Veritas Forum Discussion

I only listened to it once, but from what I remember, Smith didn't do that bad. Craig did pretty well, except one comment which I thought Smith put him to task for. As usual, Plantinga and Gale were good.

Mike, I think I know what you mean about Craig, he's a fine philosopher, his arguments are okay but if I were to debate or discuss philosophy of religion with him, the way he handles himself would kind of make me uncomfortable? Maybe I'm just looking at Gale's an Smith attitudes through the debate. Smith comes across as uncomfortable, and struggles for the right words; he's a great philosopher but not the best public speaker or presenter. Gale is like a hornet, he seems to poke all these little holes in what might be described as a "pop" version of theism; he goes after dualism, a version of a teleological argument, proper functionalism etc. But he doesn't really make a great lasting opposition from what I can tell; in other words he doesn't really stick to a single really strong argument but kind of seems to make several arguments that may pose a small problem for religious folk but not huge ones. Plantinga I think handled himself the best, he was funny, and looked particularly relaxed. I'm particularly fond of his otherworldly counterexamples.

Raymond,

I think the reason why he doesn't stick to a single strong argument because it may mean, for him, that he has to reject theism. I think he's agnostic so he thinks there are some arguments against theism, but not sufficient to reject it.