I really won't go any further than that, because I swear I don't think Friel is worth the analysis. He had nothing new, and what older arguments he did have were mangled versions (e.g., the first cause argument), which Eddie was able to refute, as he was met only with more personal incredulity and appeals to ignorance.
I was unable to tape Eddie's opening because I was limited by lack of equipment, but his arguments for naturalism were almost identical to what he presented (see below) to GF last Sunday, albeit abbreviated, since he had 15 mins instead of 45 -- Eddie opened with arguments against the supernatural along Humean lines: miracles, the argument from physical minds, arguments against an afterlife, the argument from divine hiddenness, and the problem of evil. It was typical Eddie -- cogent, precise and clear.
The Center for Inquiry - Daytona came off looking great, from their representation to the graphics and banners and the ACLU table. Props to them for their hard work -- they were all really nice and appeared to have taken this project quite seriously.
My seat for part 1 gave me a poor angle to begin with, and the issue of quality was compounded because I was only able to post this in low-res as the Google Video Desktop Uploader for large files would've taken days. If you want a DVD, email me and we'll negotiate the $***.
Here is part 1 of 2, which I recommend watching below as GV stretches it out and makes it look even worse at their site:
Here is part 2 of 2 of the debate:
Here is part 1 of 2 of Eddie's talk at UF on 3-25-07:
And finally, here is part 2 of 2 of Eddie's talk at UF:
Please leave thoughts and comments below.
________________
***To cover my time and media/shipping expenses -- I think $10, including S&H, is fair for a DVD. You can pay me via mailed check, but I would prefer using PayPal, email me and I'll invoice you.
PS: I'm always amazed by how differently two eyewitnesses can report the facts about an event -- see here for someone who thinks that atheists were "humiliated" by Eddie's performance...
You be the judge.
_________________
Technorati tags: God, Religion, Atheism, Philosophy, Gator Freethought
I'm always amazed by how differently two eyewitnesses can report the facts about an event -- see here for someone who thinks that atheists were "humiliated" by Eddie's performance...
ReplyDeleteYou be the judge.
Thanks for the comment and for uploading the video.
ReplyDeleteWhat I said about both sides is exaggerated to a degree, as is most of what I blog, but from my perspective Todd Friel did present a better case for his belief, regardless of the methods employed. I also agree with your point on neutrality- it's a tendency of human nature to see things the way we want to see them.
A friend of mine just pointed out that my snark response to Todd Friel at 35:10 in Part 1 is partly audible. I said, "They have opposable thumbs too, dumbass," after Todd claimed that this feature (opposable thumbs) meant that "we're different" from "monkeys". In fact both apes and some Old World monkeys have opposable thumbs (Hanuman langurs, baboons). He's not only a poor philosopher, but terribly misinformed, as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd the winner is… Todd!
ReplyDeleteWhy you ask, because Todd was the only one trying to help save you and Eddie was trying to deceive you.
Don’t throw the Pascal's wagers argument at me but let’s say just for the augment that there is a God and you will face judgment day. Todd is our friend because he cares enough to warn us about the impending doom and Eddie is asking us to spend eternity with him in hell. What if Eddie is wrong, just on basic morals I would listen to Todd. Did you see Eddie’s face on that close up at the end? Now that is classically hilarious. He looked scared to me. Even though you edited it a little, to side with atheism I assume, I am thankful you posted it.
For Him,
Dan
Don’t throw the Pascal's wagers argument at me but let’s say just for the augment that there is a God and you will face judgment day.
ReplyDeleteit seems that you just threw the PW argument at us...
First, Dan, there can be a god with no judgment day. Second, there can be a god with a judgment day completely unlike that of the Christian God's. Third, most importantly...how do those two things get disproven while your own god gets proven by Todd's arguments? How can you use what Todd Friel says to show that the Christian God is true and that, say, the god of Ben Franklin is false?
PS: In response to --
ReplyDeleteEven though you edited it a little, to side with atheism I assume, I am thankful you posted it.
I didn't edit anything. My tape cut out right when I had reached 90 mins. I missed all of Eddie's opening and some of Todd's because I knew I'd only have 90 mins. I only missed 1 minute of the end of Todd's closing. No editing, just lack of footage. Believe it or not, whatever. There should be a professionally-made DVD in a few months and you will know for sure then.
I didn't edit anything.
ReplyDeleteI believe you, Daniel. Thanks for clearing that part up.
For Him,
Dan
Notice that Eddie focused on clear arguments with evidence, whereas Todd used humor, stories, etc.
ReplyDeleteAfter just deleting a comment which violates our commenting policy here, I thought it apropos to highlight our policy for visitors: READ IT HERE
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn a word huh NO! you took it out of context.
ReplyDeleteDan,
ReplyDeleteWe will move this personal exchange, which has little to nothing to do with the post on the Tabash-Friel debate, to my site. I have reproduced the emails in their entirety for everyone to read and decide for themselves what is going on.
See the thread Exchange with Dan Marvin at my personal site.
As far as I am concerned Eddie by default. Anything that crawls out of WOTM's mouth is nothing but garbage. Debating Ray Comfort's court jester, is pretty much like teaching a pig to sing. It doesn't work, and it serves to inflate the pig's sense of self-importance.
ReplyDeleteW01F