(December 30, 2015 at 2:01 am)robvalue Wrote: It is perfectly justified to ask what created god if the premise of an argument is that everything needs a creator.
Sure. But in this case, it's Dawkins claiming everything needs a creator. I think you can have the premise of God without claiming everything needs a creator. Maybe Dawkins was responding to someone else who made that claim, but I'd say that's more sloppiness on that person's part. They could easily apply a scope, and say everything in our universe needs a creator, and protect their idea of God from the rule.
The key here, is that Dawkins is making an argument for God not existing. Which I don't think works. As opposed to this being an argument for God existing, which also doesn't work.
