Jayz_Cotr Makes Noah Rage Quit and Run transcript

The Germans. Hello. Mama. Mama. >> Technically, the Mormons helped most with the Holocaust. That's interesting. I didn't know anything about that. I'd have to look at that. Piercing was great on you. I appreciate it. You have a computer right now with all resources available to you. I have Google. Yeah. >> Hello. >> Hello. How's it going? >> Hey, I need your name, age, and pronouns. >> Uh my name. Can I just go with like my on my name?

I just say like Jay-Z or do I have to actually give >> Yeah, >> okay. Jay-Z is at age22 or KM. >> Gotcha. What do you want to talk about Jay-Z? >> Yeah, I wanted to know about um the progqia. I wanted to know what the reasoning for that would be. >> Yeah, I think there's no harm in letting people love who they want to love and I think that gender affirming care is necessary medical care. >> What's harm to you? Uh, probably like a a negative experience or some kind of deprivation or something like that.

But like we say harm. >> How do I know? What do you mean how do I know? >> Yeah. How do you know what negative how do you know what negative experience is? >> How do I know what a negative experience is? Something that like causes some kind of like uh displeasure or something like that. I mean it's entirely subjective. That's true. >> Oh, okay. Well, I mean, if it is entirely subjective, are how would how would you know?

Like if if I explained to you my scenario, how would you know that my scenario is um uh negative? >> Your scenario? What scenario? What do you mean? >> No, like just like for anything, like if I told you Oh, sorry, my headphones glitched out. Like if I told you a school I went to and the way that they were treating me at the school or something, how would you know if it was a negative scenario? What things would you look out for? >> Based on the way you feel? >> Based on how I feel? >> Yeah.

That's how you know it's N. So to be to be clear doing an action. >> Yeah. >> If if someone punches you in the face and like you are hurting, then I would say yeah, they probably harmed you. If someone punches you in the face and you're like more daddy, then I would say you're probably not being harmed, right? >> Well, yeah. So if I'm doing an action and I don't feel pain, then it's not harmful. >> Not necessarily. It's a negative experience.

Just simplicator. Just pain as an example. Oh yeah, but you're saying pain. Okay. So, but you're saying pain is what brings negative experience and that's how you define it. So, basically, >> example. >> Okay. Well, then okay. To be clear then, let me let me ask like for example, if it was the case that your friend Oh, I'm sorry. If it was the case that your friend wanted to like I don't want to get your wife taken down, take himself off of this earth, right?

Can you tell me what the harm in him doing that would be? >> I mean, it would probably harm me because I would experience some kind of psychological harm. Like I would be like really uh grieving and depressed. >> Yeah. But that that's enough for the for that that's enough for that situation to be bad. Your reaction to the harm. >> I I didn't say harm just in every case is bad. I would just say that harm is typically a negative experience and typically bad.

But like there are sometimes where harm is necessary. >> Like for example, if I'm giving somebody a vaccine >> or something like that and I I have to inject them, they might be like, "Ow." But like that that's technically quote unquote harm, but like it's for the greater good. >> Yeah, but I'm asking how you know that this one is the greater good when you don't want your friend to take himself, right? I'm asking how you know that one's for the greater good. >> Well, suicide is never for the greater good. >> How? >> How?

Because it doesn't yield any positive results. >> Yeah, but isn't positive just based on what you think is positive? So how do you if the guy I mean you can look at it you can look at it from any perspective apart from like the person who's actively doing the action like if you look at it from like a utilitarian point of view like you're taking a sentient person off the planet if you look at it from like a uh like you could you can look at it from pretty much any framework and people would pretty universally say suicide doesn't do any good. >> Did you say from a utilitarian point of view?

Do you mean like um yielding them best yielding the best outcome in terms of happiness? Is that what you're talking about? Yeah, but I'm I'm not you really a utilitarian. I just use as another example. Like most viewpoints would say suicide is bad or like not probably something we shouldn't engage in. >> Yeah, but the reasoning here doesn't really make sense to me because if I because when I asked you why it is that this was >> to just establish what harm is.

Do you have a definition you want to work with? >> Okay, I do. But you made the positive claim. So just give me a sec. When I ask you why it's harmful, >> you just ask me how I define it, but I'm not like hard set on my definition. >> Okay, just just get Yeah. Okay. Just give me a sec though. I'm explaining the problem here and why I don't really understand too well. When I ask you why this is harmful to do, you're you're literally just And I don't want to straw men you, so correct me if I'm wrong about this.

You're just saying, well, because I would react terribly. You could make that argument for anything. So like, what makes this one unique? Is it What is it about it? >> Yeah. Harm to me is a negative experience. That's that's just it. There there's no uniqueness to it. Yeah, but I'm saying what? So, is it just the case that if somebody feels strongly about you doing something that actually makes it bad? >> If you cause somebody a negative experience, you are harming them in some way. >> Yeah, but Okay, but you said it was bad to do the thing, though.

So, I'm saying >> if you have a different >> If you have a different definition, that's fine. I'm I'm not married. >> I don't have to have one. I'm talking about your worldview. You just said that because it gives you a strong reaction. >> I don't This is like something I don't care about. Like, what's the relevance? Who cares? >> Okay, you saying you don't care is not really an argument. I'm sorry. That's kind of just >> deflected.

I'm I'm not arguing with you over what harm is. You said you wanted I'm literally trying to understand the view and you're just saying, "Well, what's your definition?" >> I don't know what else I can give you that would help you understand it. >> Okay, sure. Just explain this to me. If it is the case that you having a strong reaction is what makes it bad, couldn't that just be applied to morally bad? >> Okay, what makes it bad?

Okay, what makes it bad? Okay. What makes it bad? >> I don't think that I don't think harm is necessarily bad. >> No, not harm. I'm saying taking yourself off the census. What makes that inherently bad? >> Oh, I I don't know. That would I'm pretty agnostic on like whether it's bad or good. Like just simplicator. I would say most viewpoints see it as bad, but I don't really know or care. >> Wait, but if you don't know, then why did you say that it's always bad then? >> It's I said it's typically always bad from most people's viewpoints. >> Okay, maybe I didn't hear you say typically.

I could have sworn >> yourself is like That's not relevant to any of the topics. It's not really I'm >> Well, it's a little bit relevant because I asked you why you were pro-LGBTQIA and you said because it doesn't cause harm. Am I wrong? I don't want to strong you. >> Uh, sure. Do you think being makes you suicidal? >> Well, no, it's it doesn't have to just be that. It's that you said it doesn't cause harm. So, me asking what harm is to you is actually perfectly in line.

Especially if what your definition of harm is is not actually >> it doesn't it doesn't cause any meaningful harm to anybody. It's >> a new thing. What's meaningful harm? >> Yeah. Like how I explained that some harm is necessary. Like if you get a vaccine or whatever, like if someone has like a completely out-ofpocket reaction, you're still technically harming them. But like I I don't think that like for example, let's say I order a let's say I go to a coffee shop and I order a black coffee medium and somebody behind me has like trauma from their dad beating them over the head with a like a metal rod and saying BLACK COFFEE MEDIUM BLACK COFFEE MEDIUM and that triggers them and they flick the [ __ ] out.

Like I didn't do anything wrong by ordering the black coffee. >> Yeah. Right. So I'm glad we can agree that harm does not always equal bad. But when I ask you why it was good, you said it would still be harming them. It just wouldn't be just >> No, no, no. I get what you're saying. I actually do get that. That Yeah, that makes sense. So harm is not always bad. Okay, that makes sense. But when I asked you why it was good, you said it doesn't cause harm.

So what would be the different >> harm? >> Yeah. So what would be the differentiator here? >> To be to be clear, I don't think that being LGBTQ is good or bad. I think it's amoral. >> Then why are you pro? >> Because I think that they deserve the same rights as everybody else. They're they're currently discriminated against. >> Yeah, but okay. If if you were just saying that they deserve rights, which that's a whole new can.

I don't know how you could ever justify rights if you don't actually think something could be moral. Well, actually, you know what? Could you even explain that to me? How could you even >> I believe things can be moral. I just don't think being gay is a moral proposition. >> Yeah, but you said you're pro. You said you're pro, right? And then you said that they deserve >> pro means that I support people who are LGBTQ and I believe that they are who they say they are and they should have the same rights as you or I.

There are people who believe the opposite, which means I'm pro and they would be anti. >> Yeah, but you said, see how you just said should. Uh, where how are you making That's a moral claim right there, isn't it? >> Why should they have the same rights that you or I do? >> Well, no. Yes, I'm asking. But you said should. Isn't that a moral claim? So now you have to justify morals. >> Yeah, I believe in morals. >> Oh, you do?

Okay. So, >> I said I didn't. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. So, you do believe. Would you tell me why it is that someone should >> do you have a severe tracking error? >> No, I've just talked to a lot of atheists that believe a lot of different things. So to be clear, you said that there is a moral. >> I never said that morals don't exist. >> Oh, you are a moral objectivist. And based on what? >> So that way I'm clear. What? Based on what? >> Reason. >> Based on reason. >> Yes. >> How isn't Isn't that also subjective? >> No.

How is reason not? Okay, please explain. >> Because you can reach objective conclusions through reason. >> You can reach objective conclusion through reason. Yeah, but when you're saying you Okay, but you can't you know who David Hume is, right? >> I'm aware of him existing. >> Yeah. So he said that you can't get an aught from an is. So basically just because you get there's a true statement does not mean you can derive moral.

Right. So how what do you mean? How is that deriving morality off? get to objective statements through reason? Yes or no? >> No. You can you can get to objective statements, but what you can't Yeah, you can. What you can't do is derive morality. What you can't do is I just I just answered it. You can't derive morality. >> Cool. Are you aware Gorth? >> What >> do you know who Alan Gorth is? >> No, I've never heard of him. >> He's a philosopher.

He has a book uh on morality and reason. >> Mhm. uh and he has an argument that establishes some level of objective morality. Uh and it doesn't come from is uh it's very simple. Uh the the concise version like the cliffnotes of it, I hope I don't butcher it, is just every agent necessarily wants to be successful in their actions. Just that's just true by definition. >> You and I are agents. um freedom, some level of freedom and well-being are the general necessary conditions for success in your actions.

Therefore, every agent must claim rights to freedom and well-being. Uh there's no relevant distinction between you or me. So, I it would be irrational for me to deny you those rights. It'd be a contradiction. I'd be affirming that agents deserve some level of freedom, well-being, and they also don't. >> Yeah. Okay. That that actually didn't make sense. So, let me do it in premise form so that way I don't stamman you.

Um, could you go ahead and explain bit by bit? Yeah, go ahead and explain the exact arguments. >> Yeah. Okay. Go ahead. Yeah. Cuz I don't want to st you. >> We'll go we'll go premise by premise. >> Okay. >> All agents necessarily want to be successful in their actions. Agree. >> I'll just concede for it. Sure. >> Well, do you agree or not agree? Because that's what agency >> I don't actually have to agree. You can concede for the purpose of a debate, but go ahead.

Concede. I concede that. >> Freedom and well-being are generally the necessary conditions for successful agency. >> Sure, I'll concede that. >> Every agent must claim rights to freedom and well-being. >> Well, could you elaborate a little bit more than that? Since every agent necessarily wants to be successful, for them to be successful, they have to claim rights to freedom and well-being. >> Well, when you say they have to, are you saying it's necessary that they have to?

Like, or are you saying that they should? Okay. Well, if you're just saying that they have to in order to get to success. Yeah, I would agree. >> Yeah. As the justifying reason for the agent's rights claim is the fact she's an agent. Can someone enslave you? So, tomorrow, can I enslave you? >> What do you mean legally or like what? >> No, I walk up to you and I make you my slave. What's What's the problem with that? >> No, you have a duty to not do that.

That doesn't mean I have an entitlement to have it not be done to me. You have a duty to not do that. >> I asked you I asked you a direct question. >> I just What is the problem with me making you a slave? >> Uh from my worldview, >> I'm talking about I'm talking about just in general. Why can't I make you a slave? >> Well, because of legal legality. That's why you can't >> morally. >> Okay, then. So, you are asking about my worldview for morals. >> I'm talking about morals.

Why can't I make you sl You are asking for my So in my worldview, you would have a duty to not do that to somebody. That's why you would have a duty. >> Why can't I make you a slave is the question I asked you? >> What do you mean? Why? I'm literally telling you why. It would be it would be immoral for you to duty. >> Uh it would be grounded in God. >> Which god? >> Well, why does that matter? You're literally just moving the topic.

Why does that matter? Actually, tell me why it matters. >> God. >> Why does it matter? Tell me why it matters. >> You're going to answer which god are you going to leave is what's going to happen. So, you're just going to kick me and run cuz you can't handle arguments. >> You You are refusing to engage with an argument. You You affirmed all the premises but not the conclusion. You've conceded several times. >> I'm asking you which God you believe in. >> You're going to give me the God you believe in. >> So, you're going to pivot.

I'll tell you. >> Which God do you believe in? >> It's the Christian God. Keep pivoting. Keep pivoting. >> The Christian God. Awesome. So, you affirm slavery. >> Keep pivoting. Are you going to pivot or answer the problem now? Now that I answered yours, are you going to answer or not? Well, I specifically I'm telling you my reasoning that people can't be slaves and you said in my world view I >> it does follow. >> No, because you just said people >> in your world view in your worldview slavery is permissible. >> So you're just pivoting because you can't handle your own worldview then that's literally what you're doing. >> So we can talk about my worldview if you want to but if I asked you what like what would ground the reason that I can't make you a slave because for me reason is uh enough.

Um, but for you, you can't seem to track this very basic argument that hasn't been rejected by any any major philosopher, by the way. >> Um, >> appeal to authority. >> Anyways, that doesn't really matter though. What we're talking about authority. >> So, your God permits slavery. So, we're I just wanted to be clear on that. >> You're I just wanted to be clear on that. So, again, which premise do you reject? >> Pivot.

Okay. I want you to actually answer my question because you always run. >> Hold on. You you said I'm pivoting from my argument and now you don't now you want to ask me a different question. Which which premise of my argument do you reject? >> The conclusion the conclusion is you can't reject the con conclusion if all the premises you can't reject the conclusion in an argument. Are you serious? >> You can't reject the >> You can't reject the conclusion if all the premises are true. >> Oh, and I'll be right back. >> I'll give him two minutes max.

What a complete [ __ ] bumbling [ __ ] Holy [ __ ] The conclusion follows from the premises and he affirms all of the premises, but the conclusion can't be right. He's going to AI this now. Yeah, he's going on chat GPT as we speak to try to find a defeater for this. Premise one, if the sun is out, the sky is blue. Premise two, the sun is out. Conclusion, the sky is blue. Well, the sun is if the sun is out, the sky is blue and the sky and the sun is out.

But I reject the conclusion that the sky is blue. You got to be better faith man. Jamal, if you think I'm the bad faith person in this conversation, you you need a psyche vow. Genuinely, you need to be hospitalized and institutionalized. Jay-Z, you've got one minute left. I bet this is his run tactic because there's plenty of like uh people who just do tactics to run from arguments. This is probably one of them. He he realizes that he's getting cooked super hard.

Uh, and uh, so he just decides I'm going to go away for a little bit and then come back and then say I then say I won. Atheist and pro-choice. What? Those things aren't contradictory. What are we talking about? Bro doesn't do that. He has strict parents. How old is this [ __ ] guy? Jay-Z, tell your mom that you rejected all of the all of the premises or you accept >> No, there was something going on outside. Apparently, some something happened with the dog.

I don't Something happened outside of the neighbors. Uh, anyways, do you think that you have to accept the conclusion if it's unound? Do you actually think that >> it's not unound? Which premise do you And so stop saying I have to accept it just because you reject which >> you don't have to only reject. Oh my god, bro. Open Google. A sound. >> Open Google. Open Google. >> Stop talking. Stop talking. Stop talking. Stop talking.

Stop talking. >> What do you think a sound argument is? >> Yeah, you're literally just running. >> Yeah. >> Anybody who thinks Just because all the premises >> just because all the premises are true doesn't mean that you have to accept the conclusion if >> I want to make that clear to the audience. >> All right, we're good. So, I can talk now. >> You never let me talk, but go ahead. I'll be nicer. >> So, you you finished a full statement and then I went to respond to it. >> You cut me and muted me 50.

So, here's what's going to happen. I'm going to explain to you something very simple, and you're going to listen. One of the premises you accepted when you said, "Just because I accept all the premises doesn't mean I accept the conclusion is that every agent must claim rights to freedom and well-being." Do you agree with this? Yes or no? >> I'll conceded for the purpose of debate. Yeah. >> Okay. So if every agent necessarily has to claim the rights to freedom and well-being, what is the relevant distinction between two different agents? >> I don't know.

Tell me what is the relevant distinction between two? >> I'm asking you. >> I just answered. I said I don't know. Tell me what is the one. >> Oh, how interesting. Now, can you answer my question? So, if you claim rights to freedom and well-being for yourself, you necessarily have to claim them for every other agent. >> Oh, okay. Maybe I just missed that. Tell me why again. Maybe I just missed it. >> So, you agree that you are an agent and that you accept and you claim the rights to freedom and well-being. >> Sure.

I claim the rights of freedom and wellbeing. relevant. What's the relevant distinction between you and another? >> Hold on. Hold on for clarity. What >> What's the relevant distinction between you and another? >> Holy [ __ ] You're so bad faith, bro. I'm trying. >> I'm dog walking you through it. Not for >> you asked me to explain it. Do you want me to explain it or do you want to pause? >> You just whine. You literally just whine.

Holy [ __ ] When you say explain it or not? >> Hold on. When you say rights and freedoms, I'm asking for when you say rights and freedoms, are you directly just saying that you have the right to be free? Is that what you mean by rights and freedoms? Is that what you mean? >> It's some level of freedom that allows you to pursue your goals. >> Okay. Yes or no? When you say rights and freedoms, are you saying you have the right to freedom? >> Just simplicator.

Uh, yes. In some in some level, in some capacity. >> Does everyone have that right or are you just saying that they should? >> So, I'm explaining why they do, which is what you asked me. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> So, you claim the rights to freedom and well-being. Yes. Well, if by rights and by freedom of rights and wellbeing, meaning I have the right to freedom, I don't think I have the right to freedom. No. So, you can be a slave. >> That doesn't mean you can be you can still have duties.

You're aware of that, right? Without >> We're talking about We're talking about the freedom to pursue your goals. >> No, I I don't think everybody has that freedom cuz you can be stopped. >> I didn't ask everyone. I asked you. >> I can be stopped. Do you have the right to pursue your freedoms in some meaningful capacity? >> Okay. When you say some meaningful, do you just mean like if people allow me? Because if so, then yeah, people can allow me to. >> I'm not talking about if people allow you have the right. >> By what?

If do you mean at all? Absolute or what? >> I'm not talking about absolute freedom. >> Then by what? >> Every agent necessarily wants to be successful in their actions. Correct. >> Sure. I'll just concede it. Sure. >> Okay. So, if you take an action, you have to have the freedom to take that action, correct? >> Uh, what do you mean? Like you want to? Well, how would you have to? What do you mean? >> How can you do you believe you have the right to take actions to achieve your goals? >> Oh, no.

Nobody has. You don't. >> Okay. Then you are you are pro-slavery. >> How is that pro? You think I have You have a duty to not do that is what I'm saying. You have a duty to not enslave people. I don't know why you think that if you don't believe in rights that means you can just do whatever is >> if you think that no one has a right to if you think that no one has a right to act just simplicator you are pro-slavery. >> It means you you think people have a duty to not enslave.

That's what it means. You have a duty to not I don't know why you're being facious and just ignoring that. >> A duty means that people a duty to not enslave means that you would have the right to freedom and wellbeing. >> No. No. That's actually not that's no. an entitlement. It would be an entitlement absent duty. So, it's not the same thing. I don't know why you thought that meant the same thing. It does not. >> What do you think entitlements are? >> Entitlements are things that you're enthrone to.

Things that you're deserving of. >> So, rights, you [ __ ] idiot. >> No, absence. Holy [ __ ] [ __ ] This dude's an idiot. Duty means it's an entitlement. Absent duty. Absent. You absolute idiot. Absent duty. Are are you listening? So you think no one has the right to do literally anything that they want to do? >> No. No. Now can we finally move to your worldview? You think they do? >> Okay, then you are pros slavery. >> Do you think they do?

Yes or no? You think they do? >> You are pro-slavery. >> Do you see how you won't answer cuz you won't want to talk about his worldview. Do you think they do? >> Yes, I do. The argument that I'm giving you is literally name one. >> That's the conclusion of the argument. >> Name one, right? So Jay-Z, we're talking about we're talking about the the premises of this argument and I'm justifying this premise to you. We're not going to pivot to a new thing. >> Yeah, exactly.

Cuz you're doing it to me and when I do it to you, >> we're not pivoting to a new thing. >> You don't like answering your worldview. You're actually >> So anyway, each one. >> So anyway, >> watch me keep running. >> Do you want to Do you want to engage with the argument or do you just want to keep pitching and moving? >> Fine. But every time I go to your roadview, you just pivot. Do you want to engage with the argument or do you want to move to a new >> I would you have to >> do you want you're going to pick one of the two options.

Okay Jay-Z reere request to the stream. You're a [ __ ] animal and I can't keep doing this to you. Reere request because our conversation is not done. This is not a run. I literally just can't talk because you're screaming into your [ __ ] phone. You absolute ape. Jay-Z, when you come up here, your words, your next words are going to be either I would like to engage with the argument you have presented or I would like to move to a new topic.

If you don't give me one of those two options, I will never speak to you again. Those are your options. I've invited him. Let's see if he comes up. >> Which option? >> Of course. Of course. I want to engage, but you have to not run. >> Would you like to engage with the argument or move to a new topic? >> So, which one? >> Stop running from the question, though. >> Which one? >> Okay, just kick me if you're going to run.

I don't Just kick me if you're going. >> Okay, so he can't tell me which one he wants to engage with. What a complete bumbling [ __ ] I've never met someone so stupid. I gave him the option to pivot. I literally said, "You can you can either engage with my argument or you can engage with a new topic." And instead of picking one of them, he just yelled and screamed