Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: Should Dawkins debate with William Lane Craig?

  1. #16
    Cookies DarkAntigone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Restricted Section
    Their debate would be interesting and can be historical. But they're like a symmetry

  2. #17
    Account closed.
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Cape Cod, Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by Varenne Rodin View Post
    From where I'm sitting "new atheism" looks like it's doing just fine. We don't have to debate anything. Observe your world.
    Good one.

  3. #18
    Maybe YesNo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Near Chicago, Illinois USA
    Blog Entries
    Quote Originally Posted by cafolini View Post
    Who cares whether it is Dawkins or the famous Argentinean Mongo Aurelio? One would have to be absolutely insane to argue with Craig.
    Craig doesn't win all of his debates, at least based on my assessment. I think he lost the debate he had with Bart Ehrman on the resurrection of Jesus:

    However, I expect Dawkins would lose to Craig if he did debate him. That is why he doesn't.

    Regarding resurrecting from the dead, it is something that some people have done, although we tend to assume that if they did come back to life they weren't really dead in the first place. Some of them have interesting near-death experiences to tell.

  4. #19
    King of Dreams MorpheusSandman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    The Heart of the Dreaming
    Quote Originally Posted by YesNo View Post
    I expect Dawkins would lose to Craig if he did debate him.
    Certainly Dawkins would lose if the subject was anything related to cosmology or historicism. Really, the only ground I see they have for debate is morality, because it's the only one both have addressed at length in their literature. Who has the edge there? I think it would be close, because morality is the one area where I think Craig has gotten beat up more than once and by more than one opponent (Sinnott-Armstrong and Kagan), and considering the ground Dawkins bases his moral philosophy in is his actual area of expertise (evolutionary biology), I think Craig wouldn't have his usual advantage when it comes to knowledge of the premises. Where Craig would still have the edge is in his incomparable ability to frame the debate and Gatling-gunning his points and counterpoints.
    "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light of meaning in the darkness of mere being." --Carl Gustav Jung

    "To absent friends, lost loves, old gods, and the season of mists; and may each and every one of us always give the devil his due." --Neil Gaiman; The Sandman Vol. 4: Season of Mists

    "I'm on my way, from misery to happiness today. Uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh" --The Proclaimers

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. William Lane Craig and the Kalam Cosmological Argument
    By MorpheusSandman in forum Philosophical Literature
    Replies: 164
    Last Post: 06-04-2012, 06:04 AM
  2. A discourse on Atheism (not a religious debate)
    By Charles Darnay in forum Philosophical Literature
    Replies: 199
    Last Post: 02-22-2012, 03:32 AM
  3. William Wilson
    By Cicero in forum Poe, Edgar Allan
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-21-2009, 08:58 AM
  4. The online me
    By Kelly_Sprout in forum General Writing
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-20-2006, 07:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts