You're listening to, atheistically speaking. Oh, Hey everyone. Welcome to episode 37 of atheistically speaking. I'm your host

Thomas Smith. Thanks for listening. So last week was great. We had Massimo

Piliuchi and I really enjoyed that.

This week we're changing pace a little bit with a debate with Blake Junta, who was on dogma debate recently.

It's very, very interesting, looking forward to that. And my patrons will know,

the premium content subscribers, that I wrote a bit about that and why I thought that debate

wasn't exactly fruitful, but we'll get to that later.

In the meantime let's have some commentary. So we've been talking a lot about scientism lately. On one hand, we've had Neil degrass Tyson openly disparaging philosophy calling it dead and a waste of time and such.

And then of course I had Massmo Peliuchi last week to talk about the other side of the argument,

how important philosophy still is and what it has contributed to the world.

As an aside, I so far haven't gotten any comments on what I thought was a pretty decent observation

about Piliuchi's analysis of the moral landscape. I feel pretty strongly

that he's misrepresenting Harris's views on a few things. I just want to

check in with you guys and see if did anyone find my points compelling or did you you did and you didn't

say anything or you didn't and you felt you didn't want to comment I don't know I'm

just wondering I curious I didn't get a single comment regarding what I thought I think that

Pilouchi just didn't look deeply enough and or he had his sort of made up his mind

already maybe for just five reasons about Harris. And I think he ignored

a little bit of nuance about the things I pointed out last week, basically. So let me know.

I don't know. let me know what you

thought about that who knows maybe no one made it that far into Thursday's

episode no one's everyone turned it off after a pilliogy left anyway beyond the

...