UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com

UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com (http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/index.php)
-   The Pit (http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Who likes debates? (http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1586210)

Rawshik 02-03-2013 03:18 AM

Who likes debates?
 
Here, have one. It's 3 hours, so only people who really like them will watch it.

Horsedick.MPEG 02-03-2013 03:19 AM

no

AeroRocker 02-03-2013 03:29 AM

Is faith reasonable?

Seriously? These guys talked out of their asses for hours about something, that by the very definition of the question, is already false?

Rawshik 02-03-2013 03:49 AM

You didn't watch it.

TunerAddict 02-03-2013 03:54 AM

You have an agenda with this video, OP.

I don't like blatant agendas, at least be decent enough to cover up and have some modesty!

Rawshik 02-03-2013 03:58 AM

I don't have an agenda. In fact, I don't expect any of you to watch it and was worried that if you did would think that very thought.

snipelfritz 02-03-2013 04:03 AM

I like debate and rhetoric in form.

But this just does not seem like a great subject. Especially as an absurdist who believes faith as being both impossible and pointless to consider "reasonable" on "not reasonable." It might be "useful" or "worthwhile" but in the end, I'm not gonna touch it.

slipknot5678 02-03-2013 04:05 AM

I like debate but I'm not watching a three hour debate on that subject. :p:

Jon777 02-03-2013 04:10 AM

I hear from my friends that William Lane Craig is an alright dude (if I'm thinking of the right person). Also, I used to do debate in high school.

Too bad this is 3 hours long. I don't think I have the patience for that.

MAC2322 02-03-2013 04:12 AM

I turned it off as soon as I saw it was William Lane Craig. That guy is an idiot.

TooktheAtrain 02-03-2013 04:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAC2322
I turned it off as soon as I saw it was William Lane Craig. That guy is an idiot.

that

Rawshik 02-03-2013 04:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAC2322
I turned it off as soon as I saw it was William Lane Craig. That guy is an idiot.


Subjectively you may think so, but objectively he's not. Anyone who's spent decades of their life studying philosophy and theology is most certainly full of knowledge and would be considered intelligent.

Also, I understand that because I'm the pretty much the "resident Christian" around here that I will probably get a lot of crap for this but that's not the purpose of the thread.

Todd Hart 02-03-2013 04:20 AM

A three hour debate about a self-refuting proposition, what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawshik
Subjectively you may think so, but objectively he's not. Anyone who's spent decades of their life studying philosophy and theology is most certainly full of knowledge and would be considered intelligent.


He's full of knowledge, but that's no guarantor of intelligence. His arguments are painfully full of non-sequiturs and holes in logic.

Rawshik 02-03-2013 04:34 AM

He seemed to make some pretty logical points this time around. :shrug: I'm not here to argue though.

MAC2322 02-03-2013 04:34 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawshik
Subjectively you may think so, but objectively he's not. Anyone who's spent decades of their life studying philosophy and theology is most certainly full of knowledge and would be considered intelligent.


Not really. His arguments are absolute garbage and display either a very flawed grasp of logic or a willful ignorance of facts.

He is clearly not stupid, since he has knowledge, but his failure to use that knowledge to craft intelligent arguments makes him an idiot.

vIsIbleNoIsE 02-03-2013 05:22 AM

after a certain age, we all bend our beliefs the way we want to, and knowing the truth won't matter in the end anyway. i enjoy debating about stuff like this with friends, but doing it all serious-like in the public forum seems kinda novel.

jrcsgtpeppers 02-03-2013 05:24 AM

I like debates because I like tests and i like rethinking my thoughts and relearning.
But i wont watch that. Iv debated it many times and you always end up with a girl and a guy both saying their gender is better because it just is.

Aralingh 02-03-2013 06:04 AM

Here's a better video for you,

part 1
show


part 2
show

MadClownDisease 02-03-2013 07:41 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawshik
He seemed to make some pretty logical points this time around. :shrug: I'm not here to argue though.

Then why did you post a video of a debate on the topic?



But ultimately the answer is... no, it's not reasonable. It's only reasonable if you already assume the existence of God, not working in the other direction. All the arguments given that I've seen (which is a good number, I spent a portion of my degree studying this) at best show that God might be compatible with the arguments given against him, they rarely offer any positive reason for that position.
Saying the God might be possible is by no means saying it is reasonable to believe so. In fact, an atheist could accept that theism may very well be true whilst still thinking that until there is any positive argument for God, it's not reasonable.

The classic tale to illustrate this is the story of the Indian prince (I can't remember who came up with it). A prince lived in a hot area of India in his palace and one day some traveller comes along and tells him about his travels. He tells him in some places in the world, it is so cold that water suddenly turns solid, with no intermediate state. In fact, it even falls from the sky in this solid form.
Of course the Indian prince doesn't believe him, and he is completely reasonable to do so. Why on earth would he believe that? We know now he was wrong, but that wouldn't make his belief reasonable.


All the cosmological arguments I've seen for God, although they get very complex with talk of modal logic and causation, essentially boil down to the same thing...
Here's the world. Why is it here? It can't just be! God did it.

...and of course the response every time is "Well then why can God just be?". These debates get very long winded and complex, but to be honest never really get any further than that.
God may be compatible, but that doesn't make it reasonable to believe in him.

EDIT: watching the video, I definitely read a paper from this guy. I remember the way he keeps saying that a "transcendent personal being" is what we mean by God, as if that shows that any argument for a prior cause of the universe also proves that it is God and he is like that. Even allowing cosmological arguments on the origins of existence you don't get any further than possibly the existence of a prior thing with causal power. That's it. That does nothing to show that any resembling the Christian God.

Todd Hart 02-03-2013 07:48 AM





Intelligent debates on religion. (note: Jews are far better at defending religion/religious ideas than Christians, mostly because Jews have a sense of humour/irony/satire/self-criticism/self-reflection.)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:59 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.