do. A post popped up over on Reddit in which the OP wanted to know the views of atheist moral realists and I pointed out that they’d have a really hard time coming up with any of those because the overwhelming majority were moral anti-realists.
I recently had someone mention an essay, written by Peter van Inwagen, which purports to be an interesting, perhaps even persuasive look at reasons to be a Christian. So, why not, says I? Let’s go take a look at it and see if it stands up to critical scrutiny.
This is one of those things that I just don’t understand. Every year, I get a calendar, for the sole reason of marking what videos I’ve uploaded to YouTube and what days they premiere. That’s all I use it for. So why are there so many problems trying to do that?
I’ve been having a lot of discussions on philosophy lately and most don’t go well. There are a lot of people who seem to think that philosophy is a one-size-fits-all solution for every problem without exception and that’s just not how any of this works.
Not that most of these people care. So I wanted to talk about a recent example or two and why these people just need a lot of help. Continue reading Philosophy Isn’t Special→