Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 11:24 am
Oh yeah. He doesn't seem to like that. I used to try and debate with him but I stopped for that same reason.
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 11:26 am
I, too, can sprinkle philosophical sounding words across a vacuous statement and refuse to back it up.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 11:30 am
Yeah. When I take that stance and just assert things without any backing, I get ignored by theists mainly as if I'm not even worth talking to. Weird huh.
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 11:34 am
(February 11, 2015 at 11:30 am)robvalue Wrote: Yeah. When I take that stance and just assert things without any backing, I get ignored by theists mainly as if I'm not even worth talking to. Weird huh.
Because most theist want to hear only what they want to hear and nothing more.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 1114
Threads: 28
Joined: June 13, 2011
Reputation:
18
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 1:48 pm
(This post was last modified: February 11, 2015 at 1:48 pm by Pizza.)
(February 8, 2015 at 4:36 pm)Esquilax Wrote: William Lane Craig, advocate for such amazing arguments as "things have a cause, and the only cause for all things is god," and "I'm going to believe in god no matter what you say!" has once again hunkered down over the remains of his credibility and pinched out another argument all over it: "Math is good at describing things, therefore god!"
Quote:It was very evident to me that [naturalists are not] able to provide any sort of an explanation of mathematics’ applicability to the physical world.…
The theist has explanatory resources that are not available to the rationalist.
Yes, it's another argument from ignorance: "I don't understand why this is so good at what it does, therefore god." Why is this guy still respected in christian circles? It's not like he started off anywhere good, and his arguments have only been dropping out of the fucking sky with increasing frequency... how is he still able to make a living off this? That's odd given that he has claimed an actual infinity doesn't exist.
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 1:53 pm
(This post was last modified: February 11, 2015 at 1:53 pm by FatAndFaithless.)
Wait..wasn't mathematics created directly from observation and interaction with the physical world?
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 2:04 pm
(This post was last modified: February 11, 2015 at 2:11 pm by Faith No More.)
(February 11, 2015 at 11:23 am)Esquilax Wrote: No, I think he just doesn't like it when people call him on the fact that he's never once justified a single claim he's ever made on the forum, like I did earlier in this thread. So he resorts to slinging mud, as though scoffing like I'm obviously too simple and nihilistic to comprehend the obvious truth of his fiat demands is a replacement for proper argumentation.
I think it's more of a "don't piss on our wishful thinking" response. Proponents of metaphysics don't like it when you point out their unjustified assertions, because that's their whole foundation for their arguments.
(February 11, 2015 at 11:26 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I, too, can sprinkle philosophical sounding words across a vacuous statement and refuse to back it up.
In Isaac Asimov's Foundation, there is a device that takes informational content like speeches and puts them through a rigorous analysis to strip away the flowery language and determine just what exactly is being said. At one point in the book the device is used to find that one person giving a speech had actually said nothing at all.
I imagine that would be the same result you would get if you used the device on any of these metaphysical arguments for god.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 2:19 pm
(This post was last modified: February 11, 2015 at 2:42 pm by dyresand.)
(February 11, 2015 at 1:53 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Wait..wasn't mathematics created directly from observation and interaction with the physical world?
It probably was early forms out counting i guess.. i think that's were pretty much math came from.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 2985
Threads: 29
Joined: October 26, 2014
Reputation:
31
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 2:37 pm
(February 11, 2015 at 1:53 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Wait..wasn't mathematics created directly from observation and interaction with the physical world?
I believe so; this is the Banana Fallacy. I think his position is analogous to saying "it's incredible how well the colors red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet can describe everything we see. God must have made it."
I also think he doesn't know a damn thing about upper-level mathematics.
How will we know, when the morning comes, we are still human? - 2D
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: William Lane Craig continues to desperately defend the indefensible.
February 11, 2015 at 4:32 pm
I went to see WLC at Rutgers last week. Interesting talk. While you dismiss out of hand the Kalam argument, he spoke for 2 hours defending each premise.
For example, you say that it's just his assertion that there are two categories 1) things that begin to exist and 2) things that don't begin to exist. He went on at some length defend the premise that there cannot be a past infinity so therefore we can conclude that there is at least one thing that did not begin to exist.
|
