Atheists, creationists, and the pitfalls of public debate

[Primalxbeast]

I know this wasn't a main part of your video, but naming somebody the 7 billionth person on the planet can't really be possible because there are too many people being born and dieing at any one time to accurately determine that. Many places don't have accurate population counts, and there are populations of people who rarely have contact with the outside world, so it's silly to just arbitrarily pick one person and put that kind of pressure on them.

[WildwoodClaire1]

Surely, the only possible result of engaging in public debate with William Lane Craig would be the aggrandizement of the loquacious Dr. Craig.

[ScreamsFromTheAbyss]

"Human, all too human" is a great work, haven't read "Nemesis" but my old dad used to be huge Phillip Roth fan.

[Zerafinel]

I loved this, thank you.

[sitemountain]

Dawkins was never GOING to debate WCL because he was busy. Even if he HAD another Christian apologist would have called on him -or another -or another, so eventually SOMEONE would end up saying 'See -he's FRIGHTENED of debating me!' -How dishonest!

[Mastikator]

Craig is a disingenuous, elitist jerk, I don't blame anyone for not debating him.

[slobomotion]

Uprated. The Old Testament seems full of cruelty to me and not worthy of us now. The New Testament seems full of a lot of questionable stuff such as Revelations -- St. John the Divine is also a problem for me. Well, I like reading all sacred texts. I must be an avatar w concern for all sentient beings, & I feel I am my own Messiah, at this point. Had another hard day, & had saved this vid for relaxation & thought. You're usually great for that with me!

[pyrrho314]

my idea is using the word debate, but really, you are in this structured system with a lot more to it. If you use it once, you might think you "won" or "lost" but if you use it often you will have to see beyond that as there are too many ways to win and lose for one to be official, in reality, and this all leads back to the information abstracted from the conversation... shifting the focus to the latter.

Eventually the winners will be those that know how to have productive conversation.

voila?

[TrenchantAtheist]

@pyrrho314 Isn't that what debate teams are for? That students are directed to argue for seemingly unwinnable positions, so that they may learn that there are, in fact, ways of winning even the most lopsided of debates?

It would seem to me that people are well aware of the many ways of winning and losing. Unfortunately, however, I think the opposite lesson is learned: not that there's no such thing as winning or losing, but rather that you can always win if you don't care about being productive

[2bsirius]

@TrenchantAtheist

Yes, that strategy is a great way to show students why research is vital to winning a debate....It could help if there were more of that here on YT....On YouTube there is a lot of tribalism and egotism but not an immense about of trying to figure out that there are two sides to every stated position...

[NAVYGOLDEIGHTFOUR]

If I understand it correctly, Dr. Dawkins chooses not to debate for the reasons you state, plus they elevate the status of his opponents while risking Dawkins' reputation to being impugned irrationally. Dawkins has little to gain and a lot to lose, logical arithmetic if you ask me. It does make me hopeful that the faithful have to resort to such silly tactics as empty chair debates. Religious zealotry needs constant attention, starve it of attention, and it can not sustain itself.

[paxguerilla]

I would much rather see Dawkins debate Lynn Margulis on the questionables of his pet Neo-Darwinism.

[thewildplaces]

I'm really glad I found your channel!

[dewinthemorning]

Why should Dawkins show up? Experience has shown that debating Craig is completely futile - nothing good ever comes out of it. Craig repeats ad nausea collections of words that don't make sense, and don't answer to anything in reality - 'unembodied, simple mind', 'abstract objects' (even if, through long searching, you can discover that actually he doesn't think 'abstract objects' exist, yet in every debate, he says 'So, what is the cause of the universe? It's either an abstract object, or god."

[WildwoodClaire1]

@dewinthemorning No one can expend more futile hours lolly-gagging in the bosky dells of speculation and specious reasoning as WLC. The garrulous Doctor Craig insists on exhaling hours of fruity, sweet-smelling prose that could have been easily replaced by a mere three words: "God did it!"

[2bsirius]

@WildwoodClaire1

Exactly! Well said...

[fortheloveofwisdom]

Cracked has a recent article that relates to what you're talking about: "5 Logical Fallacies That Make You Wrong More Than You Think." It starts with #5, which says, 'We're Not Programmed to Seek "Truth," We're Programmed to "Win".'

cracked.com/article_19468_5-lo­gical-fallacies-that-make-you-­wrong-more-than-you-think.html

[2bsirius]

@fortheloveofwisdom

Yes, exactly....We're programmed to respond to 'wedge issues'. They are those which are the polarizing and which seem to DEMAND that you thumb them up or thumb them down. We feel all smug if we attack the loser and celebrate and join the winner...

Thinking? Don't need it if you're on the winning team.

[2bsirius]

(2)

Maybe it's time we realized that "We have the power to defy the selfish genes of our birth and, if necessary, the selfish memes of our indoctrination."

I'm not sure if Dawkins is right about our absolutely determinacy, but I do know that if we don't learn to move beyond our selfish genes, we're pretty much doomed as a species, so we'd better try.

[AlainG80]

@fortheloveofwisdom

That depends on your drivers and ethical standards.

[Drgamedood]

I love how you list Dawkins credentials under his name, but under Craig's you merely write "professional Christian 'debater'". Why not write that he's a philosopher and theologian?

[2bsirius]

@Drgamedood

I would like you to explain to me what WLC said in the Q and A at the end of the 'debate'...WLC said that the adults deserved it because they were sinful, and it's alright because the children went straight to heaven. If you think that's not the Machiavellian strategy of a professional debater, I'd be interested in knowing if you think what he said made sense and why.

[Drgamedood]

@2bsirius Your reply has nothing to do with what I said. I'm asking you why you did not list Craig's credentials underneath his name. You listed the fact that Dawkins was an evolutionary biologist. You should have listed "philosopher" and "theologian" underneath Craig. But you didn't. And I want to know why.

[IntelligentProbe]

@Drgamedood She should have listed his credentials. Unfortunately all too often this courtesy? isn't given, such as when Dawkins is only given the title "atheist" on Fox News, sad really. I don't like WLC, however a person's credentials should always be established as a distinguishing mark of what they bring to the table, imho.

[Drgamedood]

@IntelligentProbe Exactly. And I agree. Fox has done the same to Dawkins. It's not right.

[2bsirius]

@Drgamedood

I corrected my oversight. I don't think Fox News will be correcting its though.

[melsbasketcase]

Have you read Mark Vonnegut's book Eden Express? He wrote another book a few years back saying that his diagnosis changed from schizophrenia to schizoaffective disorder or bipolar disorder. I read Eden Express but not the new one.

[happyjesus123]

Maybe the empty chair was for God? I bet God would have loved to come to his friend Craig's debate if he existed.

[HConstantine]

@happyjesus123 Generally its for Elijah.

[TWITfromURANUS]

I love you