Dr. Craig has debated such people as Antony Flew, Bart Ehrman and John Dominic Crossan, and holds degrees from Wharton, Trinity Theological Seminary, University of Munich and other institutions.
Prof. Dawkins has refused to debate Dr. Craig, remarking "It wouldn’t look very good on my CV would it?"
What is your spin on Prof. Dawkins' remark, or his reasons for not entering into dialouge with people who disagree with him?
2007-05-14 03:19:25 · 11 answers · asked by stronzo5785 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
He's too proud and hates loosing??? Actually in his case it seems to show a lack of respect of others and a narcissistic opinion of himself and his views... and he would hate loosing... :)
Richard Dawkins has a chip on his shoulder and so much prejudice and arrogance listening to him is both annoying and insulting but here is a debate he did do. In the Audio Visual section
http://www.rzim.org/resources/
Regarding Richard Dawkins Alister McGrath states:
“Such is Dawkins’s unruffled scientific impartiality that in a book of almost four hundred pages, he can scarcely bring himself to concede that a single human benefit has flowed from religious faith, a view which is as a priori improbable as it is empirically false.”
"Atheism must indeed be in a sorry state if its leading contemporary defender has to depend so heavily – and so obviously – on the improbable and the false to bolster his case."
Much to the annoyance of Prof. Dawkins Antony Flew the former atheist (30+ years of speaking as an atheist) that had debated men such as C.S. Lewis recently said Prof. Dawkins has presented no workable model for the creation of life and that the latest biological research said that "has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce (life), that intelligence must have been involved."
"The principle of [divine] purpose ... stares the biologist in the face wherever he looks ... . The probability for such an event as the origin of DNA molecules to have occurred by sheer chance is just too small to be seriously considered ... ."Ernst Boris Chain - Nobel Prize in medicine
2007-05-14 03:28:06 · answer #1 · answered by Pilgrim in the land of the lost 5 · 3⤊ 10⤋
First of all, I am theist....but you should note Dawkins avoids all debates (fighting out your beliefs) in favor of discussions together to understand reality (what is). He has had many such discussions with theologians, philosophers, etc. A debate is one side against another - only fools debate (as Dawkins knows).
I avoid debates with hard core materialists (usually atheists) who want to debate the existance of God. What is the point? I know God exists from my own personal experience, but I also know this can not be used to prove it to anyone else. I know there is no proof you can show another to prove God (scriptures don't count). A hard core materialist will not investigate on their own, as I have to find my proof, and so it is futile to debate such a thing.
Dawkins makes lots of wise-cracks...but he makes some valid points.
~ Eric Putkonen
2007-05-14 10:35:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
I do not know Professer Dawkins myself, so I cannot presume to guess his reasons. I however, have no such qualms... except that it's generally pointless. This subject can never be resolved by debate, because the difference is not about issues or any thing that can be studied or observed; it's about deep differences in our perceptions of fundamental reality.
None of us are operating on the same set of assumptions about the most fundamental aspects of reality, and therefore have no common ground on which to base a debate.
2007-05-14 10:25:51 · answer #3 · answered by KC 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
You know the reason, What would be the point of debating someones unmeasurable opinion? Dawkins has the evidence and studies, but we both know none of that matters to religious followers.
What's the purpose of a debate on that? Anyone interested can find Prof. Dawkins opinions on any of these subjects.
But lets be honest, you're just going to choose one of your parrot buddies as Best Answer, so why waste our time?
2007-05-14 10:32:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
How should I know?
Atheists may or may not have anything to do with Dawkins, but it's wrong of you to automatically associate us. Atheism is nothing other than a lack of belief, it says nothing about support for Dawkins, or knowledge of him. You're treating atheism as a religion, which it most certainly isn't.
2007-05-14 10:23:29 · answer #5 · answered by Dylan H 3 · 9⤊ 4⤋
Who would want to debate a person who's rebuttal will always be some kind of re-hash of the phrase "God is real, god is right & the sooner you accept him the sooner you'll save your soul from eternal damnation in hell." ??
2007-05-14 10:32:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Why do you think that all atheists know or even care?
2007-05-14 10:28:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Dawkins feels the same way towards debating Creationist as he would feel towards debating the FSM. He thinks it is ridiculous and not worth making such opponents seem worthwhile of debate. I don't blame him.
2007-05-14 10:23:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 12⤊ 9⤋
When did this happen?
I ask because I doubt it's true....
2007-05-14 10:30:14 · answer #9 · answered by Samurai Jack 6 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Since God doesn't exist, there's nothing really to debate, it there? What's you're point?
You probably won't see Richard Dawkins debating Kirk Cameron, either.
2007-05-14 10:24:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 13⤋