Archive this series
Question 2: [39:15] – “While debating the virtues of Free Speech, I've stumbled into the counter argument ‘freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences’ strawman argument rather than my opponent offering an actual rebuttal implying that if you say something they don't like they will destroy you with it. For me, this is a fallacy argument because the consequences of not exercising free speech have much greater ramifications to society as a whole by suppressing the free exchange of ideas that doesn't encourage meaningful debate and thus it tries to steer the argument into self-censorship. What would be a good counter argument to mob rule through language policing where ‘consequences’ are weaponized to silence the free debate of ideas?”
Question 3: [1:13:29] – “I'm a young guy in my twenties and am currently developing a real estate project in South America. It's my first development and has been a hell of a ride thus far but now we're entering a phase of the project where I find myself having to push my limits even more than before. The time has come for a serious marketing and sales push and even though I enjoy it overall, I think I might be getting in my own way. I'm a mellow, polite, Canadian so the pushy salesman thing doesn't come naturally to me. So far, we've been able to employ a more relaxed and organic approach but it's crunch time and I think I have to grow beyond my comfort zone again. As an experienced entrepreneur, how did you get results in this area without becoming pushy or dishonest? I value my credibility and reputation as an honest and genuine person so I would hate to become "that guy" that's probably just trying to sell you something.”
Question 4: [1:49:55] – “If absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, then how can the claim that 'life which is not the result of evolution does not exist.' be maintained? If we define self-contradiction as 'A proposition which cannot be true without simultaneously being false', and I grant that life which is not the result of evolution does not exist, then how does it follow from this that such life is therefore a self-contradiction? 'X and not x' does not necessarily follow from 'X does not exist'.”
Question 5: [2:55:53] – “To define vanity as I see it is: self-aggrandizement and denial of ‘other’. I believe virtually everything deficient about education can be reduced to female vanity including: removal of competition, expansion of unions, standardized testing, extra credit, attendance requirements, busy work, etc. I also believe that women are responsible for dress codes and other ‘restrictions’ that all serve to either deny the existence of ‘other’ (so as to remove threats to their self-aggrandizement) or to self-aggrandize. Is female vanity in part to blame for the underwhelming performance of western schools? If yes, which elements have contributed to this shift in performance and focus?”
Your support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
900 episodes available. A new episode about every 22 hours averaging 69 mins duration .