Author Topic: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg  (Read 5984 times)

Logos

  • RF Moderator
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« on: December 08, 2013, 03:35:46 AM »
This forum is open for discussion about William Lane Craig's debate with Dr Alex Rosenberg on "Is Faith In God Reasonable?"

The debate took place at Purdue University on February 1, 2013.

Logos.

Is Metaphysical Naturalism Viable?
Does Epistemological Naturalism Imply Metaphysical Naturalism?
Is Faith In God Reasonable?
-Reasonable Faith Discussion Forum Moderator

ontologicalme

  • Guest
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2013, 06:16:43 AM »
Alpha decay favoured isotopes of some superheavy nuclei: Spontaneous fission versus alpha decay:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.1767

Many nuclei do not decay. The relation in decay has got to do with the amounts of neutrons in relation to protons . Generally speaking, at low atomic number the number of neutrons is equal to the number of neutrons (carbon 12: 6 + 6). When number increases, though, the relation increases, given that the nucleus requires more neutrons to hold it together At high atomic numbers there are no stable nuclei even though the concept of the stable line still exists.

Isotopes that are above the line will normally decay by emiting an electron (beta minus decay) whilst those that are below the line decay by emiting a positron (beta plus decay). Those that are just too big to hold together decay by alpha decay, that is to say they kick out a helium nucleus (two protons bound to two neutrons).

ontologicalme

  • Guest
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2013, 08:23:17 AM »
Up to min 50.  I seem to have heard, at least, 2 ad-hominem,1 or 2 appeals to authority, a couple more fallacious assertions ( ex.Uranium alpha decay occurs for no cause at all ) one 3rd phantom option, and unverified theories (string theory ??), from Rosenberg. The  euthypro dilema is the strongest more coherent argument he has brough up so far (talk about too little, too late).

DonĀ“t know if I can take much more of that. I suppose that, if Inwagen can have philosophical exchanges with Rosenberg, it must be that,  I am just too dense to understand him. Shrug :S

« Last Edit: December 08, 2013, 08:32:26 AM by ontologicalme »

ontologicalme

  • Guest
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2013, 08:49:39 AM »
I will add that WLC was having too much fun using premises taken from RosenbergĀ“s book, perhaps a little too much.


ontologicalme

  • Guest
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2013, 10:36:46 AM »
Rosenberg gets better after the 1st hour.

arayhay

  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2013, 09:56:14 AM »
I don't really care much about the debate. But I do care about the question "Is it reasonable to have faith and trust in YAH?'

I do.

This question probly wouldn't be asked if christianity had the guts to look at themselfs in a cridical manor. They might finally find out - if their ears are not completly shut, and their eyes completly darkined yet, that the system they hold so dear is completly corrupt and impossible to substanciate bibliclly.

I don't think christians realize that there is more evidance that christianity is a forum of sun god worship, than a biblical exstention of and fulfilment of God's plan of salvation.


Just look at the encyclopdia and referance christmas or easter, or sun rise service; its all pagan sun god worship.

AND I DON'T THINK YAH IS PLEASED TO HAVE IS REAL SON - not the christian polytheistic christ they offer - TIED TO any PAGAN HOLIDAY.

ontologicalme

  • Guest
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2013, 10:01:16 AM »
I don't really care much about the debate. But I do care about the question "Is it reasonable to have faith and trust in YAH?'

I do.

This question probly wouldn't be asked if christianity had the guts to look at themselfs in a cridical manor. They might finally find out - if their ears are not completly shut, and their eyes completly darkined yet, that the system they hold so dear is completly corrupt and impossible to substanciate bibliclly.

I don't think christians realize that there is more evidance that christianity is a forum of sun god worship, than a biblical exstention of and fulfilment of God's plan of salvation.


Just look at the encyclopdia and referance christmas or easter, or sun rise service; its all pagan sun god worship.

AND I DON'T THINK YAH IS PLEASED TO HAVE IS REAL SON - not the christian polytheistic christ they offer - TIED TO any PAGAN HOLIDAY.

Wrong thread.

wghturbostar

  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2014, 12:02:37 PM »
I was present in the audience at Purdue University when I became aware of and saw Dr. Craig for the first time.

I was impressed with the organization of his thought. Most of his ideas were presented using classic syllogistic argument, an extraordinarily transparent method. In other words, if, in retrospect, Dr. Rosenberg, or anyone for that matter, wanted to take the time and attack Dr. Craig point-by-point, then Dr. Craig has made that opportunity for the critical thinker to do so in the clearest way possible, in my opinion.

What was equally impressive was Dr. Rosenberg's seeming lack of organization. I agree with previous posters to this forum that he almost immediately attacked Dr. Craig in an ad hominem fashion. Where Dr. Craig was direct, linear, and clear, Dr. Rosenberg was scattered, vague, and reaching for a foothold.

Dr. Craig won the debate in several categories: a) using a system of impartial judges, he won the debate on the merits of the process b) Dr. Craig won the debate from votes in the audience and c) Dr. Craig won the debate from voting online. That's a triple win.

I certainly hope that this doesn't represent Dr. Rosenberg's best work, but one would think that it should, since Dr. Craig spent a considerable amount of time disarticulating the arguments from Dr. Rosenberg's own book.

Dr. Alexander Rosenberg is the Department Chair and the R Taylor Cole Professor of Philosophy at Duke University. According to Duke's website, he has secondary positions in the department of biology and political science. In other words, a committee has selected Dr. Rosenberg for his position and the endowed chair means that a foundation or family has given money to be paid to Dr. Rosenberg as extra money for assuming this position. As such, he has declared himself an expert on the use of language in presenting his arguments.

As an example of Dr. Alexander Rosenberg's work, I would give Dr. Alexander Rosenberg a failing grade, and were I a member of the committee which makes decisions on whether he is to remain as department chair, I would begin the process to have him removed from that position.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 12:05:25 PM by wghturbostar »

baranbaran

  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Dr Craig vs Dr Alex Rosenberg
« Reply #8 on: April 27, 2015, 02:20:40 AM »
well done for this nice post
Graduated from Soran University with First Class Degree with Honours in Computer Science.

 

anything