So the fact that Dakwins gets these 'stupid' arguments so completely backwards must suggest he's a bit of an idiot too, right? I mean if they're so obviously 'stupid' he's really got no excuse for failing to represent them accurately and then making arguments against his own straw men that still don't work... In some of his arguments it's literally like an open invitation to theists to "refute this bullshit" and seeing as how bad his philosophical arguments are even a half-ass apologist can deal with a great number of them with ease.
Far from being 'pretty fucking stupid' a great many of them are complicated, well thought out and are even intellectually impressive - Some of them when tackled honestly do in fact raise the prior probability of a God relative to alternative explanations, lending a degree of credibility to the general idea - None of them manage to establish existence and seeing as there is no strong evidence the prior probability is often all they have to work with, but as far as improving the debate on metaphysical, mental, experiential and conceptual issues many theist philosophers, especially Plantinga and Swinburne in my view, have done a great service to philosophy.
Hell, even William Craig manages to fucking destroy the like of Hitchens and Harris on conceptual and philosophical issues - As evinced by the debates he had with both of them - and Craig with his KCA (which is NOT one of the impressive arguments) isn't even near the quality of Plantinga.
Far from being 'pretty fucking stupid' a great many of them are complicated, well thought out and are even intellectually impressive - Some of them when tackled honestly do in fact raise the prior probability of a God relative to alternative explanations, lending a degree of credibility to the general idea - None of them manage to establish existence and seeing as there is no strong evidence the prior probability is often all they have to work with, but as far as improving the debate on metaphysical, mental, experiential and conceptual issues many theist philosophers, especially Plantinga and Swinburne in my view, have done a great service to philosophy.
Hell, even William Craig manages to fucking destroy the like of Hitchens and Harris on conceptual and philosophical issues - As evinced by the debates he had with both of them - and Craig with his KCA (which is NOT one of the impressive arguments) isn't even near the quality of Plantinga.
.