Andrew Wilson vs. Naima HEATED Debate Round 2 | Whatever Debates #23

Date: 2025-11-11

Duration: 3h 30m

Guests

Brian Atlas

AAndrew Wilson >

Identified Speakers

SPEAKER_01Brian Atlas(host)

SPEAKER_03Andrew Wilson(guest)

SPEAKER_04Naima(guest)

Key Moments

IntroBrian introduces debate: Andrew Wilson vs Naima Round 2

Key MomentAndrew reduces Naima's morality grounding to 'preference'

ControversyAndrew: under Naima's morality, slavery/genocide would be justified if preferred by majority

QuoteNaima on male benevolence: 'Kind of the bare minimum, no?'

Key MomentTwin-brother incest thought experiment tests bodily autonomy principle

QuoteAndrew closing: 'You just got absolutely decimated'

QuoteNaima closing: 'The few times you stated opinions, you justified slavery and genocide'

Topics Discussed

Rights/Morality Grounding

~90 min debate on whether rights can be grounded outside God. Andrew reduces Naima to preference-based anti-realism.

Feminism Lies About Male Benevolence

Andrew: men could rape/enslave but choose not to, therefore benevolent. Naima: that's the bare minimum.

Can Black People Be Racist?

Quick agreement on interpersonal racism; disagree on systemic.

Feminism Enslaved Women (Student Debt)

Andrew: feminist push for college created debt slavery. Naima: blame capitalism not feminism.

Force Doctrine Deep-Dive

Men have monopoly on force, women always appeal to men for rights.

Transcript

Page 3 of 4

Naimapeople? >> No, I'm sure it's very small. probably small. So then why are we talking about this? >> We're testing No, actually, I want >> it. I'm almost done. >> the conversation to something >> and I'm almost done. I just want to ask one last question. >> I think it's weird that we've been so

Brian Atlasfocused One last question on bodily autonomy. Just to be fair, I'll I'll I searched her thing up. So sh- globally, it says about 20% of the world's

Brian Atlaspopulation lives in communities where consanguineous marriage is preferred with a rate of 20 to 50% in parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia. >> immoral, right? >> So in those countries, it's Well, I

Naimamean, if they're >> They're all immoral, right? Hold on. Can I ask you a question? Me? Yeah. >> Yeah, sure. >> I mean, wait. I want to go back to more research on this. I feel like I can't

Naimagive you a good answer cuz I don't really know anything about it. Well, there's also cousin marriage worldwide more than 10% >> about like the cultural tradition of marrying your cousins or having incest with a sibling in a society that does not accept it?

Andrew Wilson>> here, I'll just make it simple. I'm just going to make it su- super easy, the question. Your whole family dies in a tragic accident except your twin brother. So now you can't destroy them emotionally

Andrew Wilsoncuz they're all dead. Is it okay or moral then to have a twin brother uh incestuous relationship based on your principle of bodily autonomy? I guess if you're not hurting anyone, including

Naimayourself, then sure. But I don't think that this negates the basic belief that bodily autonomy is a human right. Because I do think the consequences of living in a society where you where

Naimabodily autonomy didn't exist are far greater. I mean, if nobody has a right to bodily autonomy, then at any point any of us would be able to just [ __ ] with each other and physically harm each other. >> But don't you want to restrict bodily

Naimaautonomy constantly? What? >> Don't you want to restrict bodily autonomy constantly? >> In what universe do I want to restrict >> know. Did you support the lockdowns? Did I support the Well, that again is an exception in the case of creating harm

Andrew Wilsonto yourself or others. >> Well, wasn't that a Wasn't that a subjective harm? Millions of people died. Is that subjective to you? Well, I mean, it's a subjective harm that you lock people in their homes or lock down their businesses. >> Millions of people died, though. It's not subjective that those people died.

NaimaThey objectively died. >> but I mean Did you know anyone who lost anyone during COVID? >> It was brutal, man. Yeah, of course, but the thing is How do you argue >> it be bodily So you don't really believe in a principle of bodily autonomy? >> But it's foreseeable risk.

NaimaLike there's a foreseeable risk that if you go outside while there is a contagious deadly disease and you continue to spread that contagious deadly disease, you could foreseeably cause a So bodily autonomy should be

Andrew Wilsonrestricted as long as we can justify that there's some sort of harm to other people. Or is Is that right? Yes, to an extent. To an extent. >> that there are certain exceptions, but I think on a general principle, yeah, I agree with that.

Andrew Wilson>> So why shouldn't we stop women from having an abortion if half of us perceive the harm of it? Well, because you haven't proven that it's a legitimate >> we need to? All we have to do is prove is perceive it that way. No, you have to prove that there's a legitimate >> Then why do we care about this?

Andrew Wilson>> Foreseeable risk Like in on a legal sense, you have to be able to prove that there's a foreseeable risk. Then why do we care about you just Then why is it that we care about you hurting your entire family cuz it hurts yourself again? Cuz that's just perception.

Naima>> Because there was a proven foreseeable risk. Like legally, there was a proven foreseeable risk that going outside could potentially cause bodily harm. And by the way, Isn't going outside always potentially something that can cause

Naimabodily harm? I mean, I was also in like alive during COVID. People still left their houses all the time. People threw parties. Like people did tons of stuff during COVID. >> They resisted the uh the state-sponsored

Andrew Wilson[ __ ] That's true. But it wasn't a mandate. Like it wasn't forcing you to be inside. The lockdowns didn't force you to be inside. >> And they had And progressives wanted COVID passports. Where are your paper

Andrew Wilsoncheckpoints, right? Very fascist dystopian. >> you can't spread a disease that was killing people. >> So then restricting >> that you should just be allowed to spread a disease that was killing people. I think that your principle of

Andrew Wilsonbodily autonomy is making less and less sense because it seems like as long as we subjectively can claim that you're going to do something which we perceive as being harmful, uh then we can restrict your bodily autonomy. >> No, it's not subjectively can claim.

NaimaIt's objectively can claim. Oh, we can objectively claim. >> as you can objectively claim that there is either foreseeable risk of causing bodily harm or you are actively causing

Naimabodily harm to yourself or others, then an individual deserves bodily autonomy. Then why don't we restrict swimming pools? Why would we restrict Because there's a massive foreseeable risk that you're going to cause harm to yourself, your

Andrew Wilsonfamily, or other people who come swimming. I don't think there's a massive Also, that's why we have lifeguards. There's a much bigger chance that your percentage as a as an individual would die probably in a swimming pool than from COVID-19.

Andrew Wilson>> pools are voluntary. We're not forcing everyone to go into a swimming pool. Well, this is so funny to me. I thought it was about bodily autonomy, not about not not about anything else. Yes, swimming pools are voluntary. >> want to restrict bodily autonomy. If you

Andrew Wilsonforce everyone to go into a swimming pool, then yeah, that'd be Then why wasn't it voluntary for me to walk into a [ __ ] shop if I wanted to without a mask on? Well, the shop voluntarily chose to close. If you wanted to open your shop then >> The state mandated that they close. Oh,

Andrew Wilsonokay. Well, that sucks, but restriction of bodily autonomy. Like all of your principles are completely [ __ ] incoherent. They're all incoherent. No, I'm not. No, it's not. There's still a foreseeable risk. There was a foreseeable risk that people were going to die.

Naima>> risk with everything. I mean, but also, Andrew, like if you were to open a store during COVID and a bunch of people went to your store, got COVID, and died, they would sue the [ __ ] out of you. I think a lot of businesses would be sued anyway.

Andrew Wilson>> it people's choice? Just like the swimming pool? Just like the swimming pool, going into a a restaurant and opening yourself to foreseeable risk. Yes, and lots of people chose to do that. >> And then why is it that you just 5 seconds ago said that these restrictions

Andrew Wilsonand the lockdowns were totally fine from the state mandating what people do voluntarily? Brian, look up how many people died during COVID. You just said the the voluntary nature of swimming pools is why we don't restrict them even though they cause

Naimabodily harm. Why is the voluntary nature of people engaging in society during COVID not not the same? >> voluntarily spread disease. You can't be like, "Hey, I'm not going to spread disease to that guy cuz he's

Naimaimmunocompromised. I'm going to keep it >> had the choice to stay home or go out, right? >> live with other people. That was the issue. If some members of a family went out and then some left and then came back and exposed their immunocompromised

Naimafamily members to the illness, they could die. >> Then the problem you have again with Like dude, COVID sucked. It was horrible for businesses, but I would rather have to stay inside or go to a park or go to

Andrew Wilsona public space than risk killing my grandma and the other immunocompromised people in my life. >> Should people who all voluntarily But that's why the shop was voluntary. If people are always voluntary Well,

Naimaprogressives didn't want it to be. Seven million. So 7 million people died, Andrew. >> Yeah, how many people die every year of the common flu? Sure. You don't think that's enough of a foreseeable risk? >> Let's see how many people would die from

Brian Atlasthe common flu. Wait, are we talking US or just That the one I provided, the 7 million, I believe that was worldwide. >> And that was for how many years? Let's do just US for both. Just US for both, one second.

Naima>> Yeah, cuz we're talking about the US. I mean, other countries don't have the same access to medical, you know, health that they Some of them have much better. Yeah, I know. Globally, the estimates that seasonal

Brian Atlasflu causes about uh 290,000 to 650,000 deaths each year. Uh That seems like a worldwide That's worldwide. That's worldwide and that

Naimaseems like a lot less than Wait, can we do US? Yeah, calm down. I'll do US. There's no uh-oh. Well, Andrew, I think you're wrong. >> That's a foreseeable risk, isn't it? I don't think statistically it's a high enough foreseeable risk. How many people get the flu every year?

Andrew Wilson>> a second. How many people do you think 7 million people is as a percentage of the global population? Um well, isn't the global population like 8.2 billion?

Brian Atlas>> Uh-huh. Yeah. There's a bit of a range, but 21 for 20 22 2023, the CDC estimates about 21,000 deaths due to influenza in the USA. Okay. >> And then you wanted me to look something up? Yeah, but hang on. Hang on.

Andrew Wilson>> Wait, no. Let's keep going. >> do You got to do that not during the COVID lockdowns. That's the important part. Because you can COVID lockdowns, they reduce significantly. You want me to check that? >> Oh, wow. Isn't that nice?

NaimaYeah. Yeah, true. If you lock people in their houses, they won't they won't spread any illness. That's true. >> was the point. There was multiple illnesses going around that were subjecting people to a serious >> percentage What percentage is reasonable

Andrew Wilsonfor us to implement against bodily autonomy when it leads to death? Is 7 million people yearly >> Well, I think you have to ask a lawyer, Andrew, cuz there is actually a legal precedent for that. I'm asking you. >> Well, I'm not a lawyer. You should ask a legitimate >> to ask a lawyer how many people you

Naimathink it's legitimate to restrict their bodily autonomy for? >> Well, it's a law. Like it's a literal law. >> You don't base your morals on law. You're basing them on bodily autonomy. No, I'm basing it on the concept of I'm

Naimabasing bodily autonomy on the concept of foreseeable risk, which is a law. So, why would you ask >> So, 650,000 a year isn't enough of a foreseeable risk? Worldwide? Yeah. I would say no if there's 8.2 billion

Andrew Wilsonpeople on the >> million if there's 8.2 billion? Seven Do you not know the difference between 650,000 >> Yeah, I'm trying to figure out where the threshold breaker here is. >> It's a lot bigger. Well, it's not up to me. Well, I'm but I'm asking because of

Andrew Wilsonbodily autonomy. You support this stuff. Yes, I support saving people's lives. >> Yeah, so what Where's the threshold where we can lock people down and and restrict their bodily autonomy? >> is a legal threshold. I don't know. Ask

Naimaa lawyer. >> I don't have one. Well, it's based on a legal precedent. Why should every single individual person just get to decide, I think it's this? >> I'm not a lawyer. >> This is so ridiculous. >> It's not ridiculous, Andrew. What is the

Brian Atlaspoint of asking me a legal Let's switch prompts. Definition. What do you What do you guys think about this one? Black people can be racist towards white people. Would you guys like to do that

Naimaone? Sure. Um yeah, I think that before we move on, should we define racism? Yeah. How do you define racism? >> Yeah, we should just get the semantics out of the way so we can actually have a

Andrew Wilsonconversation. I'm sorry. It keeps annoying me. So, I would do the I have a more classical definition. Okay, let's hear it. >> Which would be the hatred or bigotry of

Naimaan entire race. Is that it? Hold on. Wait, my phone is going off. So, the hatred or bigotry of an entire race on the basis of what? Race?

Naima>> Or most of the race. On the basis of race, yes? Yeah. Okay. Um and that's your only definition of racism? Yeah, I I I think that yes. Okay, cool. Um

Naimado you mind if I pull up the dictionary definition of racism? Uh well, you can pull up whatever you want, sure. Okay. Well, so there's I think there's two main types of racism

Naimathat are involved in what you just said. So, what Andrew just described perfectly was interpersonal racism, which is prejudice, discriminatory actions

Naimabetween individuals based on their hatred of the entire race. Um and then there's also what we see in this country, which is systemic and structural racism, which is again, since

Naimawe have to define systems, a complex system of laws, policies, and practices that create and perpetuate racial inequality. So, this would be

Naimaessentially the patriarchy, but on the basis of race if we're going back to our definition of the patriarchy. Now, where

NaimaI agree with Andrew is that anyone can be interpersonally racist. >> Okay, well, then that's the end of that prompt. >> No, it's not because there are multiple forms of racism. >> What's the prompt, Brian? >> And the power Read the prompt.

Naima>> Blacks can be racist towards white I mean, dude, we agreed on the last prompt and we still talked about it for like another hour. So, let's get into it. >> Well, hang on. Hang on. I just want to make sure >> Yes. that the Can you read the prompt, Brian? >> Yes. Black people can be racist >> And you're agreeing that that's the

Naimacase. >> I just read that. >> Okay. >> Yes. Shall we move to a different prompt, then? >> No, I think we should continue with this one. I actually really want to do this >> It was the one that I thought was the most interesting. I mean, I guess I don't I guess >> I guess if you don't want to move on if you want to move on to another prompt,

Naimawe can, but all I will say is although blacks can be racist towards whites, the system that perpetuates inequality works in favor of white people. So, while yes, it might hurt your feelings, it doesn't

Naimahave a broader impact on your life like genuinely decreasing your quality of life and standard of living. It's not backed by any power. Why don't I read some of the other prompts, and if you want to return to this one, we can.

Brian AtlasOkay. So, uh we have feminism enslaved women instead of liberating them. >> That one I think is hilarious. I would be down to do that one. Women just as violent as men, if not more. Problems with democracy. Forced doctrine. The

Brian Atlasdescription >> women more violent. Mhm. Okay. It sounded like you wanted the feminism enslaved women, but >> I like both of those. >> Okay, so we'll do uh

Andrew WilsonLet's do uh feminism enslaved women instead of liberating them. Or are you really keen on the I don't I don't care either way. >> Neither one matters, but I would at It's 5:30. Just real quick, take a smoke

Brian Atlasbreak and then get back to this while you take some super chats. I'm team Uh yeah, we >> The one thing that we can agree on today is the smoke breaks. I love those. >> Can you guys do it simultaneously, though? >> No, cuz part of it is a break for yourself.

Naima>> quick. What's that? No, cuz part of it is you get a break from the debates, some fresh air, clear your head, come back, be locked in. >> Yeah, I'll take 5 minutes. >> Yeah, so we'll what we'll do >> Each get a five?

Brian AtlasYou'll have five, but Nick can bring you uh somewhere else somewhere else. Okay, just go with Nick. Uh You got it. Yep. All right, guys, they're taking a brief break brief

Brian Atlasbreak. They're each uh Smoky man bad. Smoky girl bad. Um they're just going to take a quick smoke break. So, uh really quick, guys, as soon as they come

Brian Atlasback, we'll we'll actually do a Q&A session super quick. So, if you guys want to get in a question, streamlabs.com/whatever. Streamlabs. All

Brian Atlasright, now that they're gone, chat. Now that they're gone, what do you What do you guys think? Who's winning the debate? Should I do a poll, chat? What do you think?

Brian AtlasShould we do a poll, chat? Uh Brandwolf, thank you for the super chat. Uh Baby, thank you for the super chat. Appreciate it. Thank you, guys. Couple quick messages. Guys, if you want to

Brian Atlassupport the the show, you want to support the stream, and you want to do it without these platforms taking their cut, YouTube takes 30% by the way of all super chats. So, for example,

Brian Atlasif you super chat 100, YouTube takes 30. You super chat 200 like this, YouTube takes 60. And then if you're doing it on

Brian Atlasan Apple device, Apple takes 30% on top also. So, if you super chat 200, they're taking 100 of it, basically. So,

Brian Atlasstreamlabs.com/whatever. Get your Q&As in, guys. Also, guys, like the video if you're enjoying the stream. They should be back here in just about 3 minutes. They're taking a smoke break.

Brian AtlasI'll I'll pull this up a little bit later. Oh, let me shout out the people who sent in some things via Venmo and Cash App. Guys, Venmo Venmo and Cash App, if you want to send something in, let's see.

Brian AtlasLee Lee Pittman, thank you for the 20. Brian, thank you for the three. Marissa, thank you for the five. Uh George, thank you for the 10. Jonna Jana, apologize if I'm mispronouncing that. Thank you for the five. Appreciate

Brian Atlasit, guys. Thank you. Thank you. Also, guys, go to twitch.tv/whatever. Drop us a follow and a prime sub if you have one. If you have Amazon Prime, you link it to your Twitch. It takes about 2

Brian Atlasminutes to do. I know a lot of you have the Amazon Prime. You get, you know, the 2-day delivery, all kinds of perks on Amazon. You link it to your Twitch account. You can create a Twitch account if you don't have one already. If you do

Brian Atlasalready have one, you just link it up. Super easy. And then every single month, uh you can basically support the show for free. I obviously have to pay for the Amazon Prime sub, but included with your Amazon Prime, you get a Twitch

Brian AtlasPrime. It's a quick, free, easy way to support the show every single month, and uh it enables us to do the show. We don't do sponsorships. Um

Brian Atlasthe because the topics we cover in the debates and on the dating talk panels are of a often times controversial nature. Sometimes, you know,

Brian Atlasuh certain words are used that are going to get the video flagged. Often times, we lose our uh individual video monetization on these videos because, you know, we are talking about that. They're

Brian Atlascontroversial topics or uh keywords get used, and the YouTube has an audio algorithm that is going to immediately just flag a video if you say certain words, and then you're just going to lose the monetization. So,

Brian Atlasum because we don't do sponsorships, because a lot of our stuff gets demonetized, we are viewer supported. So, if you guys want to support, uh we we have a ton of options. We have

Brian Atlasthe twitch thing, Venmo, cash app, shop.whatever.com. Get yourself some merch, guys. We sell tea We got some great designs. We sell t-shirts. You can get yourself a mug. We're selling these cups. These By the way, you can't get

Brian Atlasthese anywhere. Trust me. The You can't You can't get these these solo jazz cups anywhere. Um

Brian AtlasI had to go to the manufacturer and I ordered 60,000 cups because I have issues. Um anyways, somebody told me to get therapy today. Maybe that's

Brian Atlasit. Discord, join our Discord, guys. discord.gg/whatever. discord.gg/whatever. Andrew's just returned from his smoke break. We are about to get right back into it. Give us just one more minute,

Brian Atlasguys. Also, guys, if you're enjoying the stream, like the video. Guys, like the video. Um I trying to see what we're What are we at right now? Uh what are we at? If you guys can get

Brian Atlasthe likes to Uh you guys get the likes to 7,000 7,000 cuz there's 12,000 people watching. Get the likes to 7,777.

Brian AtlasYou know, I I may or may not have We we got pickle jars, olive jars, peach jars. You need an energy drink, Andrew? You

Andrew Wilsonneed uh I got enough patience for one more prompt, dude. Okay. And uh we'll >> infuriating because she just refuses to answer questions. She just prattles for

Andrew Wilsonhours and just won't answer any questions I ask her. What are the questions that you want her to answer? >> Well, I want her to answer her questions on uh morality. She tried to evade on the incest question. I had to beat that

Brian Atlasout of It took me like 40 minutes to beat a basic question cuz I can't move the conversation forward. Let's do this. If uh S- sometimes I'm preoccupied with some of the stream stuff and I'm not always

Brian Atlascatching when if she is being evasive. If you just want the immediate answer, just appeal to me and I'll insist she give an answer. How does that sound? I mean, this is I mean, it's just ridiculous. They just don't answer any

Brian Atlasquestions ever. Speaking of which, guys, Andrew's back at the table. He is a master debater. He's a master debater. You got to get the program debateuniversity.com.

Brian AtlasUh you can It's instructional video, hours and hours of instructional video. debateuniversity.com. Guys, we're going to do a Q&A session as soon as Naima returns. Let me try to get

Brian Atlasthem to hustle back here so that we can get this going. We're just taking a brief intermission to allow a breather for the debate participants. Um Hold on. Let me text.

Brian AtlasAll right. Thank you guys for your patience. Uh Kenneth Wallen, by the way, says W Andrew. Uh thank you, Kenneth, for that. I'm

Brian Atlassure Andrew appreciates your viewing. Appreciate it. Let's see. Some of these I I'd like to wait to pull up just for uh I think this

Brian Atlasone came up. RB Uh Oh, he's asking about the tribe. RB, thank you for your uh super chat, man. Do appreciate it. Do appreciate it. I'm going to let something some from Oops.

Brian AtlasHold on. Pasty George here is coming in. Speaking of which, guys, now's the moment. If you want to get a Q&A in, do it now. Do it now. We'll get into the Q&A uh before or as soon as Naima comes

SPEAKER_02back. We have Pasty George here. >> from the government of Canada. Pasty George donated $200.04. That pop was for Andrew and whatever he

Brian Atlaswants to get, whether it be beer or some drink or cigars. Would you like uh >> [sighs] >> Maybe I'll send Nick to to do run. You want some beer? What You want a

Brian Atlasrefresher on anything? No, I'm good. >> You're good? Okay. >> Yeah. Uh I guess I'll We'll we'll get What Pasty What I We'll we'll get Andrew a burrito. We'll

Brian Atlasget Andrew a beer. We we won't do it on stream, you know, but uh Yeah. Is your flight tonight or early tomorrow? >> Tonight. >> Tonight, yeah. That's why I got to go. All right, they're back. They're back. Let's get it going. Let's get it going,

SPEAKER_02guys. And uh Hold on. So I'm just saying I'm trying Skuma Bear donated $200. What do you personally think about the

SPEAKER_02Orthodox faith after sitting in with Orthodox debaters? God bless. Sorry if too personal of a question. >> Is this directed at >> Thanks for your platform. Is that him?

NaimaHe wrote it. Or me? I believe it's directed to you. What do I think about the Orthodox faith? I don't know, man. Whatever floats your

Brian Atlasboat. Like Orthodox Christianity or Orthodox Judaism? Christianity. >> Christianity. Orthodox Christianity? >> I think that's for you. Um Uh Skuma Bear, appreciate it. We have uh

SPEAKER_02a question Oh, boy. Oh my god, not Pasty George. $200.04. >> Dude, this man is going to drain his Do you feel kind of bad for him? >> Slavery was good and I'll let you know

SPEAKER_02why. If slavery had never existed, we wouldn't have the innovative music we have today minus the devolving rap for brain-dead thug wannabes. What is he talking about? >> Um If slavery had never existed, we

Naimawouldn't have So you think we should have Slavery is justified because it made good music? Should I disavow that? I don't know if I should or not. Do you want to I Come on, Brian. That was a rough one.

NaimaLike you got to admit that was just stupid. It Hey, you know, um I mean, that is maybe the I Props to you, Pasty. I think that is one of the worst justific- >> Pasty. Oh, not Pasty. >> Not Pasty. Not Pasty.

Naima>> Oh, it's Pasty. Sorry. He's You can call him George or Pasty Pasty. >> Pasty. I think PG. >> I like Pasty. Um Props to you, Pasty. I think that might be one of the worst justifications for

Brian Atlasslavery I've ever heard. Mr. Fernand Garcia, thank you, man, for the super chat. If morality is subjective, I think suffering is good. Hypothetically, I have a big army and more willing and capable to enact force than you. Outside of God, how am I wrong?

Naima>> Well, I don't think morality is subjective, so. I think [laughter] morality is based on natural law, which is objective.

>> [laughter]

Brian Atlas>> All right. Uh guys, if you want to get a message in again, $200 Q&A. Let's get into the next prompt, though. Welcome back, everybody. All right. Uh Do you guys both smoke Marlboros, by the

Naimaway? >> No, I smoke Turkish Royals. I see. Okay. Do you have thoughts on You guys want to debate the best cigarette? Do you smoke cowboy killers? Yeah. I don't hate them. I feel like everyone starts with Marlboro, so I feel

Andrew Wilsonlike they're kind of basic. I feel like the Marb Golds are better, but All right. >> I don't spice my food, either. So >> spice your food? I'm kidding. It's It's a memeing to me. Next prompt. >> Oh. I'm sorry. That just sounded like

Naimasomething you would do. Feminism enslaved women instead of liberating them. Yeah. Okay, Andrew. I think you I think you got to start cuz I genuinely just want to hear

Andrew Wilson>> if you'd like to start on this. Yeah, so the first thing is I'm going to tell you all the things I don't consider to be slavery. Okay. So I don't consider not having voting rights slavery. Okay. Do

Andrew Wilsonyou want to just define slavery instead of telling me everything that's not slavery? >> Well, hang on. I will. I'll define that, too. Well, let's skip to the good part. Calm down. So I don't consider not having voting

Andrew Wilsonrights to be slavery and I don't consider having um having certain social benefits um instead of voting rights to be slavery

Andrew Wilsonat all. So I don't consider lack of suffrage or an inability um for like, I don't know, other things like higher education, things like this. I don't consider any of that to be

Andrew Wilsonslavery, even if it were the case that we didn't quibble over what that means. >> don't think that those >> Yeah, exactly. So I don't think that women at the time of feminism were slaves at all, okay?

Naima>> I don't, either. I mean, black women >> Do you want me to Do you want me to give the at the time of the 19th Amendment? No. I thought you were talking about like during slavery.

Andrew WilsonWhat? >> Legitimate like American slavery, no? What? No. >> [laughter] >> What are you even talking about? Anyway, so I don't consider women at the time of

Andrew Wilsonwomen's suffrage to have been slaves at all. Okay. I do, however, um slavery is very nebulous. And Brian, if you can pull up a few definitions, I could just

Andrew Wilsongive you the Merriam-Webster definition. I literally wrote it down. Yeah, but the problem is is that there's a bit of nebulousness here that I think we need to clarify in the semantics for what slavery is. Okay. So go ahead and pull pull up the definitions, Brian.

NaimaWell, there it's good Okay. I mean, it's the state of being a slave. I don't know if that's pretty helpful. >> Can I give you a definition? Go ahead. Okay. So here's what cuz I know it's When you look it up, it's always the practice of being a slave, which is

Naimastupid. Slave definition. >> Um here's what I would say. I would say forced and or involuntary labor without pay. >> No. You want me to >> Here's But here Now, here's why. Here's why I would dis-

Andrew Wilson>> Why? Do you want to know why? >> [laughter] >> Sure. I guess I do. >> Because I'm not sure that that encompasses another type of slavery. >> What's the other type of slavery? >> Well, indentured servitude. Do you want me to read the one? That is without pay

Andrew Wilsonthough. So it is well not really. So no, it's not. Just let me make the case. Do you want me to read the definition? Do you know what indentured slavery even is? Indentured slavery or indentured servitude? They're the same thing.

NaimaIndentured servitude is when you essentially got a patron who would allow you to come to America or this country and then you had to work off your time spent yeah your debt for coming to this country.

Naima>> without pay. Well, I think that it was essentially not enough money. Like the amount

Andrew WilsonWell may maybe not but but I consider that slavery and I consider that indentured servants who were coming in I think that they were being paid they were just pay all their pay was going to

Naimaa debt. So that's the distinction that I would make there. No, I agree with you and I think that to that point sharecropping would also be slavery cuz it was a similar you all of your money was going

Brian Atlastowards a debt. So my So my basic argument here is >> we're agreeing on our definition though. Can we just define our terms? Do you want me to read the few definitions? Yeah, sure. Just for slave

Brian Atlasone a person who is forced to work for and obey another and is considered to be their property and enslaved person next one a person who works very hard without proper room and remove Oh my

Brian Atlasgod, I'm sorry. remunerated remuneration >> I'm sorry. That's I'm going to say that. remuneration remuneration or appreciation Oh my god, I'm so embarrassed. Um the person

Brian Atlas>> it's okay. [laughter] a person who is excessively dependent upon or controlled by something Mhm. an ant captured in its pupal state >> on the previous definition >> want to say Brian 54% of the

Naimasay Brian 54% of the population reads below sixth grade reading level. So you're doing pretty good.

Andrew WilsonThank you. A person who is excessively dependent upon or controlled by something. A person who is excessively dependent or controlled. I agree that that would be a

Andrew Wilsonform of slavery. So >> Okay. Here's where my essential argument is. Right. >> Is that women could not incur debt and I consider that a massive incurrence of debt like what you would get with indentured servitude that you then have

Andrew Wilsonto um you have to work doing things that your preference is definitely against uh doing is a form of slavery. And so my argument here is that ultimately what

Andrew Wilsonhas happened through the idea of all women need to go to college which has been a massive feminist talking point is that they're under crushing student debt generally speaking for degrees they don't even need and I would say that

Andrew Wilsonthat is not liberating at all. I would say that women have become debt slaves to the economy and before feminism they could not incur debt themselves under coverture laws. So I would say that they

Andrew Wilsonhave a form of slavery or at least more akin to a form of slavery under state debt um than was worth it for a right to vote that barely makes a significant

Naimadifference anyway. Okay. Um so to those points I cannot speak for other feminists but I

Naimawill speak for myself. Nobody is forcing women to go to college under feminism. Like yeah, sure we are encouraging women and it part of it the feminist movement

Naimawas to fight for the right or I guess fight is not but to advocate for the right of equal education opportunity but the difference is that it's not involuntary. Yeah, so

Naima>> Like a woman today >> indentured servitude and you agreed it's slavery. Yes, but a woman today could still choose not to be a student and go to school. >> not to be indentured servants. So the

Naimasame principle They could agree then not to be indentured servants. So the same principle applied. No, it's not the same principle because what were they leaving? Like if you're leaving a potato famine you don't really have an option. Either you're dying or you're now in a different >> You still have options and it's your

Andrew Wilsonchoice and the same reason that many women will incur massive amount of college debt is because they're trying They're trying to leave terrible economic conditions. That's why they do it. Yeah, of course it's voluntary. >> argue that the burden of

Andrew Wilsonall these massive student loan programs which are designed specifically to incentivize women to incur huge amounts of debt which they do um has actually been more of a form of economic slavery than anything that they had pre-feminism

Naimaunder coverture laws where they were not allowed to incur debt. They did not have debt which they could incur. >> coverture laws women were also not allowed to keep their earnings. All of the money that they made from doing literally anything had to go to their

Naimahusbands. That is not true especially with inheritances. But going back to this belief that incurring debt through

Naimaa university that you voluntarily choose to go to is somehow slavery then wouldn't anyone who takes out be a slave regardless of whether or not they're a

Naimaman or a woman? I think usury is real bad and so the idea >> single person who is going to college voluntarily and voluntarily taking student debt is now a slave to that

Andrew Wilsonuniversity. >> They are. Okay, so either you don't understand slavery or you don't understand the higher education system. >> me what the distinction is between that and indentured servitude which have the exact same qualifiers. Well, the difference is first of all we're in a much different society in which

Andrew Wilsoneducation Give me the argument of the principle. The principle of indentured servitude which is voluntarily taking out a huge sum of money and then paying it back through work right? And you have to pay

Andrew Wilsonthat money back or else there's serious [ __ ] penalties for that just like there is for student loans. In principle what is the distinction here? They're both voluntary. The principle is that

Naimaunder an indentured servitude you're working for seven years and your owner >> for a lot longer than that often with student debts. It's the concept of ownership. You are not owned by a company. No no no. It wasn't chattel

Andrew Wilsonslavery. You weren't owned the same way. No, but you were responsible to pay that debt off via the agreement of the contract just like you are with one of these huge student loans for useless debt. Look, I understand your point

Naimabut it's not slavery. It's not just that debt. Then you should have agreed that indentured servitude is slavery because it meets the same qualifiers. >> It does not meet the same qualifiers. >> Because the owner of the indentured

Naimaservant and I'm going to use owner in this scenario >> They're not owned the same way as you owned the chattel slavery. Yes, but during indentured servitude they would often push the goal posts and be like oh you owe me more and more and more money.

Andrew Wilson>> it same way with compound interest rates from student loans. >> understand the interest rate. It's up front. >> They understood the interest rate cuz it was up front. That's why they signed contracts. Yes, they had to adhere to the contracts the same way.

Andrew Wilson>> Half of them weren't even literate. Like that's completely different. >> and just because people are doing things which are illegal it was within the confines of the law. They had to adhere to the contract. These were supposed to be free white men. That's different than

Andrew Wilsonchattel slavery. That's why they had certain things afforded to them Okay. >> that were not afforded to chattel slaves. And my argument is >> I guess you defeated your own purpose. >> Yeah, you've made >> So you've argued against indentured

Andrew Wilsonservitude being slavery and >> No, I'm arguing like you are that it was slavery You're conflating two different things. the same thing. It's a form of economic slavery along with the

Andrew Wilsonpropaganda which is trying to push women for useless degrees especially and giving them loans which they then get penalties on and they do get penalties. >> So what is your solution Andrew? To what?

Andrew WilsonTo eliminating the slavery problem. >> need to have a solution. We just need to agree that this is a form of economic slavery. That's it. >> believe it's a form of economic slavery because it's a choice. >> Then neither was indentured servitude. >> Okay, sure. So indentured servants weren't slaves? Fine. Okay.

Naima>> [laughter] >> I'm willing to if you as long as you bite that bullet. Next prompt? Yeah, next prompt. That I guess that's why they called them indentured servants and not indentured slaves. All right. So you don't wait. So >> [laughter] >> Go ahead. We're going to the next one. I'm done. I'm

Naima>> No no no go back. So are you conceding We'll go to the next Hold on Brian. All right, go ahead. I got it. So then Andrew if I'm conceding that indentured servitude isn't slavery then are you conceding that feminism isn't enslaving women?

Andrew Wilson>> I'm still going to I'm still literally going to stick by the definition that almost all sources would consider indentured servitude a form of slavery due to the crushing debt and the lack of choice that that brought. I'm going to

Andrew Wilsonargue that the same thing is the case through all forms of crushing debt which are brought by corporate or state bodies against people as forms of slavery that women did not have to deal with before feminism that feminism introduced.

NaimaTherefore I think they're less free now than they ever were because of the word debt. >> all I don't think you can blame feminism for this. Feminism is not >> forcing women to go to college. We're giving them the option of going to college and people

Andrew Wilsoncan go to college who can What if a woman could just afford to go to college and she wants to go? >> Until you can tell me the distinct criterion difference between the crushing debt of indentured servitude

Andrew Wilsonand the crushing debt of college loans which are often targeted at minorities and people have very little in the way of means to pay these loans back and

Andrew Wilsonthey give them to them based on useless degrees often right? I'm not arguing >> how you can say that not only you would have to admit that not only is that that's a bad thing but how's that not a form of economic slavery? >> Andrew I'm not arguing any of these

Naimapoints. I'm arguing that this isn't the responsibility of feminism. Feminism created an option but the concept of college debt was not made by feminism. >> Who pushed for it? Who pushed for college debt? >> to go to college and have it financed by the government?

Andrew Wilson>> no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no Yes, feminists pushed for women to go to college and take out student loans. This is the third way feminists by the

Andrew Wilsonway. Hold on we're going to the next one. my god. Who created college debt? Created it? >> Yes. Financial institutions >> Okay, so then financial institutions are the slavers, not feminists.

Andrew Wilson>> Because it's feminist who What's the prompt? That feminism did more to enslave women than to free them, right? Or to keep them or give them more rights or give them more freedoms in society. That's what

Andrew Wilsonwe're talking about. And here's the truth. >> Feminists Yeah, I can and I am. Feminists did >> Well, it's stupid. >> Well, let me make the argument and then respond to it. Feminists did absolutely

Andrew Wilsonpush for women in higher education. They pushed to have it financed by the state. And they By the way, modern feminists still push it. Modern feminists right this second are still pushing that women

Andrew Wilsongo to college and take on college debt if necessary to get a degree. That's what they push more than anything, in fact. >> What we were pushing is the right to go to college.

NaimaThe right. Do you understand that? Before feminism, women were not allowed to pursue a degree in higher education. >> to indentured servitude. >> We're not Okay, but [laughter] we didn't create Feminism didn't create the quote-unquote indentured servitude

Andrew Wilson>> They did. of the No, we didn't. >> You did. Who created college debt, Andrew? >> If there wasn't this massive If there wasn't incentive, right, for

Andrew Wilsonthese companies to create these diploma mills because And the only reason they're creating these diploma mills is because the student loan programs, which are coming out of the federal government. >> Yeah. Okay, that's what's going on. I'm

Andrew Wilsonsure you have student loans, and it sucks. Like, I'm sorry. That sucks. I It does suck. And I'm sorry >> part is I agree with you on that. >> you're being crushed under that weight, but I'm telling you right now that that was not done by the malicious

Andrew Wilsonpatriarchy. This is feminists and feminists even currently who really pushed hard that all women need to go to college. They all need to go. They all need to go. And this All these student loans and the crushing debt now, and

Andrew Wilsonwomen are responsible for so much of that debt. I would argue that that is way worse that these women now have to go work these menial [ __ ] jobs and [ __ ] like this to pay back their student loans to the [ __ ] federal government.

Andrew WilsonIt's so bad now that now you have a new wave of feminists trying to come out and just ask for free everything. They're like, "Oh, just Please, student debt forgiveness." They crushed >> go ahead. I mean, Andrew, I completely agree with you. I mean, I'm literally

Naimahaving this conversation with you right now to pay off my student debt. But my issue is that I don't think like all of these problems are real. But I don't think the blame and the onus is on feminist. I think the blame and the onus

Naimais on a capital a capitalist system that is designed to [ __ ] all of us. It's not even just women. It's men, too. Like, men also I mean, >> No. So you don't think that

Andrew Wilsonprivate college fund >> think that I don't think that private equity firms >> think that these diploma mills The diploma Listen. >> on capitalism.

Andrew Wilson>> equity firms, right, would not be financing people who are going to school for [ __ ] basket weaving, okay? Because their chance of getting paid back would be way less. It's because these loans are backed by the federal

Andrew Wilsongovernment that they're even possible because equity firms would laugh at them. So the thing is is like, look, as we look at this from the like bird's-eye view, right? You and I agree that that system is [ __ ] okay?

Andrew Wilson>> Yes, I do. >> And yes, absolutely feminists pushed for that system in a big way. And my argument essentially is simple. It's just saying, "And you know what? You can even caveat it. You can be like, you know what? Feminists did a lot of great things.

Andrew WilsonThis one wasn't it." And if you As long as you're willing to make the concession like, "Look, that sort of financial slavery is way worse than what they had pre-19th Amendment" because it is, then I think we have an accord and we

Naimacan move to the next prompt. >> I will Can I do a closing statement? And if you feel like we're done, then I'm going to be done with this one. I think the main point that I will make is that feminism was not about forcing women to

Naimago to college. But before feminism, women physically could not go to college. It was about creating equal opportunity. Because although colleges are [ __ ] with the way that they

Naimaabsolutely steal from students by proliferating college debt, Do you consider that a form of financial slavery? >> Yes, but some degrees are actually

Naimaworthwhile. Look. And women should have the right to pursue those degrees as well. >> want to point out that >> It shouldn't It's the inequality that women that feminists are fighting

Naimaagainst. But in no universe are we trying to force every single woman to go to college even if they don't want to and it doesn't make financial sense for them. No one is advocating for that. I am an avowed feminist, and I would never

Andrew Wilsonsay that to another woman. So anyway, these were the same arguments that were being used for the pushing of indentured slavery. Same exact indentured servitude. Same exact thing. Nobody's forcing you to do it. We're just making sure that people have the

Andrew Wilsonability to do it cuz they don't have enough money to get here. Hang on. Yeah. I didn't interrupt your closing. That's it. Okay. The indentured servants, they want to come here. They just can't afford it. Okay? So we can charge them whatever they want. And doesn't that really just

Andrew Wilsonmake their life better because we're giving them the option to do it? These are the same exact arguments that were made for that. Same exact thing. And so the thing is is like, look, fine. That's great that you like want this option,

Andrew Wilsonright? But that doesn't change the fact that feminism created the conditionals for this, not the patriarchy and not covert your laws. Feminism Hang on. Created the conditionals for this. And since they did and they advocated for

Andrew Wilsonit, they pushed everyone into it. They made a bunch of economic slaves out of otherwise viable women in their fertile years who could have gotten married. I mean, can I just respond to that? The thing though is that it wasn't that women weren't allowed to be indentured

Naimaservants and then only men could be indentured servants and then feminists pushed for women to be indentured servants. Like, the issue is that men [clears throat] could go to college, but women couldn't. We didn't have the

Andrew Wilsonoption. We were fighting for the option. Most men only got the option to start going to college in mass, right? Only slightly before women did. That's one. And two, let me just point this out. That if college was really about

Andrew Wilsonrewarding the best and the brightest, not everybody could go. And the the entirety of the push for this should always have been for that anyway. And what happened is feminists made a bunch of economic slaves out of women that they really didn't need to make out of

Andrew Wilsonwomen. And they still, by the way, on every mainstream network, this is what you'll see female feminists in modernity saying. "Go to college. Go to college. Go to school." Because a lot of them are paid [ __ ] shills, in fact. Okay? So yeah,

Andrew Wilsonfeminism did bring the conditionals for this. They did make economic slaves. I And here's the thing, as long as you agree And here Here's maybe the olive branch that we can get. Fine, you don't want to call it slavery, economic slavery, don't

Andrew Wilsoncall it economic slavery. I think that in any other conditional though, as an avowed socialist like you would use that exact language, economic slavery. You just don't want to blame it on feminism. You want to blame it on capitalism. But it's like

Andrew Wilson>> I agree with you that the system is But even if I make Can we have an olive branch? Can we have an olive branch then that that forms of of bad capitalism mixed with bad feminist ideology created the

Naimaconditionals for this? Maybe that's the olive branch. >> it's forms of bad capitalism that created the conditionals for this that everyone experiences. And I also feel like you're kind of downplaying what men have to deal with as well. I mean, men

Andrew Wilsonare in the same freaking boat. No. >> Like, no? Well, not really. Men are moving towards the trades. They understand that there that there's a massive scamery going on with college. They're moving into trades. And they don't have to spend In fact, they get

Andrew Wilsonpaid. Most of the time when you're training Most of the time when you're training for training for a trade, you get paid a high amount of money. Most trade schools that you go to, you know, maybe go for 6-8 weeks and then you're signed as an

Andrew Wilsonapprentice. Or sometimes you just start as an apprentice and you work for 4 years and you're getting paid the entire time. >> Yeah. That seems like the opposite of economic slavery. This seems like it is. And I think that feminists created the

Naimaconditionals, and I'll leave it there. >> Feminists also gave women access to go to trade school as well. Like, all forms of higher education feminists fought for the right to women to attend to. And then we can choose among them. >> It was higher education, not Women weren't fighting to get into trade

Naimaschools. >> man, don't have to be >> fighting to go weld, okay? >> It's the equality of opportunity. not understand what the equality of opportunity is? >> a break. That wasn't what it was about. It was about a bunch of industrialists

Naimahornswoggling you into becoming second-class citizens because you became economic cogs. Okay. Here's Here's I'll just close this out. I think we can agree that the college education system needs some severe reformation. And I think that we

Naimacan agree that it's a [ __ ] a lot of Americans, both men and women. Where I disagree is that I don't think that feminism is the cause of this, I guess,

Naimauniversal fuckage. Instead, it literally created the ability for women to choose this. And it's not forcing it on women. If they are going to go into too much debt and it's not economically feasible

Naimato go to college as a feminist, I'm telling you right now, don't do it. If it's not worth it, then don't. >> Yeah, that's great. But that's like counterintuitive to what your whole movement said for the last, you know, 60 years. >> think you understand my movement,

Brian AtlasAndrew. I think I'm the only one at the table who does. I would disagree. We have three prompt options. Problems with democracy, women just as violent as men, if not more,

Naimaand force doctrine, the descriptor for Earth. >> Yeah, do you want to do force doctrine? Cuz we never got to that. Oh, yeah, that's true. We didn't Honestly, I kind of wanted to do problems with democracy. Yeah, we can do that, too. Problems with democracy is fine.

Andrew Wilson>> Yeah, you want to start with problems with democracy and then move on to What was the other one? I like women are more violent, too. Do you have a preference? >> Let's do problems with democracy. Okay, cool. And then force doctrine and then time permitting. >> Well, I don't think we're going to have

Naimatime after this one. >> Force doctrine is going to be really long is what I'm saying. Is what I'm thinking. Well, then let's do force doctrine so we can get out of the way. >> Let's do force doctrine, then. >> All right, then. So Andrew, it's your your claim if you want to

Andrew Wilson>> Yeah, so force doctrine is a descriptor which just describes that men gain or women gain the rights from men. That's the descriptor. Um, okay, so why do women gain their right? Do you want to define force

Naimadoctrine and why >> did. No, you didn't. What am I leaving out of my own definition? Well, why do women like because Why do they have to appeal to them? >> Yes, women gain their rights from men.

Andrew Wilson>> have a monopoly on force and since they have a monopoly on force, uh, women always have to appeal to them. Example, if women right this second who were in some Middle Eastern nation, right, wanted their rights from the men and the

Andrew Wilsonmen did not want to give them any rights, can you demonstrate for me a single shred of recourse that they could have except appealing to other men? Or the men that that are not giving them rights. I mean, well, they could invent a bomb that would just like destroy everyone.

Andrew Wilson>> Have you Can you give me a single historic example of women ever successfully using physical force to overthrow when they're considered second-class citizens by the men? No,

Naimabut I honestly believe physical force is immoral. I guess my issue with force doctrine is like so what? What is your point? Like sure, that's your definition, but why is this

Andrew Wilson>> point is is that it's very clear again that men are very benevolent. That's it? Because Yeah, because >> a pat on the back? >> No, I want I want I would like to see gratitude in the world for men because

Andrew Wilsonit is indeed the case that they have the monopoly on force and at any time according to their own preferences could just enslave all women. And you know, it's really funny cuz it's like So wait, we I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on.

Andrew WilsonImagine saying like You think that women should thank you for deciding not to enslave us. Uh, I mean, the the idea here is simple.

Andrew WilsonThe idea is that if it is the case that you have people who are drastically weaker one people group other than another people group, okay? And they can They can do anything they want to you whenever they want and half

Andrew Wilsonthe world demonstrates that that's the case. At least in this half of the world, we don't do that. And because we don't do that, women take for granted that the men here are so benevolent that they could take what they wanted and

Andrew Wilsonthey don't. And it's like, yeah, it's not just about a pat on the back. It's about actually thanking them for every breath of every day because ultimately they could do this and you can't refute that they can.

NaimaWell, do you believe that there is a moral obligation? Like what's your >> I don't believe that you can justify moral obligation just saying. >> to ask you. Do you think that there is a moral justification >> Well, no, I Well, it should be. I would like to

Naima>> should it should be an >> I would like to hear your prescriptive I would like to hear your prescriptive >> a prescriptive claim. It's a descriptive claim. >> and I want it to be prescriptive. I just want to hear what is your moral justification for why you believe that

Naimadoing the bare minimum is somehow some great thing. Like what's your moral >> mean gratitude? No, not not your moral justification for gratitude. I guess what I'm saying is so under your analysis

Naima>> Yeah. every man at any point could just overpower a woman and force his will on her, right? And they choose not to do it. >> not to do it. >> So what if they did choose to do it? Do

Andrew Wilsonyou have a moral justification for why that would be okay? >> but I believe that only my view um, gives a moral justification and I believe that your view does not. So I'll

Andrew Wilsongive you mine. Okay, so my moral justification is that I make an appeal and I ground my epistemology and ontology in Jesus Christ. And I think that you can't get to knowledge philosophically without having

Andrew Wilsongrounding. So the thing is is like that's how I would ground my morals for you ought not do that. However, the problem that you have is that secular

Andrew Wilsonstates are are rising up everywhere. And the appeal to Jesus Christ is not rising up. And so if it's the case that secularism cannot make an appeal for why men ought not do this outside of

Andrew Wilsonpreference, then aren't you just laid bare by men's preference? Like when it when it whenever they decide that they prefer to do this, right? What moral thing can you appeal to other than your own preferences that they don't?

Naima>> Wait, so you exclusively believe that something is moral or immoral based on whether or not God told you it was moral or not. >> Christian ethics, divine command, and church history, apostolic succession,

Andrew Wilsonthe grounding of understanding the transcendentals which are required to be grounded in God for them to even exist. Okay, but the wisdom of God has to be translated through man. So >> So then your morality isn't based on

Andrew WilsonGod. It's based on somebody else's interpretation of God's will. >> The So then if all it does is get us back to preferences, right? I'm fine with that, too. >> So you're back to this preference-based sense of morality. >> So if that's the case

Andrew Wilson>> justifying slavery. Oh, wait. So can I just Yes, your morality justifies slavery. I agree. >> [laughter] >> Yes. No, but Andrew, you're the one who believes in preference-based morality. You have to back up >> No, I don't. >> Then give me the grounding where it's

Andrew Wilsonnot preference-based. >> I believe that morality is objective. You don't. >> Yes, I do. I've said it multiple times. >> means exist absent minds. >> Yes. So believe that morality

Andrew Wilson>> does it exist absent minds? >> Well, it's not a physical concept. >> all human beings die tomorrow, is there is there things that are still moral or immoral? Yeah. How is that possible? >> other life on Earth, Andrew.

NaimaSo if a lion eats a [ __ ] rabbit, is it moral? Well, no. I mean, yeah, sorry. It is? It's a form of sustenance. I mean, we eat chicken every day like >> Wait a Wait a Wait a second. So

Andrew Wilson>> So you don't believe that there are any objective >> on. I'm making sure I got this right. If it's the case that all human beings on planet Earth are dead, there's no more minds. There is still object Hang

Andrew Wilsonon. There is still morality? But there are still minds. >> I Yeah, I know. I know. Yeah, that's No, no, no, no, no. >> Oh, okay. So So how is morality exist then? Is it monkey morality? >> [laughter]

Andrew Wilson>> I mean, yeah, kind of. So there's Is there objective human morality? >> that there is objective human morality. Okay, so how How does it exist absent mind? You got to get her to answer, dude. She's just going to pivot. >> Because there's other animals on Earth.

Andrew WilsonYou got to answer this question. Listen, you have to answer this. All human minds are gone. All of them. Everyone. There was a plague and every human died,

Andrew Wilsonright? What would then make a thing objectively moral or immoral, meaning there's no more minds and it exists somewhere as being moral or immoral absent an interpreter.

Naima>> Yeah, I mean, the concept of objective morality would still exist. >> How if there's no minds? Then who could come up with the concept? It already exists. >> How could it exist without you coming up with it?

Naima>> alive. We're here right now. So just because we died tomorrow doesn't mean what happened hasn't already happened. >> If you're all dead, if everyone's dead, how can concepts exist?

Naima>> Okay, Andrew, I'll humor you. If every if no humans never existed, then human morality would not exist, either. >> No, so if humans no longer exist, then human morality also no longer exists. Well, it

Naimawas already invented. It already exists. So yes, we would be gone like we wouldn't be there to record it, but it still exists. It's a concept. >> Where does it exist? A concept >> is immortal. Is immortal. How did No, concepts are not immortal.

Naima>> wrote them down, so there. It's there. >> Who's there to read them? Nobody. So it doesn't So then how do they exist? matter, but it still exists. No, it doesn't. Where? Where Where could it possibly exist? >> In a book. Have you seen one? A book

Naimathat nobody can read? Yes, so it doesn't matter, but but it still exists. >> How do you How does a concept >> Andrew, there's a difference between existence and whether or not an important >> I would agree a book would exist and a book would have words on it.

Naima>> somebody wrote down all of the objective moral principles that we have learned through humanity and basic human instinct and human experience, it would still exist. No,

Naimajust a book would exist, not the concept. The concept is in the book. There's words in books. That's why we read them. >> Doesn't Doesn't a book require a mind to interpret it? Sure, so it wouldn't

Naimamatter, but it still exists. Only the book exists. Yes, and the book has the concept in it. >> [laughter] >> Oh my god.

NaimaThere is a recorded version of this concept. So it's continues to exist, but there is no one there to observe it. So then you have a >> that? Nope, not at all. How does a

Naimaconcept exist if somebody's not around to observe it? >> falls, it exists because it was created and documented, right? And now humans no longer exist, but the concept is still

Naimathere. Just like the diary of Anne Frank still exists even though she doesn't, right? The concepts that she wrote in that book are still there even though she isn't. That's why we [ __ ] write things down.

Andrew Wilson>> require interpreters? Yes, so it wouldn't matter at that point, but it still exists. >> So Hang on. A book exists. A concept does not exist because it requires a mind and an interpreter. The concept does exist. It just doesn't matter.

Andrew Wilson>> No. Yes. >> No. Human morality would still exist, but if there's no humans, then it doesn't matter. >> Help me out here. Let us pretend for a moment that you came across a book full of alien writings that had all of their

Naimamorals in it. Sure. And you couldn't read the book. Okay. How could the And all these aliens were dead. Okay. How could the concept now exist? Well, the concept is still there and it still exists, but the humans don't. I mean, or

Naimathe aliens don't. Andrew, do you not understand when something can be objective without being physical? Like something can exist if it didn't have a physical form. Dude, we got to put you in like a biology class or something. How do you not get this?

Andrew WilsonLike why are we going around in circles about this? It's kind of a basic concept. >> and I'm basically trying to figure this out. >> basically struggling real hard. >> That's true. I am totally struggling with this because

Andrew Wilson>> something can exist even after It doesn't matter. It's not important anymore because humans aren't there, but it still happened and it still exists. >> So, do you think that if I write a

Andrew Wilsonconcept down on a piece of paper like do not kill all men named Chuck. Okay. All men named Chuck, right?

Andrew WilsonAnd I die. Okay. Okay? And there's nobody around. Mhm. Is it now objectively true that it is immoral to

Naimanot kill Chuck? Well, you don't get to decide objective morality as an individual. >> does? It's a collective. So, the collective gets to decide. >> Yes. I mean, so you think that it should

Naimabe sky daddy and I think it should be based on the will the collective will. It's an object It's object morality on the basis of the experiences of the collective. >> Okay, so if >> think that there is an objective good

Andrew Wilsonand bad. >> if I write So, if I write now If I write now >> believe that collective will The whole of the law shall be you do not kill Chuck and the majority of people agree

Andrew Wilsonwith me before I die and we all die, is that now what's objectively moral? What the [ __ ] are you talking about? Go back. >> If most people agree with the my only

Andrew Wilsoncommandment of do not kill Chuck and almost everybody agrees with me and we all die, but I have left behind this little pamphlet that says do not kill Chuck and it's now written down.

NaimaIs that objectively moral now? Well, it doesn't matter cuz we're all dead. So, sure, maybe it is, but it doesn't matter. That's what I'm saying. It can still exist, but it doesn't matter. This is literally the point.

Naima>> So, is that Is that objectively moral or not? What the [ __ ] We're not talking about whether or not that is objectively moral. We're talking about whether or not something can exist after the human race dies. >> No, we weren't. >> Yeah, that was what you were not

Andrew Wilsonunderstanding. >> objective versus subjective morality. The idea here is very simple, right? You keep on claiming that I I believe that morality is based on preferences, but I keep demonstrating over and over again

Naimaso do you and you want I don't know why you won't concede the point. You look ridiculous. >> I don't look ridiculous. I'm not the one who just justified slavery based on your own words. >> understand how bad this is going to be. I'm telling you don't even understand

Previous 1 2 3 4 Next