Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: 2014 debate: William Lane Craig vs Sean Carroll

  1. Top | #1
    Elder Contributor Underseer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    11,413
    Archived
    39,172
    Total Posts
    50,585
    Rep Power
    71

    2014 debate: William Lane Craig vs Sean Carroll

    6:39 synopsis including highlights:

    (View video on YouTube)

    Full debate:

    (View video on YouTube)

    William Lane Craig did a re-wording of the Kalam Cosmological argument that he's built his entire career around. Basically, he re-worded Kalam, played fast and loose with a few equivocation fallacies (e.g. "confusing" different philosophical meanings of the word "create") to make it sound like modern physics supports the claim that a god exists.

    Since the average Christian doesn't actually understand science very well, he has been wildly popular with Christians, because they can give each other WLC books and say "See? Modern physics proves that god is real and that Christianity was right all along!"

    Since he was mostly arguing with philosophers, he got away with making bad claims about physics for a very long time, but it was inevitable that physicists would eventually note that someone got famous mischaracterizing physics. Needless to say, trying to use his usual arguments on an actual physicist did not go well for Craig. Despite what Christians believe, they don't actually know more about physics than physicists.

    WLC's various confrontations with physicists went so badly that he was eventually forced to try and refute Einstein's relativity with a syllogism.


    (View video on YouTube)

    So the time line is:

    WLC tries to borrow legitimacy from physics to bolster an apologetics argument → physicists explain to him why his arguments are bad → WLC tries to disprove a cornerstone of physics with a syllogism, ignoring all available evidence → WLC then decides it's a good idea to have a public debate with Carroll

    His previous arguments with physicists went so badly that he was forced to try and disprove relativity, and he still agreed to have that debate with Carroll because he knows the average Christian will watch the above debate and think Craig won the debate, and probably won't look into the results of any of his previous debates with physicists.

  2. Top | #2
    Elder Contributor Underseer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    11,413
    Archived
    39,172
    Total Posts
    50,585
    Rep Power
    71
    PS—if Martymer makes a YouTube video about you, you've hit rock bottom. Martymer only goes after the really dumb ones (e.g. Spirit Science), presumably for the humor value.

  3. Top | #3
    Elder Contributor Underseer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Posts
    11,413
    Archived
    39,172
    Total Posts
    50,585
    Rep Power
    71
    More on William Lane Craig vs Einstein and the rest of reality:


    (View video on YouTube)

    The Kalam argument is correct because it is supported by the A theory of time. The A theory of time is true because that is what is needed to say that the Kalam argument is correct.


    The more he opens his mouth about relativity, the more he humiliates himself.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •