Total Posts:62|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

William Lane Craig recent debate

Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2012 8:41:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
http://www.reasonablefaith.org...

I have to wonder why so many of these people actually take the stage against Craig.
This person did not understand the concept of debate though. He was clearly trying to give a lecture on his presuppositions.

I felt bad for him and you can see Craig did too. Craig was incredibly gentle on him.

One point on this debate is Kappel's use of the magical star analogy. Craig gently points out that it is logically incoherent and it is just calling, what we call God, a star. I was stunned that an academic atheist (besides lewis wolpert) would still use this obviously invalid concept to support their beliefs, though I realize Kappel is a presuppositionalist.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/6/2012 11:29:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/6/2012 10:24:10 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I absolutely love WLC!

The guy's my hero.

Agreed, I'm about halfway through his opening and I already feel bad for him. This must have been embarassing.

Besides, the juxtaposition to a magnificient debater like WLC just makes him look worse.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:07:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't get some Atheists...It's not really hard to refute what Craig says, and he says pretty much the same thing every debate. You would think that more Atheists would have defeated him by now (WLC has only lost a few debates in my opinion, he wins most of them with ease). We need to put Craig against more people like Austin Dacey, who actually addresses Craig's arguments and presents positive arguments for Atheism.

Right when the Atheist started off with the psychological reasons for why people believe in God I face palmed lol There are so many better arguments than that...
SarcasticIndeed
Posts: 2,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:17:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:07:32 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't get some Atheists...It's not really hard to refute what Craig says, and he says pretty much the same thing every debate. You would think that more Atheists would have defeated him by now (WLC has only lost a few debates in my opinion, he wins most of them with ease). We need to put Craig against more people like Austin Dacey, who actually addresses Craig's arguments and presents positive arguments for Atheism.

Right when the Atheist started off with the psychological reasons for why people believe in God I face palmed lol There are so many better arguments than that...

Which exactly are the debates you think he's lost? I'd love to see them. Oh, and I haven't seen much of WLC, but back then when he used the moral argument, I thought something like "Oh, wow, even I could refute that" Haven't really seen the rest.
<SIGNATURE CENSORED> nac
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:17:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/6/2012 8:41:13 PM, Gileandos wrote:
http://www.reasonablefaith.org...

I have to wonder why so many of these people actually take the stage against Craig.
This person did not understand the concept of debate though. He was clearly trying to give a lecture on his presuppositions.

I felt bad for him and you can see Craig did too. Craig was incredibly gentle on him.

One point on this debate is Kappel's use of the magical star analogy. Craig gently points out that it is logically incoherent and it is just calling, what we call God, a star. I was stunned that an academic atheist (besides lewis wolpert) would still use this obviously invalid concept to support their beliefs, though I realize Kappel is a presuppositionalist.

I haven't listened to the debate, but I can't imagine he did any worse than Richard Carrier against WLC. Richard Carrier was using the entire time to proselytize for atheism and ignored WLC's arguments, even to the point where Carrier wouldn't stay on topic because he just wanted to present his (weak) case for atheism.
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:07:32 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't get some Atheists...It's not really hard to refute what Craig says, and he says pretty much the same thing every debate. You would think that more Atheists would have defeated him by now (WLC has only lost a few debates in my opinion, he wins most of them with ease). We need to put Craig against more people like Austin Dacey, who actually addresses Craig's arguments and presents positive arguments for Atheism.

Right when the Atheist started off with the psychological reasons for why people believe in God I face palmed lol There are so many better arguments than that...

The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. I disagree, of course, that it's not hard to refute what Craig says. But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.
Clash
Posts: 220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:23:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Haha, Klemens Kappel got totally owned. Really the most pathetic debate I have ever seen. Here is another debate where Humanist Dr. Lars Gule get completely owned by Hamza. Dr. Lars Gule ignored most of Hamza's arguments and started to talk about things which didn't have nothing to do with the existence of God, and most of what he said is really just illogical.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:25:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Shabir Ally took Craig perfectly in some of their debates. Sadly I didn't know about the debate WLC had in Copenhagen. It's not far from where I am, could've seen it live.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:25:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
We need more debates like the super debate between Deepak Chopra, Sam Harris, and Michael Shermer.

People like Deepak present a view that is unique and doesn't fit Atheist vs Theist.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:27:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
And yes, Austin Dacey is great, he challenged Craig the most imo.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 3:27:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:17:01 PM, SarcasticIndeed wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:07:32 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't get some Atheists...It's not really hard to refute what Craig says, and he says pretty much the same thing every debate. You would think that more Atheists would have defeated him by now (WLC has only lost a few debates in my opinion, he wins most of them with ease). We need to put Craig against more people like Austin Dacey, who actually addresses Craig's arguments and presents positive arguments for Atheism.

Right when the Atheist started off with the psychological reasons for why people believe in God I face palmed lol There are so many better arguments than that...

Which exactly are the debates you think he's lost? I'd love to see them. Oh, and I haven't seen much of WLC, but back then when he used the moral argument, I thought something like "Oh, wow, even I could refute that" Haven't really seen the rest.

"Which exactly are the debates you think he's lost? I'd love to see them."

I've only seen 2 debates where I'm completely confident Craig lost (when he faced Austin Dacey, and when he faced Shelly Kagan). Stephen Law and Sam Harris did well against Craig, but I wouldn't say either of them beat Craig. Besides that, in my opinion, Craig has won pretty much every debate.

Craig even wiped the floor with Hitchens (which I thought would be difficult). In my opinion, William Lane Craig is simply just a really skilled debater, I mean he rarely stumbles, and speaks slow so you grasp what he is saying, and he presents himself with conviction.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 4:03:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Yeah, this guy pretty much says "I don't really wanna debate" in his opening arguments. Craig is a great debater. It's too bad though. Does anyone have any links to any debates in which Craig is given a run for his money? I am curious because I have found several paradoxes or flaws in Craig's opening statements.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
SarcasticIndeed
Posts: 2,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 4:19:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:27:29 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:17:01 PM, SarcasticIndeed wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:07:32 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
I don't get some Atheists...It's not really hard to refute what Craig says, and he says pretty much the same thing every debate. You would think that more Atheists would have defeated him by now (WLC has only lost a few debates in my opinion, he wins most of them with ease). We need to put Craig against more people like Austin Dacey, who actually addresses Craig's arguments and presents positive arguments for Atheism.

Right when the Atheist started off with the psychological reasons for why people believe in God I face palmed lol There are so many better arguments than that...

Which exactly are the debates you think he's lost? I'd love to see them. Oh, and I haven't seen much of WLC, but back then when he used the moral argument, I thought something like "Oh, wow, even I could refute that" Haven't really seen the rest.

"Which exactly are the debates you think he's lost? I'd love to see them."

I've only seen 2 debates where I'm completely confident Craig lost (when he faced Austin Dacey, and when he faced Shelly Kagan). Stephen Law and Sam Harris did well against Craig, but I wouldn't say either of them beat Craig. Besides that, in my opinion, Craig has won pretty much every debate.

Craig even wiped the floor with Hitchens (which I thought would be difficult). In my opinion, William Lane Craig is simply just a really skilled debater, I mean he rarely stumbles, and speaks slow so you grasp what he is saying, and he presents himself with conviction.

Thanks, I'll look those up.
<SIGNATURE CENSORED> nac
WriterDave
Posts: 934
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 4:47:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM, KeytarHero wrote:

The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. I disagree, of course, that it's not hard to refute what Craig says. But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.

That's actually spot on. Give an atheist a year off his day job, during which he does nothing but study the art and practice of oral debate, 24/7, including several practice debates a week, and at the end of that year he would hand Craig his rear end on a silver platter.

Jeff Lowder wrote an in-depth article about the various tactics Craig uses to win his debates, and how these tactics give the appearance of having the superior position. He later took it down because Craig threatened to sue. I saved a local copy, though, and I think I still have it somewhere in my files . . . I'll check later.
Writer. Liberal atheist. Official "Official of the FREEDO Bureaucracy" of the FREEDO Bureaucracy.

Edit To Civilize, with FAQs: http://bit.ly...
Insult Ownership: http://bit.ly...
Haters: http://bit.ly...

"I said you are a fake, a phony, and a fraud, but that doesn't mean I think you're putting on an act." --Innomen
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 4:51:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 4:47:37 PM, WriterDave wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM, KeytarHero wrote:

The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. I disagree, of course, that it's not hard to refute what Craig says. But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.

That's actually spot on. Give an atheist a year off his day job, during which he does nothing but study the art and practice of oral debate, 24/7, including several practice debates a week, and at the end of that year he would hand Craig his rear end on a silver platter.

Jeff Lowder wrote an in-depth article about the various tactics Craig uses to win his debates, and how these tactics give the appearance of having the superior position. He later took it down because Craig threatened to sue. I saved a local copy, though, and I think I still have it somewhere in my files . . . I'll check later.

Obviously Jeff Lowder by implication thought he would lose the lawsuit. Liable is a tenuous position to take to defeat so obvious a victor. I study the art of debate myself, and I assure you Craig is one of the most straightforward debate Icons out there. There are no deceptive tactics used by him. He deliberately keeps it very clean and with this debate you can see he is very gentle on people who are in over their head.
unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 5:27:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:25:54 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
We need more debates like the super debate between Deepak Chopra, Sam Harris, and Michael Shermer.

People like Deepak present a view that is unique and doesn't fit Atheist vs Theist.

Lol at deepak chopra.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 5:29:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I love the "if atheists actually tried to win, they would win" comments.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
SovereignDream
Posts: 1,119
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 5:33:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:27:29 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Stephen Law and Sam Harris did well against Craig, but I wouldn't say either of them beat Craig. Besides that, in my opinion, Craig has won pretty much every debate.

Haven't seen the debate with Law, but Sam Harris' performance in the debate with WLC was an absolute train wreck. He did not address any of Craig's arguments or refutations and instead just proceeded to launch emotional, unsubstantial diatribes against the supposed evils of religion. At one point in the debate, Craig even offered a knock-down argument against Harris' moral landscape, to which Harris replied "Well, that was very interesting..." and launched a characteristic emotional diatribe against religion.
Ahmed.M
Posts: 616
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 5:40:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
no offense to anyone who supports Deepak Chopra i think some of his ideas on consciousness are interesting but this video was hilarious:
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 5:45:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 5:33:10 PM, SovereignDream wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:27:29 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Stephen Law and Sam Harris did well against Craig, but I wouldn't say either of them beat Craig. Besides that, in my opinion, Craig has won pretty much every debate.

Haven't seen the debate with Law, but Sam Harris' performance in the debate with WLC was an absolute train wreck. He did not address any of Craig's arguments or refutations and instead just proceeded to launch emotional, unsubstantial diatribes against the supposed evils of religion. At one point in the debate, Craig even offered a knock-down argument against Harris' moral landscape, to which Harris replied "Well, that was very interesting..." and launched a characteristic emotional diatribe against religion.

I could not agree more.
WriterDave
Posts: 934
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:04:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 4:51:55 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 5/7/2012 4:47:37 PM, WriterDave wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM, KeytarHero wrote:

The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. I disagree, of course, that it's not hard to refute what Craig says. But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.

That's actually spot on. Give an atheist a year off his day job, during which he does nothing but study the art and practice of oral debate, 24/7, including several practice debates a week, and at the end of that year he would hand Craig his rear end on a silver platter.

Jeff Lowder wrote an in-depth article about the various tactics Craig uses to win his debates, and how these tactics give the appearance of having the superior position. He later took it down because Craig threatened to sue. I saved a local copy, though, and I think I still have it somewhere in my files . . . I'll check later.

Obviously Jeff Lowder by implication thought he would lose the lawsuit. Liable is a tenuous position to take to defeat so obvious a victor.

Would? Or might?

I study the art of debate myself, and I assure you Craig is one of the most straightforward debate Icons out there. There are no deceptive tactics used by him. He deliberately keeps it very clean and with this debate you can see he is very gentle on people who are in over their head.

I'll try to find that article for you to read.
Writer. Liberal atheist. Official "Official of the FREEDO Bureaucracy" of the FREEDO Bureaucracy.

Edit To Civilize, with FAQs: http://bit.ly...
Insult Ownership: http://bit.ly...
Haters: http://bit.ly...

"I said you are a fake, a phony, and a fraud, but that doesn't mean I think you're putting on an act." --Innomen
WriterDave
Posts: 934
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:05:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 5:43:57 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 5/7/2012 5:29:37 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
I love the "if atheists actually tried to win, they would win" comments.

This.

Rather than laughing, why don't you fund the experiment?
Writer. Liberal atheist. Official "Official of the FREEDO Bureaucracy" of the FREEDO Bureaucracy.

Edit To Civilize, with FAQs: http://bit.ly...
Insult Ownership: http://bit.ly...
Haters: http://bit.ly...

"I said you are a fake, a phony, and a fraud, but that doesn't mean I think you're putting on an act." --Innomen
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:10:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. ... But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.

I agree with KatarHero. Does't happen that often, so I thought I should mention it. :D

I watched WLC slaughter an atheist in a debate, and that is what made me realize I should learn to speak out for atheism.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:13:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I actually find many "atheist" leaders to be rather poor in debating. Although Dawkins and Harris have had success with books and fans, they struggle in actual debate. Not really being philosophers is a large problem. However, I find Craig jumping to his conclusions far too often. Basically, a lot of these "philosophy" celebrities don't really impress me. I could talk a lot about this subject. Hahaha
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:14:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 4:47:37 PM, WriterDave wrote:
Jeff Lowder wrote an in-depth article about the various tactics Craig uses to win his debates, and how these tactics give the appearance of having the superior position. He later took it down because Craig threatened to sue. I saved a local copy, though, and I think I still have it somewhere in my files

I want a copy.
M.Torres
Posts: 3,626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:14:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 6:10:57 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. ... But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.

I agree with KatarHero. Does't happen that often, so I thought I should mention it. :D

I watched WLC slaughter an atheist in a debate, and that is what made me realize I should learn to speak out for atheism.

This is a major point. MANY of Craig's opponents are NOT debaters.
: At 11/28/2011 1:28:24 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
: M. Torres said it, so it must be right.

I'm an Apatheistic Ignostic. ... problem? ;D

I believe in the heart of the cards. .:DDO Duelist:.
unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2012 6:16:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/7/2012 4:47:37 PM, WriterDave wrote:
At 5/7/2012 3:19:39 PM, KeytarHero wrote:

The problem is that WLC is a master at debating. Atheists think they can just go up against him, present their case and they'll win. Most atheists who go up against Craig simply don't know how to debate. I disagree, of course, that it's not hard to refute what Craig says. But if atheists hope to defeat Craig in a debate, they really need to study the art of it.

That's actually spot on. Give an atheist a year off his day job, during which he does nothing but study the art and practice of oral debate, 24/7, including several practice debates a week, and at the end of that year he would hand Craig his rear end on a silver platter.

Jeff Lowder wrote an in-depth article about the various tactics Craig uses to win his debates, and how these tactics give the appearance of having the superior position. He later took it down because Craig threatened to sue. I saved a local copy, though, and I think I still have it somewhere in my files . . . I'll check later.

I remember the brew-ha-ha the article caused, but I haven't read the article myself, so if you could post it, that would be awesome.

Lowder is as organised as Craig, and in his debate with Phil Fernandes, his rebutting and defence of his arguments in particular was as good as it gets. Although there are a number of debates I've heard Craig lose, and some of them quite clearly lose (Bradley and Kagan), Lowder is probably the only atheist I'd bet on beforehand to beat Craig.