Why Something Rather Than Nothing?

[Heywood]

Negative Esquilax.....not a strawman.

You might be able to make an argument that it is a red herring....but that would be a stretch. I'm done trying to teach you. You're just too incredulous to learn.

Maybe you'll listen to someone else.

Right, so do you deny that Craig's presuppositionalist position is relevant to the conversation or not?

The only things relevant to the argument you have rejected are the elements of the argument you have rejected. How about you list all the premises of Craig's argument and the conclusion he draws from them and we'll see if his presuppositional position is one of the premises.

Can you do that? Can we evaluate Craig's argument instead of Craig the man?