Someone Needs to Humble Matt Dillahunty

[Monster Energy]

What’s disappointing isn’t that Matt has limits. Everyone does. It’s that those limits are rarely acknowledged. Confidence fills the space where humility could be. Sharpness replaces openness. And sometimes, condescension replaces understanding.

Which is why it’s tempting to imagine a real conversation, not a debate, between Matt Dillahunty and Leo Gura.

Not about God. Not about religion. But about epistemology itself. About whether scientific materialism is a method or a metaphysics. About whether skepticism can quietly turn into dogma. About whether consciousness is something to be explained away or something explanation already presupposes.

Matt would bring rigor. Leo would bring discomfort. And if either of them were willing to genuinely slow down, the result could be far more interesting than another victory lap over bad arguments.

Until then, Matt remains what he’s always been. Exceptionally good at telling us what not to believe, and far less curious about why his own worldview feels so unquestionably right.

And maybe that’s the final irony. The man who built a career on skepticism might benefit most from turning it inward.

 

[Recursoinominado]

You will never convince a blind man that colors exist.

He needs a mystical experience, not a logical argument. 

[Joseph Maynor]

39 minutes ago, Recursoinominado said:

You will never convince a blind man that colors exist.

He needs a mystical experience, not a logical argument. 

Sort of true.  But you can also cause someone to consider something new, to the extent that it is tolerated within a system.

[Monster Energy]

6 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

You will never convince a blind man that colors exist.

He needs a mystical experience, not a logical argument. 

The metaphor sneaks in a hierarchy too easily.

Blindness suggests a defect, and disagreement isn’t one.

The problem isn’t that some people lack experiences. It’s that experiences don’t come with built-in authority.

Mystical insight can illuminate, but it can also mislead.

What’s interesting isn’t convincing anyone that “colors exist,”

but asking why we assume vision is the only valid way of knowing in the first place.

 

[Hojo]

@Monster EnergyPlease explain in your own words what this means. Because it just seems like a garble or words. I read it 15 times and I can't understand what it means.

It was clearly a metaphor that ai didnt pick up on.

Edited 3 hours ago by Hojo