Richard Dawkins' Ultimate Excuse for Not Debating!

[imperator332]

The Ohio State Michigan football rivalry isn't as energetic about meetings as the Craig supporters are to see a debate.

It's almost like one side needs the debate to validate themselves......hmm......

[Birdieupon]

@imperator332

"It's almost like one side needs the debate to validate themselves......hmm......"

Surely better than chickening out to validate oneself, wouldn't you agree?

[imperator332]

@Birdieupon

I'm sorry, I'd have responded sooner, but I had to debate someone who thinks the Earth is flat. Better than "chickening out" I suppose....

[Birdieupon]

@imperator332

" I had to debate someone who thinks the Earth is flat. Better than "chickening out" I suppose...."

Then why does Dawkins choose to debate some "flat earthers" and not others?

[imperator332]

@Birdieupon

Like who?

[AgApE010]

@imperator332

The inherent implication there is that Craig's views are the intellectual equivalent of a person believing in a flat earth. The problem there is that the debate was not to be about science, but the existence or non-existence of God. So even if Craig was a Creationist, believed in a flat earth, geocentrism, alchemy, and whatever else, that is merely a digression on your and Dawkins' part.

[iamgoddard]

He's trying to protect Craig from the psychological trauma he'd inevitably face after having his world view systematically dismantled by Dawkins, it would be devastating! The debate avoidance is a kindly act of compassion!

[joehardysr]

@iamgoddard

Dawkins partially took Abraham Lincoln’s advice: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

[iamgoddard]

@joehardysr, good quote!

Though, in Dawkins defense, we have to consider that debating is an art form in which Craig is highly skilled, especially given his solid background in philosophy. So the outcome of debates is more a measure of the skill of the parties involved than a measure of the ontological reality about which they may debate. Dawkins is probably right to estimate that he's out-skilled by Craig in the art of debating, but that doesn't necessarily mean theism reflects the truth.

[joehardysr]

@iamgoddard

Then Richard Dawkins should say he feels outmatched! That would be another chapter to his book of excuses. Debating may be an art, but it’s a fair opportunity for one to present their case and, frankly, Dawkins doesn’t have one. If you do think his arguments in the God Delusion work, then show how it does. You may be more skilled than Dawkins after all!

Don’t pull a Dawkins on me.

[iamgoddard]

@joehardysr, I also think he should debate, irrespective of Craig's skills. I think it's arguable that as a, or perhaps even The, leading atheist of our time, he has a duty to debate, or at least have a public discussion with, Craig. And the reasons he gives not to debate Craig make him look more like a scoundrel than an academic.

[joehardysr]

@iamgoddard

I don’t believe Dawkins would objectively win such a debate. Do you? His best chance at a debate is to choose a topic for debate and invite Craig to engage him. If it is about his argument against God expressed in The God Delusion, he would lose outright.

[joehardysr]

@iamgoddard

Your subsequent response demonstrates you don’t believe a word you stated here:

“Though, in Dawkins defense, we have to consider that debating is an art form in which Craig is highly skilled, especially given his solid background in philosophy…Dawkins is probably right to estimate that he's out-skilled by Craig in the art of debating, but that doesn't necessarily mean theism reflects the truth.”

[iamgoddard]

@joehardysr, really?! Why would I not believe a word a said there?

[joehardysr]

@iamgoddard

“Though, in Dawkins defense, we have to consider that debating is an art form in which Craig is highly skilled, especially given his solid background in philosophy…Dawkins is probably right to estimate that he’s out-skilled by Craig in the art of debating, but that doesn’t necessarily mean theism reflects the truth” contradicts your previous comment “He’s trying to protect Craig from the psychological trauma he’d inevitably face…” “…a kindly act of compassion!”

[iamgoddard]

@joehardysr, my previous comment about about "a kindly act of compassion" was a joke, tongue in cheek.

[joehardysr]

@iamgoddard

Ok.

[Birdieupon]

@joehardysr

Dawkins has TONNES of debate practice! He's been doing it ever since he and Peter Atkins had non-grey hair. He's also a writer of popular books, with language-shaping, rhetoric and communications skills being one of the most important strings to his bow. Don't forget he also has for more experience of the media than Dr Craig, with countless interviews and soundbites.

He dropped academic debate because he realized his arguments suck, but could still sell them to lay people.

[joehardysr]

@Birdieupon

I don’t think Dawkins stands a chance against Craig, especially with his philosophically bankrupt argument.  When his statements are examined, he is found to be worse than Sam Harris—what he says may sound good, but makes no logical sense.

[KBrimstone]

lol



[Agrippa521]

The simple ones are the best ones.

[HonestTechnoAtheist]

Getting a little worn out here, don't you think?

[Birdieupon]

@HonestTechnoAtheist

Dawkins? Yep, you bet! ;-)

[HonestTechnoAtheist]

@Birdieupon No, your constant insistance that they debate, is what is getting worn out.

[Birdieupon]

@HonestTechnoAtheist

so long as Dawkins persists in behaving like a child, I will be reporting those actions.

If, on the other hand, he decides to grow up, I shall happily cease commentary.

[HonestTechnoAtheist]

@Birdieupon What is he doing that can be defined as, acting like a child?

[kubrox91]

@Birdieupon Hey, I don't care about the outcome of whether he wins or loses a debate, I'd just like to see him man up and debate somebody that he is always chickening out on.

[joehardysr]

@HonestTechnoAtheist

Nope!

[M3PanoS]

I loled...that was pretty funny actually.

[MPaulHolmes]

It's so hard to avoid personal attacks on Dawkins, because he's just so objectively weasel-like.

[escapingplatoscave]

LOL