Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sotzo · 06-07-2002, 05:06 AM

I don't know if this is the appropriate DB for this question but here goes....

Much critique of WL Craig exists on this site which is understandable since he is perhaps the most popular Christian apologist at this time. However, much of the critique aims not so much at Craig's arguments, but Craig himself, particularly his debate style. Many here have suggested that he carefully chooses his opponents such that they he looks good.

The most recent thread on this issue is in the Feedback forum and if I was more web savvy I would put a link to the thread, but I don't know how!

It is entitled Craig-Tabash debate (actually the original poster butchered the spelling of Tabash's name so I think it says something like Craig-Taback).

Well, for those of you who think that Craig has not debated good opponents (ie, he has selected opponents that make him look good), my question is this:

If you could choose a debate opponent for Craig, who would it be? Although I'd prefer to see names of opponents who are living, perhaps there are deceased opponents who you think in their day would have given Craig a run for his money - include those names too!

cheers,

jkb

Steven Carr · 06-07-2002, 05:12 AM

I think Jeffery Jay Lowder or Doug Krueger would be good opponents for William Lane Craig.

Echo · 06-07-2002, 05:50 AM

Michael Martin comes to mind.

He does formal debates, so maybe he has already done one with craig; but I have not seen it if he has.

I can think of numerous people on this board and usenet's Alt.Atheism who would make very formidable opponents. I've heard that craig is very finicky about only selecting opponents who possess PhDs, although apparently he has made exceptions.

Clutch · 06-07-2002, 07:30 AM

I don't think anyone's claimed that Craig has not debated some good opponents, or even excellent ones. It's more that there's a *tendency* to pick what seems to be soft-ish targets.

But I agree that too much should not be made of this. It does a disservice to Craig, for one thing, since he is a very formidable debater. That he makes his opponents seem soft might have more to do with him than with them.

Pomp · 06-07-2002, 11:05 AM

I'm not sure that this is really an EoG topic, either, but I'm not sure where it would fit better, so I'll leave it here, unless one of the other mods has a better idea.

For reference, <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002110" target="_blank">here</a> is the Feedback thread sotzo mentioned.

Sotzo, the code I used to make the link is <url=http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002110>here& lt;/url>, only replace < and > with [ and ].

sotzo · 06-07-2002, 11:16 AM

Pompous:

Thanks for the help on how to post a link. And thanks for allowing the thread to remain in your honorable domain.

jkb

David Bowden · 06-07-2002, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sotzo:
<strong>If you could choose a debate opponent for Craig, who would it be? Although I'd prefer to see names of opponents who are living, perhaps there are deceased opponents who you think in their day would have given Craig a run for his money - include those names too!</strong>

I'll second the Michael Martin nomination. Martin seems most appropriate - a professional philosopher and author of both The Case Against Christianity and Atheism: A Philosophical Justification. (Why he and Craig haven't already debated numerous times on different aspects of the Christianity question intrigues me a little. They seem like such obvious opponents.)

A Lowder/Craig debate would be well worth any price of admission, IMO.

For pure entertainment purposes: our very own Koy, of course. And if we can't get Koy, the late, great Thomas Paine will do.

Dead but (I think) potentially interesting WLC opponents:

Corliss Lamont
John L. MacKie
Bertrand Russell (in his rhetorical prime)
Robert Ingersoll
Thomas Henry Huxley
W. V. Quine
Edward Gibbon
John Stuart Mill

And going off the deep end a little...

Pontius Pilate.

Caiaphas, the High Priest.

St. Paul (I'd love to see where he and Craig diverge. "No, Mr Craig, I didn't write either of those letters to Timothy... and did you say you allow your women to teach Sunday School classes?!")

Any first-generation Christian (would he/she support or contradict the Gospel/Acts accounts?)

either Porphyry or Celsus

Grumpy · 06-07-2002, 01:52 PM

Perhaps not on the SecWeb MB -- but the II Library does have critiques of Craig's arguments, as opposed to debating style.

Robert M. Price has <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/stinketh.html" target="_blank">at least</a> <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/reply-to-craig.html" target="_blank">two</a>.
James Still has <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/kalam.html" target="_blank">another</a>. In fact, critiquing Craig's kalam cosmological argument has become a <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/greg_scorzo/kalam.html" target="_blank">cottage</a> <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/davies.html" target="_blank">industry</a> on II.

[ June 07, 2002: Message edited by: Grumpy ]</p>

Brad Messenger · 06-07-2002, 10:39 PM

It depends on the format of the debate. Jeff Lowder has the conversational speaking style that would work well with an oral debate. Since Craig only engages in debates with live or radio audiences, an atheist needs to have the same clarity and conciseness in their argument Craig has perfected. Lowder's seven points provides a map for his audience similar to the structure of Craig's audiences. Michael Martin also does a good job of structuring his arguments.

Since success in live debates results in large part from presentation, Craig gains an immediate advantage when facing foreign-born opponents who cannot clearly state their cases in English. Also since Craig is always the first speaker, he sets the tone of the debate and determines its structure. So when the atheist opponent tries to argue in a different style from Craig, Bill charges him with ignoring his points. If Craig had to start second, he may have less success.

In written debates, though, there would be many good candidates to face him. Of course, Craig does not do written debates.

06-07-2002, 05:06 AM	#1
sotzo Regular Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Lakeland, FL, USA Posts: 102	WLC opponents I don't know if this is the appropriate DB for this question but here goes.... Much critique of WL Craig exists on this site which is understandable since he is perhaps the most popular Christian apologist at this time. However, much of the critique aims not so much at Craig's arguments, but Craig himself, particularly his debate style. Many here have suggested that he carefully chooses his opponents such that they he looks good. The most recent thread on this issue is in the Feedback forum and if I was more web savvy I would put a link to the thread, but I don't know how! It is entitled Craig-Tabash debate (actually the original poster butchered the spelling of Tabash's name so I think it says something like Craig-Taback). Well, for those of you who think that Craig has not debated good opponents (ie, he has selected opponents that make him look good), my question is this: If you could choose a debate opponent for Craig, who would it be? Although I'd prefer to see names of opponents who are living, perhaps there are deceased opponents who you think in their day would have given Craig a run for his money - include those names too! cheers, jkb

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-07-2002, 05:12 AM	#2
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	I think Jeffery Jay Lowder or Doug Krueger would be good opponents for William Lane Craig.

06-07-2002, 05:50 AM	#3
Echo Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Winter Park, Fl USA Posts: 411	Michael Martin comes to mind. He does formal debates, so maybe he has already done one with craig; but I have not seen it if he has. I can think of numerous people on this board and usenet's Alt.Atheism who would make very formidable opponents. I've heard that craig is very finicky about only selecting opponents who possess PhDs, although apparently he has made exceptions.

06-07-2002, 07:30 AM	#4
Clutch Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 3,751	I don't think anyone's claimed that Craig has not debated some good opponents, or even excellent ones. It's more that there's a tendency to pick what seems to be soft-ish targets. But I agree that too much should not be made of this. It does a disservice to Craig, for one thing, since he is a very formidable debater. That he makes his opponents seem soft might have more to do with him than with them.

06-07-2002, 11:05 AM	#5
Pomp Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Indianapolis area Posts: 3,468	I'm not sure that this is really an EoG topic, either, but I'm not sure where it would fit better, so I'll leave it here, unless one of the other mods has a better idea. For reference, <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002110" target="_blank">here</a> is the Feedback thread sotzo mentioned. Sotzo, the code I used to make the link is <url=http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002110>here& lt;/url>, only replace < and > with [ and ].

06-07-2002, 11:16 AM	#6
sotzo Regular Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Lakeland, FL, USA Posts: 102	Pompous: Thanks for the help on how to post a link. And thanks for allowing the thread to remain in your honorable domain. jkb

06-07-2002, 01:52 PM	#8
Grumpy Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Alaska, USA Posts: 1,535	Perhaps not on the SecWeb MB -- but the II Library does have critiques of Craig's arguments, as opposed to debating style. Robert M. Price has <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/stinketh.html" target="_blank">at least</a> <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/reply-to-craig.html" target="_blank">two</a>. James Still has <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_still/kalam.html" target="_blank">another</a>. In fact, critiquing Craig's kalam cosmological argument has become a <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/greg_scorzo/kalam.html" target="_blank">cottage</a> <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/graham_oppy/davies.html" target="_blank">industry</a> on II. [ June 07, 2002: Message edited by: Grumpy ]</p>

06-07-2002, 10:39 PM	#9
Brad Messenger Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: New York,NY, USA Posts: 214	It depends on the format of the debate. Jeff Lowder has the conversational speaking style that would work well with an oral debate. Since Craig only engages in debates with live or radio audiences, an atheist needs to have the same clarity and conciseness in their argument Craig has perfected. Lowder's seven points provides a map for his audience similar to the structure of Craig's audiences. Michael Martin also does a good job of structuring his arguments. Since success in live debates results in large part from presentation, Craig gains an immediate advantage when facing foreign-born opponents who cannot clearly state their cases in English. Also since Craig is always the first speaker, he sets the tone of the debate and determines its structure. So when the atheist opponent tries to argue in a different style from Craig, Bill charges him with ignoring his points. If Craig had to start second, he may have less success. In written debates, though, there would be many good candidates to face him. Of course, Craig does not do written debates.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.