William Lane Craig Is Not A Model of Reality

I blog at Tuesday Afternoon.
http://www.12Tuesday.com

I blog at the League of Reason.
http://www.leagueofreason.co.uk

Follow me on Twitter.
http://www.twitter.com/theowarner

My NaNoWriMo blog is at:
http://www.ashisownsoul.com

My other YouTube channel is:
http://www.youtube.com/ashisownsoul

My Amazon Wish List
http://amzn.com/w/RZN64P6WM5W4

Category:

Education

Tags:

• william
• lane
• craig
• logic
• contradiction
• philosophy
• philosophia
• indoctrination
• theology
• christianity
• christian
• burial
• tomb
• history
• historical
• resurrection
• crucifixion
• apologetics
• richard
• dawkins
• child
• abuse
• discussion
• commentary
• religion
• spirituality
• andromedaswake
• paul
• simon
• talk
• photography
• video
• log
• vlog
• slideshow
• presenter
• stephen
• hawking
• leonard
• mlodinow
• the
• grand
• design
• model
• models
• of
• reality
• universe
• big
• bang
• cosmology

[facilisdescenus]

Craig is trying to show the implications of Hawking's philosophy are things that you believe to be false and as such you should reject the assumptions.If someone came up to you and told you Bigbangcosmology and YEC are equivalent models of reality , you would most likely reply that this is false. Because you believe this is false you would reject the assumption of anti-realism. Craig does take it for granted that you believe YEC is not equivalent to BBC because this not not controversial

[theowarner]

@facilisdescenus

I believe that YEC and BBC are not equivalent but obviously, that is the question at hand in Hawking's philosophy.

I can reject Hawking's philosophy based on my opposing belief, unto itself. That's just to head to head opinions. I say non-equivalent. Hawkings says equivalent.

Something else is needed if Craig wants to win the point.

[theowarner]

@CartesianTheist

Again, I'm not suggesting that Craig is not qualified to talk about Hawkings. I'm just saying that when he did in this interview, he made an argument that didn't make any sense.

And, actually, I would say that most professors will try to explain their subject and not say "I'm a professional." Craig's response to most of his more informal critics is: "Go learn philosophy." Where is the dialog? Where is the teaching? I see nothing but "I'm smart. You're not. Go away."

[theowarner]

@groovyengineer

That would have been a much more compelling reply than Craig's.

[SaintKimbo]

Beats me why anyone who possesses objective reasoning would bother debating with WLC,

As a Christian, WLC, will NEVER change his mind.

He will always pontificate in the favor of the uncaused creator.

He is really just a sophisticated Kent Hovind and it is just as futile and pointless trying to sway him toward any other position.

[MisterTutor2010]

Is it true that in Hilbert Hotel that you can check out anytime you want but you can nevel leave?

Oh never mind wrong hotel :)

[mon2nika]

The world is mind made, not man made. Everything we find in the universe is a single unit which comes with a flip side. How we use it and what we do with is our choice. It takes a pair to make a whole. You cannot be whole when you take sides. The truth is just a popularity contest. People like Craig are to far gone to get him to see another point of view. He just cant or wont wrap his head around it because it can get spooky. Obviously he is just not ready to make the transformation yet.

[YOURINQUIRER]

This is one of many videos falsely DMCA'd by the hypcritical "Christian" followers of William Lane Craig. @theowarner is to be praised for his courage.

[CheekyVimto08]

Is Hawking actually an anti-realist? Wouldn't that basically just be a cognitive relativist? Then how can you write a book saying you know anything at all, let alone how the universe began?

[humanistheart]

I've yet to hear a decent argument come from Craig. It's just the same trite stuff over and over, things even a teenager could defeat easily.

[Abu7929]

Theo, the majority of Craig's opponents react defensively to his argument from morality. A wise opponents would admit ethics are relative, before explaining why we can build a powerful ethical model on the basis of reason. Unfortunately they deny or attempt to obscure his claims. Craig uses the argument because he knows his opponents nearly always fall face first into it, I think your efforts would be put to better use encouraging his opponents to improve rather than criticizing Craig.

[thePhantomFrank]

@idioticatheists I'm pretty disappointed in your shoe "always existed" means that the quantum vacuum is supposedly nothing. And this will educate both theists and atheists have certainly made the universe. Listen to the video, genius. It's the point where matter, energy, and time began. All you're doing is "tu mentiroso" because you really think that bashing a baby born prematurely at 8 months isn't really human and is clearly sexually aroused by them.

[Noisegator]

2:25 - Perhaps it is the bastard child of of Reductio ad Absurdum and Begging The Question.

[facilisdescenus]

@theowarner

Sorry , just noticed this.

Craig is just appealing to our prior beliefs. For example, If Peter Singer or some other ethicist came up with some philosophy that says that it OK to kill babies for fun , it would be perfectly valid to point out this is an implication of his philosophy.

Craig is basically asking if it is more plausible that Hawking is right and YEC and BBC are equivalent or Hawking is wrong and YEC and BBC are not equivalent.