William Lane Craig 10 Part I: Paranormal Craig

Been a while, ain't it? Yes.

Yes, it has.

This video, and the shortly to follow Part II, focus on smaller areas of incompetence by Craig as opposed to tackling an entire lecture or single point. The advantage? Miles more Craig refuting for your Youtube buck. The disadvantage? Honestly? None. THERE ARE NONE

Thanks go to AndromedasWake, who shot and co-directed the infamous "Kitchen Scene" as well as recording the narration. That boy speaks good British for a Dane. However, all thanks can be negated by the fact that it took him TEN SOLID MONTHS to give me the media. Yes! By the time I got it, I'd moved house and forgotten my own name. So it's really his fault that you waited so long. Not mine or my lack of willpower. No. Him.

Part II will be online shortly. In the meantime, I have twitter: twitter.com/th1swasatriumph and bandcamp: bandcamp.th1swasatriumph.com

I figured you'd be excited by that.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• th1swasatriumph
• william
• lane
• craig
• apologetics
• apologist
• christian
• christianity
• religion
• atheist
• atheism
• philosophy
• refutation
• rebuttal
• intellectual

[Mentat1231]

2c) Just because many cultures disagree about particular ethics, does not mean that there are no objective moral values. Indeed, all of those cultures agree that objective moral values exist; they just disagree about certain ones. Again, with the illustration of color: If I say that color exists, you cannot disprove that by saying that people often disagree about colors like indigo or turquoise, since all those people still affirm that color exists.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@Mentat1231 Colour is a matter of physics, basically. It's empirical. You can't use that example to prove the existence of some over-arching morality.

[Mentat1231]

@Th1sWasATriumph

Wavelength is a matter of physics. Color isn't. Color is empirically verifiable only in the sense that we can confirm that almost everyone perceives it. In other words, color can be said to exist objectively, because there is something there which we all perceive, even if we disagree about some shadings. Craig is saying that morals exist objectively in the same way. When rape occurs, those of us with well-functioning brains should be outraged.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@Mentat1231 And where is the objective authority that states a well-functioning brain should be outraged by rape beyond you simply SAYING it's an outrage? You've moved the goalposts by qualifying a particular moral response as the property of a "well-functioning" brain, which is itself a matter of some objectivity, and allows you to ignore all dissent as presumably "ill-functioning".

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@Mentat1231 If every living thing in the universe ceased to exist, things would still be the same colour. There is no analog to morality there. Furthermore, the extent to which people agree on colours (down to quite specific shades, on which basis appreciation of a great deal of art, for example, rests) is far greater than the extent to which they agree on morality.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@Mentat1231 Oh, correction: I meant that the definition of a well-functioning brain is a matter of SUBJECTIVITY, sorry. Long day.

[Th1sWasATriumph]

@KaseyAkira 331 people didn't give a shit I'm not AronRa.

[RomansPwnedJesus]

@Th1sWasATriumph The Royal Dutch Medical Association officially views circumcision as a violation of a boy's rights.

[Mentat1231]

@Th1sWasATriumph

Oh, and lest my appeal to what has historically been perceived as "moral" cause you to think that it is therefore subjective, I want to re-iterate my original point: Every society has perceived that morals really exist. They have disagreed about the "shades", but that there are such things as moral values and duties is an absolutely universal belief (until lately, among a few philosophers, that is; but then some philosophers are Solipsists, too).

[Mentat1231]

@Th1sWasATriumph

There is indeed an analog to morality, if you formulate the analogy correctly. If light ceased to exist, then there would be no color. Color has to do with properties of light (and the perception of these properties); morality has to do with properties of the behaviors of sentient creatures (and the perception of these properties).

To elucidate the analogy further, consider that logic also would not exist, if there were no thinking beings; yet logic is objectively real.

[Mentat1231]

@Th1sWasATriumph

But, historically speaking, every code of ethics/Law has forbidden certain things (like rape, murder, and theft). Granted, these have had slightly different "shadings" as to what constituted "murder" or "rape", etc, but that these things are generally wrong has been agree by every major society I can think of.

I'll admit that calling a brain "well-functioning" could be a subjective assessment, but it could also be based on commonalities among mankind throughout history.