William Lane Craig vs Alex O’Connor on the Kalam

William Lane Craig vs Alex O’Connor on the Kalam June 22, 2020

Alex O’Connor is a bit of a star in the atheist world right now, with a huge internet following, getting invited to conferences and getting huge names to discussions, from Richard Dawkins to, now, William Lane Craig.

So here he is talking to William Lane Craig. And I am sure as hell O’Connor has read my book on the Kalam because he uses my conceptual nominalistic analogies of chairs and species.

About three-quarters of the way through, he uses my argument on the circularity of the KCA as set out here and elsewhere:

Kalam Cosmological Argument: Causality and a Circular Argument

I have never before seen WLC give so much ground as I did here. His approach to mereological nihilism (similar to conceptual nominalism I often talk about) was initially (as it is elsewhere) to be incredulous and mocking of such an anti-realist approach. But as O’Connor goes on, he almost seems to understand it more and take it more seriously.

Which makes me think that WLC needs to do some more work on the Kalam and properly investigate some of the bigger criticisms against it. Personally, I think O’Connor should have really pressed WLC on this subject.

He can start with my book: Did God Create the Universe from Nothing?: Countering William Lane Craig’s Kalam Cosmological Argument (UK).


Stay in touch! Like A Tippling Philosopher on Facebook:

A Tippling Philosopher

You can also buy me a cuppa. Or buy some of my awesome ATP merchandise! Please… It justifies me continuing to do this!


Browse Our Archives