Archives for October 2011

Summary and Assessment of the Craig-Drange Debate (1997)

(This is yet another old debate summary and assessment from my archives. I think I wrote this around 1998. I am posting it here unchanged.)On February 26, 1997 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, William Lane Craig debated Theodore Drange of West Virginia University. The topic was, "Does God exist?"Note: video of the debate is available online here.SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING THIS DEBATE SUMMARYDrange did not address each of Craig's theistic arguments in turn. Instead, he made three … [Read more...]

LINK: Bradley Monton’s Blog

This is another one that falls into the "not new, but new for me" category.Bradley Monton is an atheist philosopher at the University of Colorado at Boulder who specializes in philosophy of religion, philosophy of science (especially physics), probabilistic epistemology, and philosophy of time. Secular Outpost readers will be interested in Monton's interesting essay on the fine-tuning argument, "God, Fine-Tuning, and the Problem of Old Evidence," and his book, Seeking God in Science: An Atheist … [Read more...]

In Defense of William Lane Craig

After my last post on William Lane Craig and debating, I decided to do several web searches related to William Lane Craig and debating. While I obviously disagree with his arguments, I have no problem with him as a person. I suspect the majority of atheists (who know who he is) also do not. But a few of his critics have engaged in personal attacks which I think are unfair and inaccurate. As a freethinker, I think it's important to follow the evidence wherever it leads and avoid sloppy thinking. … [Read more...]

LINK: Matt McCormick’s Atheism Blog

His blog isn't new, but I just discovered it and wanted to mention it here.LINKFor those of you who do not know who Matt McCormick is, he is an atheist philosopher of religion at California State University at Sacramento. … [Read more...]

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.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. I … [Read more...]

LINK: Two Sites Related to Darwinian Ethics

While web browsing, I stumbled across two sites related to nontheistic and/or Darwinian ethics. Pretty much anyone interested in The Secular Outpost will probably be interested in both of these sites and for the same reasons.1. The website for the late James Rachels. For those of you who do not know who James Rachels was, he was an important moral philosopher. Among his many publications were an interesting argument for atheism (republished on the Secular Web) and his book, Created from Animals: … [Read more...]

Why Won’t William Lane Craig Debate John Loftus?

On the Debunking Christianity website, John Loftus has recently posted an article, "Let's Recap Why William Lane Craig Refuses to Debate Me." The article even includes a picture of Craig's face digitally edited into the picture of a chicken, with the caption, "Is William Lane Craig Chicken to Debate John Loftus?" According to Loftus, in 1985 Craig apparently told a class at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, "the person I fear debating the most is a former student of mine." Loftus then … [Read more...]

Public Reason

There's a popular (I'm tempted to say "standard") secular liberal argument in support of a secular public sphere. Appeals to faith, the argument goes, might have purchase on the faithful, but not on those outside a particular sect. The Bible interpretation of a certain denomination or the pronouncements of popes and rebbes may legitimately persuade or motivate those who accept such authorities. But we live in a pluralistic society where no single overarching view of the good life is dominant. In … [Read more...]