Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 17, 2015 at 10:09 pm
(June 17, 2015 at 8:57 pm)Cephus Wrote: I would never debate Craig for the same reason I'd never debate Ken Ham. He's already said that there is absolutely nothing that anyone could ever say, no amount of evidence that anyone could provide, that could ever convince him that he was wrong. That makes the whole idea of a debate pointless.
That is the exact same reason I would never climb up on a stage in front of hundreds, facing my fear of public speaking in order to try to dumb down a point so far that even an imbecile can understand.
Oh yeah, now die zombie thread something, something ..
Posts: 467
Threads: 75
Joined: April 17, 2015
Reputation:
3
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 19, 2015 at 11:19 pm
(June 17, 2015 at 10:09 pm)whateverist Wrote: (June 17, 2015 at 8:57 pm)Cephus Wrote: I would never debate Craig for the same reason I'd never debate Ken Ham. He's already said that there is absolutely nothing that anyone could ever say, no amount of evidence that anyone could provide, that could ever convince him that he was wrong. That makes the whole idea of a debate pointless.
That is the exact same reason I would never climb up on a stage in front of hundreds, facing my fear of public speaking in order to try to dumb down a point so far that even an imbecile can understand.
Oh yeah, now die zombie thread something, something ..
Isn't Dawkins equally disingenuous? Is he truly going to listen to WLC and reason on what he is saying? Or even when atheist say that if they knew god existed they still wouldn't worship them. Its a point of principle nothing else. Hypothetical questions are only good for that
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 2:39 am
So you're admitting WLC et al are disingenuous?
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 2:41 am
(June 19, 2015 at 11:19 pm)Won2blv Wrote: (June 17, 2015 at 10:09 pm)whateverist Wrote: That is the exact same reason I would never climb up on a stage in front of hundreds, facing my fear of public speaking in order to try to dumb down a point so far that even an imbecile can understand.
Oh yeah, now die zombie thread something, something ..
Isn't Dawkins equally disingenuous? Is he truly going to listen to WLC and reason on what he is saying? Or even when atheist say that if they knew god existed they still wouldn't worship them. Its a point of principle nothing else. Hypothetical questions are only good for that
Maybe he did it once, but doesn't feel like it any more because he found the first time he tried that WLC is not arguing in good faith... I tried really listening to his arguments in a debate against hitchens or whomever, and I couldn't take more than half an hour of his lies and distortions.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 2:48 am
(This post was last modified: June 20, 2015 at 2:52 am by robvalue.)
If I debated WLC or one of his mates, I'd make a series of cards with all the logical fallacies and dishonest techniques written on them. As he fires off his spiel, I'd hold them up as he went so viewers could identify all the flaws as they were happening and analyse exactly why they are flaws when they watch it back. Whaddya say Bill?
One of my friends told me about this guy he was impressed with who defended Christianity. I was sceptical of course, but I checked him out. Before the guy even got to his own arguments, I heard about 6-10 logical fallacies in his pre amble as he attempted to smear his opponent. My friend is an atheist and I'm not trying to say he is stupid, he is simply unfamiliar with this kind of debate and analysing logic in this way. If you're wondering, the guy was Hitchins' brother.
Posts: 1765
Threads: 225
Joined: February 18, 2015
Reputation:
16
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 3:48 am
All I will say is that the Muhammadan version of William Lane-Craig is way worse. William has several clones and it's really disheartening. You get these people who get paid to go around the world to lie to people.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 6:43 am
I'm not surprised Dawkins is refusing to debate though. His last outing didn't go so well:
http://youtu.be/mM0LLAlgPnc
Posts: 467
Threads: 75
Joined: April 17, 2015
Reputation:
3
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 4:56 pm
(June 20, 2015 at 2:39 am)robvalue Wrote: So you're admitting WLC et al are disingenuous?
I am saying that if you put a level of burden on another party you should accept the same burden on yourself. Dawkins uses many logical fallacies as well.
Posts: 23222
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 5:19 pm
(June 20, 2015 at 4:56 pm)Won2blv Wrote: (June 20, 2015 at 2:39 am)robvalue Wrote: So you're admitting WLC et al are disingenuous?
I am saying that if you put a level of burden on another party you should accept the same burden on yourself. Dawkins uses many logical fallacies as well.
This should be interesting ...
Posts: 3541
Threads: 0
Joined: January 20, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: Dawkins explains why he wont debate William Lane Craig
June 20, 2015 at 5:58 pm
(This post was last modified: June 20, 2015 at 5:59 pm by Homeless Nutter.)
(June 20, 2015 at 4:56 pm)Won2blv Wrote: I am saying that if you put a level of burden on another party you should accept the same burden on yourself. Dawkins uses many logical fallacies as well.
I call BS.
Examples, please.
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
|
