Some (Very Incomplete) Thoughts on Luke Muehlhauser’s “How to Debate William Lane Craig”

After writing a post about William Lane Craig and John Loftus debating, I remembered that Luke Muehlhauser (Common Sense Atheism) posted an article in April 2009 about debating William Lane Craig. (LINK) Here are some very incomplete thoughts about Luke’s article.

  1. I agree with Luke that many of Craig’s debate opponents were unqualified, in the sense that they did not have both (a) the relevant knowledge (e.g., of philosophy of religion, metaethics, etc.); and (b) suitable debating experience.
  2. I strongly disagree with Luke’s assumption that Craig has ‘won’ literally “all” of his debates, but I do think he has ‘won’ most of them. Off the top of my head, I think the following opponents ‘won’ their debates with Craig:
  3. I agree with the five specific points in his section, “How to Win.” On the other hand, in my experience, the people who would most benefit from following Luke’s advice tend to be the same people least likely to follow it.
"Hello Ryan, here are a few key problems I see in the Thomist version of ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."
"Here is an idea...I could attempt to construct a series of posts that form a ..."

Why I Reject the Resurrection – ..."
"I often summarize my posts at the end of the post and/or at the beginning ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."
"Good point. In my next post on Kreeft's case I will take a step back, ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment