Some (Very Incomplete) Thoughts on Luke Muehlhauser’s “How to Debate William Lane Craig”
After writing a post about William Lane Craig and John Loftus debating, I remembered that Luke Muehlhauser (Common Sense Atheism) posted an article in April 2009 about debating William Lane Craig. (LINK) Here are some very incomplete thoughts about Luke’s article.
- I agree with Luke that many of Craig’s debate opponents were unqualified, in the sense that they did not have both (a) the relevant knowledge (e.g., of philosophy of religion, metaethics, etc.); and (b) suitable debating experience.
- I strongly disagree with Luke’s assumption that Craig has ‘won’ literally “all” of his debates, but I do think he has ‘won’ most of them. Off the top of my head, I think the following opponents ‘won’ their debates with Craig:
- Paul Draper
- Doug Jesseph (the first debate, not the second debate which I consider a draw)
- Shelly Kagan
- Keith Parsons (both the debate on God and the debate on Christianity)
- Michael Tooley
- I agree with the five specific points in his section, “How to Win.” On the other hand, in my experience, the people who would most benefit from following Luke’s advice tend to be the same people least likely to follow it.