[This post was originally published on The Secular Outpost on October 12, 2011. It was republished here on November 7, 2021 with the date manually adjusted to reflect its original publication date. The link was also updated to its current location.]
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.
