Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath Pt. 15 of 15

Conversation between Dawkins and McGrath from the Root of all Evil. This is uncut footage. Comments and ratings appreciated! Thanks!

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• Alister
• McGrath
• Religion
• Atheism
• Christianity
• The
• Root
• of
• All
• Evil

[bobdinker]

Great comments from both of them. It's nice to see a discussion of these issues that dosen't turn into a fight. Thanks for posting.

[Craplatte]

@bobdinker Yeah, that really is refreshing! The greatest thing about it in my opinion is, that they let each other finish their sentences. That is extremely unusual in religious discussions or debates.

[DMBtomp]

@Craplatte Yeah sadly that's the case, that's why I enjoyed this one so much. Good job to both. Dawkins undoubtedly came off better, in terms of arguments. It's a shame Alister didn't combat him as much; this could have been much more interesting and fruitful. I'm a Christian and think about this sorta stuff quite a bit, and I think even some of MY thoughts could have answered Dawkins more fully. Still, extremely good!!

[sasop117]

very nice, thanks for the upload, just noticed the look on richards face when he didn't answer the last question

[TheEnlightened77]

Very civil discussion by both men and this is the way it should be done. I concur with RD when in speaking of faith, he mentioned that critical thinking may be stopped by the believer since the truth is known already. On the other hand, I liked some of the answers AMG gave, although he was less effective in answering the question on the problem of evil. AMG should have invoked 'love" in relation to "true faith" and a quest for understanding as well as the cosmic Christ and consciousness.

[fisheresque]

I'm not a fan of "my guy beat your guy" comments. It doesn't add anything constructive to this debate and implies at the heart of this argument, what you're really concerned with is being the "winner" and not furthering a cooperative inquiry into these issues. These two men set a great example for the rest of us in how to conduct yourself for these discussions. Instead of finger pointing and complaining, why don't you actually contribute something of substance to this argument? Both sides!

[Starnebula100]

Decent and respectful debate. However, I am disappointed with Alister's lack of answers of why and how questions - he simply went round and round. Alister gave mild answers but in essence there was no substance in his arguments. But then again, Alister proves the point that it is FAITH after all. In that case, one can have faith in anything and just believe that it is true. So any faith is no better than the other faith. I hope the Evangelists understand this ultimate truth.

[Bethos1247]

After this conversation, I understand both sides better.

[axolotl5]

This was a good discussion. Both were civil & respectful. Well done!

[jockmo42]

@MrSDSTRIKEBREAKER I don't think someone as intelligent as you really cares how delicately I put things, but whatever. All I really took any issue with was your comment on McGrath's closing statement, and it's not even a big issue. It's just my opinion that the guy was extremely mature the entire time, and while he's still an idiot, most people in his position wouldn't have been so polite. He let Dawkins have the last word, and I really respected that. We just reacted differently. No biggie bro.

[MrSDSTRIKEBREAKER]

@jockmo42 No, I do "give a fuck" as you so delicately put it. Yes it's good that two people clearly at polar opposites can debate without using chainsaws. I've seen a few of McGrath's debates and he strikes me as particularly irritating in his "reasoning" - Dawkins is the most patient man on the planet. I doubt McGrath "took" anything away from the debate, he's likely still as deluded as he's ever been, there's usually not much hope for people like him. Occasionally the odd one will see sense.

[jockmo42]

@MrSDSTRIKEBREAKER My point is that a lot of the people who Dawkins talks with end up screaming him out of the room. They both remained civil and many of the commenters here took a page from their book. I'm just saying that yours seems rather presumptive to me given the situation. Maybe McGrath was genuinely pleased with the insights Dawkins elaborated for him that morning, not just that it was over.

I doubt you really give a fuck, but you went "Ummm..." and asked for my point, so there you go.