On Causation and the Ethics of Discourse.

Craig's responses:
http://hr-hr.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=150792504987652&comments
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8846

Theo Warner's Tuesday Afternoon article:
http://12tuesday.com/william-lane-craig-is-not-theoreticalbullshit/

Go here to submit questions to Dr. Craig:
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=1180&ACTION_REQUIRED...

Klraifying Kalam Kraziness:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmeZ_BAWAhQ

A written version of this video is available at the Tuesday Afternoon website:
http://12tuesday.com/on-causation-and-the-ethics-of-discourse/

Category:

Travel & Events

Tags:

• god
• cause
• effect
• kalam
• cosmological
• argument
• william
• lane
• craig
• debate
• universe
• theoreticalbullshit
• theowarner

[HitchPaine3]

you are the man. William Lane Craig is an immoral prick who thinks animals don't feel pain.

[Br0k3nS41nt]

@OriakoPhi You weren't explicit, a educated philosopher/logician such of yourself should know clarity is God.

[Alexanderthegreat616]

There is some evidence of quantum particles that are observed to come into existence spontaneously. Whether or not this is the the particles traveling in and out of the observable universe, a lack of accuracy or a true something from nothing occurrence is yet to be seen. I may have read this from out dated materials if i have correct me if I'm wrong and point me to more reputable sources. Just trying to point out that "creatio ex nihilo" may have occurred not that this was caused by "GOD"

[itsjustameme]

I know one thing that comes from nothing: Pocket lint.

Unless... Oh my Dawkins... Pocket lint is proof of God's existence.

[Sunky4u]

@TheAlexANGST Duly noted. thanks for the info.

[TheAlexANGST]

@Sunky4u Or, in other words, what literary trope it fits under, in terms of being a figure of speech. Hmmm, I'd say... it could be considered a catachresis, or a misunderstanding of word usage, perhaps not far off from truism, where the statement itself may seem self-evident, but also has the technical fallacy of incorrect terminology. If we are to get technical about it, I do believe we would be wasting our time. "To cause something to exist" is bad terminology.

[Sunky4u]

@TheAlexANGST I meant what kind of figure of speech e.g Irony, Metonymy etc.

[TheAlexANGST]

@Sunky4u A figure of speech is a non-literal expression or use of language, in this case, would be used for the simple purpose of explaining a causal action, though it's not technically a correct use of words.

[Sunky4u]

@TheAlexANGST What figure of speech is it ?

[TheAlexANGST]

@Sunky4u He said it was a figure of speech, and that causality can only happen to that which already exists, therefore the carpenter caused MATERIALS that were previously not a table, to become a table. "Cause a table to exist" is a phrase that is inherently, by definition, meaning that they are simply bringing the table into existence, but that isn't what is happening.