Do NOT Let Craig Rape your Mind with "Being" and "Nothing"!

Response to this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fSluNqGxRA&feature=channel_video_title

Craig builds the whole majestic building of philosophical arguments for god on two words - "Being" and "nothing", which are abstractions, so he doesn't have a leg to stand on. He should be stopped at the foundation, because if you let him slip them in, he can use philosophical language and logic to do anything he wants with you! Thankfully, he doesn't have the proper tools, they are abstractions.

"Philosophy and the Reification of the Unreal" by Jud Evans:

http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/reification_of_the_unreal.htm

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• William Lane Craig
• religion
• theism
• god
• Christianity
• philosophy
• atheism
• science
• phisics
• second law of thermodynamics
• being
• nothing
• concept
• reification
• Kalam cosmological argument
• the universe
• belief
• career
• faith
• Al Ghazali
• logic

[krapptacular]

Damn i messed that up.  LOL

[dewinthemorning]

@krapptacular "Damn i messed that up. LOL "

No, you didn't. My cognitive faculties make me disregard the typos, lol:

"Yes, his argument is flawed right from the start. And yet even a layman as I can catch it.

God would need a cause, that is his flaw. You shouldn't just jump to your answer, so how smart is Craig? And no, we have no evidence for any mind floating in space!"

It's actually a very good comment. :)

[dewinthemorning]

@krapptacular You "messed up" in another way - apparently liking the video, but not "liking it" officially. LOL

[urcorrect]

I'm no physicist or philosopher, so correct me if I'm off, but I think it may also be fair to respond to craig's version of the age old kalam argument in a form similar to: That which exists has a net energy value. Something metaphysical has no energy. God is metaphysical. Therefor, God does not exist. If the so-called metaphysical can affect the physical, we can discard the first law of thermodynamics... and good luck substantiating that idea.

I too was blocked by youtube user drcraigvideos.

[dewinthemorning]

@urcorrect Brilliant! Thumbs up!

But, would you believe it, I have watched videos where Craig answers questions about the first law of thermodynamics in the following way: "The first law of thermodynamics is valid only after the first Plank unit of time, Physicists don't know about before that. God created all energy."

The physical objects in the universe have positive energy. But empty spase is full of negative energy, so the sum of the energy of the universe is zero.

[urcorrect]

@dewinthemorning Clever, but it seems to me the premises are unsupported; a timeless event and a process of metaphysical creating stuff. Admitting before time is unknown, they're arguments from ignorance at best. He also states "nothing comes from nothing", so god couldn't even create energy absent the 1st law. He's left with, stuff always existed and god manipulated it, but occam's razor cuts out god.

Thanks for the response. And great video.

[dewinthemorning]

@urcorrect I just now happened to come across the video where Craig states that before the big bang the first law of thermodynamics is not valid. And then, in the same breath he says that god created all the energy. What you say: "nothing comes from nothing", so god couldn't even create energy absent the 1st law. " is absolutely right!

watch?v=l50ZZMs1RqY&feature=g-­vrec&context=G2611088RVAAAAAAA­AAQ

[philhellenes]

You can find intelligent Christians. You can find honest Christians. But I never encountered a single one that was both honest AND intelligent. The level of arguments the intelligent ones use are so inconsistent I'm unable to believe they believe them. The natural is caused by the supernatural? Silly word games to fool children. The other week I heard Willy say the killing of non-Christian children in the Bible was an "infinite good". Nice guy, and by "nice" I mean revolting and putrid.

[integralmath]

"the formaldehyde of his philosophical beliefs where he keeps the corpses of long ago refuted philosophies."

You, madam, are one clever wordsmith.

[TheAwesomeMaths]

@philhellenes You are disgusting and not very intelligent.

[krapptacular]

Yeah craig is right about me in one way, i can't spell for shit. I don't see how that makes one stupid though.

Damn when i see it now, it's like I'm illiterate or something. WTF I hate seeing what i have written and i do get carried away sometimes.

[krapptacular]

Yes his argument is flawed right from the start. And yet a layman as i can catch it.

Godwould need a cuse, that is his flaw. You don't just jump to your answer, so how smart is craig. And yes we no evidence of any mind floating in space. LOL

[Aguijon1982]

Philosophy is radical questioning, but to really question – to push one’s questioning to the brink of the abyss – one must be an atheist, for faith gives answers too soon.Faith and philosophy are mortal enemies; in fact, ‘faith is so absolutely the mortal enemy that philosophy does not even begin to want in any way to do battle with it.’ ‘the philosopher does not believe’ – he cannot believe, because faith is in radical opposition to the very nature of philosophy as questioning. M Heidegger.

[dingodavid]

WLC is incredibly simple.

[dingodavid]

He's 'lost in space'...Let him go...

[dingodavid]

Bill to Earth...

[dingodavid]

If a story sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.

Pay attention to the initial premeses.

[dingodavid]

Craig's debating opponents need to contest his premeses rather than his pre-arranged conclusions.

Any dickhead can convincingly reach pre-arranged conclusions if they arbitrarily pre-arrange their initial premeses.

[dingodavid]

WLC appears to be 'flabbergasted' by the entire universe.

Perhaps that's why he has given up on reason, and turned to the easy alternative of 'theistic philosophy'.

[finchy633]

@dewinthemorning The connective did not serve me well, but I could hardly complement you on one and not the other. Your ideas are grand though!

[dewinthemorning]

@McPrfctday Thank you, thank you, thank you. lol

[McPrfctday]

@McPrfctday sorry "breasts, accent and mind compliment each other", so there is nearly the full 'person'.

[McPrfctday]

@dewinthemorning You have wonderful breast but I also agree with what you say lolol. The comment section here should have more breast references... That would be normal human behaviour... But I'm think people are scared of being offensive. I'll do it for them; "Your breasts and your accent compliment each other beautifully" :)

[dewinthemorning]

@finchy633 You don't have to add 'but', the two clauses in your sentence don't have to exclude each other. lol

[finchy633]

I agree with everything you say about WLC, but I have to add that you have fantastic breasts.

[tsunami770]

@philhellenes To be ignorant means one does not know. I can forgive that in a person who honestly does not know a given fact even though they may be intelligent but the theist must submit to a doctrine of opposing on faith any idea that is not conducive to the belief that their religion is divinely right. So how honest and intelligent can a christian be if they have to sabotage those qualities to accept the self serving notion that they are going to heaven and I will burn?

[dewinthemorning]

@tsunami770 I like this idea - all of us, blocked by drcraigsvideos belonging to quite an exclusive elitist club (because of the higher intelligence of its members, lol).