Yes, I know this is going to fry somebody's chips. I don't really care.
The reason I'm posting this clip is because of the argument held by both sides. I would have found something without 'Poor Mans Podcast' interjections, but I found I agreed with a larger portion of his responses than I disagreed.
With that said, this NOT about Tate, but the discussion he and his opponent hold in front of two young men, who looked (to me, at least) persuaded on the principles of Tate's argument itself.
The question is (without the small ad hominems on either side); does his FOUNDATIONAL argument hold?