Philosophical Vegan Forum

between a theist and an atheist?

I would have loved to see a religious debate between Bill Clinton and Christopher Hitchens. Also, Christopher Hitchens vs. George Bush would be hysterically funny I think.

I would love to see Matt Dillahunty taking on someone like William Lane Craig sometime, because I know Dillahunty can handle him without any problems.

Volenta wrote:I would love to see Matt Dillahunty taking on someone like William Lane Craig sometime, because I know Dillahunty can handle him without any problems.

Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens already debated Craig. I haven't seen these debates in their entirety, but do you think Dillahunty would do better than these three master debaters?

Jebus wrote:Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens already debated Craig. I haven't seen these debates in their entirety, but do you think Dillahunty would do better than these three master debaters?

Harris debated him only on morality, Dawkins never debated him (one-to-one) as far as I know (and to be honest, I'd rather see him talk about evolutionary biology), and Hitchens was as always more interested in the evil implications of theism rather than the existence of a theistic God. Dillahunty is maybe the best articulator in my opinion of the philosophical debate on the existence of God. I would also say that Sean Carroll already has completely destroyed Craig lately, but I think it's great to see Dillahunty argue with the 'bigger guys'.

Volenta wrote:I would love to see Matt Dillahunty taking on someone like William Lane Craig sometime, because I know Dillahunty can handle him without any problems.

This. Basically I want all important Christian apologetics to debate Matt Dillahunty for as long as possible.

Jebus wrote:Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens already debated Craig. I haven't seen these debates in their entirety, but do you think Dillahunty would do better than these three master debaters?

I think he would. Matt has much better understanding of debates, reasoning and philosophy than these three in my opinion even though they have more knowledge on their particular field. He said once on his show that Craig often lays out this checklist for what the opponent has to do to prove him wrong and that really seems to put off his opponents, I think this happened with Harris, although I have not seen his debates with Hitch and Dawkins.

Also what Volenta said.

miniboes wrote:Matt has much better understanding of debates, reasoning and philosophy than these three in my opinion even though they have more knowledge on their particular field.

Well, I don't know whether Dillahunty has a better understanding, in particular compared with Harris. They both just have a different debating style; Dillahunty especially likes to break down the argument very carefully and spot every small thing, while Harris is a master of rhetoric.
Also Dawkins shouldn't be underestimated and in his book The God Delusion he really does a great job (he doesn't debate that often), but I kind of have the feeling that while he's getting a bit older, he's not that sharp as he used to be.
I'm also not that blown away by Hitchens philosophical understanding as lots of people seem to be (but I have to say that he also helped me a lot to form an opinion about religion).

Volenta wrote:Well, I don't know whether Dillahunty has a better understanding, in particular compared with Harris. They both just have a different debating style; Dillahunty especially likes to break down the argument very carefully and spot every small thing, while Harris is a master of rhetoric.

Yeah, when writing that I was definitely doubting it myself in the case of Harris.

Also Dawkins shouldn't be underestimated and in his book The God Delusion he really does a great job (he doesn't debate that often), but I kind of have the feeling that while he's getting a bit older, he's not that sharp as he used to be.

Yeah, although that is probably so a debate is quite different.

I'm also not that blown away by Hitchens philosophical understanding as lots of people seem to be (but I have to say that he also helped me a lot to form an opinion about religion).

Nope, me neither. He did have this very persuasive way of speaking and his wit was incredible.

Volenta wrote:Hitchens was as always more interested in the evil implications of theism rather than the existence of a theistic God.

Really??? Hitchens was a supporter of the Jesus myth and I've often seen him speak and debate about the stupidity of the belief in itself.

Jebus wrote: Really??? Hitchens was a supporter of the Jesus myth and I've often seen him speak and debate about the stupidity of the belief in itself.

What are you referring to?

brimstoneSalad wrote:

Jebus wrote: Really??? Hitchens was a supporter of the Jesus myth and I've often seen him speak and debate about the stupidity of the belief in itself.

What are you referring to?

Referring to the Volenta quote that is right above my last post.